Why does America want to police the whole world, why can't we just heal from within?

Question

Focus on the poor, the sick and on the elderly and education for the youth?

Answer 1

So you are favoring "Isolationism". That worked real well in the 1930's leading up to World War 2, now didn't it?

Answer 2

As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent Patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practise the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the Public Councils! Such an attachment of a small or weak, towards a great and powerful nation, dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens,) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake; since history and experience prove, that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of Republican Government. But that jealousy, to be useful, must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defence against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation, and excessive dislike of another, cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots, who may resist the intrigues of the favorite, are liable to become suspected and odious; while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.

The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connexion as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop.

Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people, under an efficient government, the period is not far off, when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality, we may at any time resolve upon, to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.

It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.

Taking care always to keep ourselves, by suitable establishments, on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.

In offering to you, my countrymen, these counsels of an old and affectionate friend, I dare not hope they will make the strong and lasting impression I could wish; that they will control the usual current of the passions, or prevent our nation from running the course, which has hitherto marked the destiny of nations. But, if I may even flatter myself, that they may be productive of some partial benefit, some occasional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party spirit, to warn against the mischiefs of foreign intrigue, to guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism; this hope will be a full recompense for the solicitude for your welfare, by which they have been dictated.

-George Washington, in his farewell address

s******g around with foreign countries is a bad idea...he called it...

Answer 3

One can't heal for long when there is 'disease' running rampant around the world unchecked.

Answer 4

Good idea - and since other countries don't want us to interfere in their problems, it should be obvious. We should set an example for them, not try to impose our values on them - the same it works with individuals, so it is for nations. The current problem stems from the multinational corporations and the defense industies who profit from war and meddling in foreign affairs.

Answer 5

You mean why don't we dump money into social programs instead of security?

Because the USA is a place where anyone with drive and ambition can reach their highest aspirations. It is not, and should not be, a place where it is comfortable to not-provide for yourself and your family.

Answer 6

We spend a lot of money on the military in order to protect our global corporations, insure access to raw materials and energy resources, and to spread our influence. We are the only superpower in the world now, and it is our responsibility to protect the Western world from the evil Islamic Jihadists who want to spread their fundamentalist Islam all over the world. Without the US as world policeman, there would be wars all over the world, and the the blood-thirsty terrorists would be killing thousands of people every month.

The pathetic, weak Europeans are no help in this war, except for the Brits!

Answer 7

It is naive and unrealistic to believe that their would be not wars and that if the US quit policing than their would be healing.  

Answer 8

America has no authority to police the world.