Why is it ok for USA

[Revoltingest]

Of course i can say no to all your question, But the reason i asked the OP is because i am sick and tired of America playing world police, Europe can take care of them self, we dont need America to be police here.

Politicians are attracted to government because they like wielding power.
It's rather like liquid seeking the lowest level...their grasp extends wherever it can.
And pursuit of justice is seldom the cause....usually just the excuse.
And now we need to kill some Iranians.

 

[sooda]

Honestly, i have a feeling American governments will not stop before a new war has started.
If they stop meddling inmidle east i think those countries will calm down again

That's up to Iran.

 

[Kenny]

Nah, think they are just moving them to other places deemed more strategically important (Eastern Europe, Asia, Africa)

Such as? (site quote)

 

[Twilight Hue]

Why is it ok for USA to have nuclear weapons but they tell everyone else it is not ok?
Example with Iran, Why can USA keep their weapons but Iran can become nuked by USA if they do not get rid of their nuclear weapon? where is the logic?

What do you mean? A lot of countries have nuclear weapons now.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's up to Iran.

Our actions are our own responsibility.
We cannot blame Iran for what we do.

 

[Revoltingest]

What do you mean? A lot of countries have nuclear weapons now.

Once a country gets nukes, then things change.
Before....we try to prevent their joining the club.
And we'll attack them to keep them nuclear neutered.
But after a country gets nukes, we leave them alone.
Why?
Because they can defend themselves better.

 

[sooda]

Our actions are our own responsibility.
We cannot blame Iran for what we do.

Fact is that Iran funds Hezbollah, HAMAS and the al Houthis... so Yemen, Lebanon and the Palestinians can't catch a break.

 

[Augustus]

You do know that USA in the 70s was the one who created the Taliban? it was CIA who founded that group, and today? Suddenly they become Americas enemy. I find that strange.

The CIA armed and funded some mujahideen groups, but if they hadn't done so, there would still have been mujahideen groups being funded from other state and non-state sources. It's not like America created something that wouldn't have otherwise existed.

(As an aside, if you watch the James Bond film The living daylights, Bond goes off to help the mujahideen which is funny in hindsight. Also Rambo III has him fighting the commies in Afghanistan)

 

[dybmh]

Why is it ok for USA to have nuclear weapons but they tell everyone else it is not ok?

#1 reason: USA allows **more** transparency. Iran is virtually non-transparent.

there are other reasons. but this lack of transparency is the most important.

 

[Revoltingest]

Fact is that Iran funds Hezbollah, HAMAS and the al Houthis... so Yemen, Lebanon and the Palestinians can't catch a break.

Iran does what it does, as do other countries in the region.
Some good...some bad.
We don't attack based upon their being good or bad,
but rather upon whether we like or hate them.

Our reaction is our choice.
I'd prefer that it be negotiation.
Results won't be perfect, but they'll be better than continual war.

 

[sooda]

The CIA armed and funded some mujahideen groups, but if they hadn't done so, there would still have been mujahideen groups being funded from other state and non-state sources. It's not like America created something that wouldn't have otherwise existed.

(As an aside, if you watch the James Bond film The living daylights, Bond goes off to help the mujahideen which is funny in hindsight. Also Rambo III has him fighting the commies in Afghanistan)

Afghanistan has been a mess since the local communists overthrew the monarchy in 1974.

 

[sooda]

Iran does what it does, as do other countries in the region.
Our reaction is our choice.
I'd prefer that it be negotiation.

Which other countries?

 

[Revoltingest]

Which other countries?

For example, Israel attacks its neighbors, & oppresses non-Jews.
But it's OK because they're our ally.
Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, & others also have their troubles.
And yet, we don't plan to wage war against them.

I sense great acceptance for our invading & crushing Iran.
And to what end?
To prevent their getting the nuclear weapons they need
to defend against our repeated attacks upon them?
That's a vicious circle which we could end simply by
inaction, ie, stop attacking them....be peaceful.

 

[Flame]

If they stop meddling inmidle east i think those countries will calm down again

I don't. There would still be conflicts with the Kurds and Turks, Houthis are ramping up, Taliban is growing again, Israeli and Palestinians relations are still rock bottom, ISIS are still out in the desert and have sleeper cells in various nations and the Syrian war still be going on.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Of course i can say no to all your question, But the reason i asked the OP is because i am sick and tired of America playing world police, Europe can take care of them self, we dont need America to be police here.

I tend to agree here with you.

I've always thought , Isn't that the function of the UN peacekeeping forces and the reason why the Smurfs exist?

Personally, I think it's a drain on America's resources and what I find disturbing about the whole thing is our offensive posture. United States traditionally has always been a defensive country that would only respond when needed and when necessary.

Tactically on the other hand , it's a good strategy to to keep our foot continually on the necks of our existing and potential enemies.

The only reason I think we've been tolerated as the world's police is we've always been responsible with other countries and respect borders without acquisition of territory.

 

[sooda]

For example, Israel attacks its neighbors, & oppresses non-Jews.
But it's OK because they're our ally.
Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, & others also have their troubles.
And yet, we don't plan to wage war against them.

Yes, Israel creates a lot of problems and resentments.. The Saudis have been steady.. I don't really follow Pakistan, but they are terribly poor and illiterate.

ISIS and Boko Haram, AQ are very much the enemies of the Muslim majority. Muslim Brotherhood is also a problem.

 

[Stevicus]

Why is it ok for USA to have nuclear weapons but they tell everyone else it is not ok?
Example with Iran, Why can USA keep their weapons but Iran can become nuked by USA if they do not get rid of their nuclear weapon? where is the logic?

Because we want to have the advantage over other countries. It's not that we would necessarily use it, but we would hold it over other countries in the event of a dispute.

It's certainly not fair or equitable, but there is a certain logic to it, from a US point of view.

 

[Revoltingest]

United States traditionally has always been a defensive country that would only respond when needed and when necessary.

That hasn't been our tradition for a long time.

Tactically on the other hand , it's a good strategy to to keep our foot continually on the necks of our existing and potential enemies.

Sounds like a great method to ensure they remain enemies.

The only reason I think we've been tolerated as the world's police is we've always been responsible with other countries and respect borders without acquisition of territory.

Like the 1953 coup wherein we overthrew Iran's elected government to install the Shah?
Yes...we really respected their border that time.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes, Israel creates a lot of problems and resentments.. The Saudis have been steady.. I don't really follow Pakistan, but they are terribly poor and illiterate.

Some of their citizens have caused trouble though.

And their government urges us to attack Iran.
With allies like them, who needs enemies, eh?

ISIS and Boko Haram, AQ are very much the enemies of the Muslim majority. Muslim Brotherhood is also a problem.

Some problems aren't solved by waging war against the country de jour in our sights.

 

[Augustus]

Such as? (site quote)

General knowledge.

These NATO bases were mostly relics of WW2 and the Cold War, Britain also had a lot of troops based in Germany and started withdrawing them around this time. Many of these were closed to save money as there wasn't much point is having large deployments of troops in Western Germany anymore.

It wasn't a desire to step away from the world stage just reutilisation of resources. It's mentioned in the article you linked anyway, but look at pivot to Asia, US bases in Poland, Africa, etc.