Ok so I've really debated posting about this topic since my topics seem to be rubbing the wrong way lately but I'm going to anyway.
So i was watching the Today show this morning ( i love to watch the today show, it's a little bit of all the good stuff; real news and gossip news combined :) Well this morning they were talking about the post-election situation in Iran and the riots that are going on. They were explaining that the people think that the election was rigged and are calling for a recount. There is talk of a revolution. They're not happy the the old pres got re-elected.
I don't really know much about this guy and my opinions aren't about him or how people are handling the election/post-election there. My beef is with how the US believes it needs to step into any international situation ever. The first thing they talked about after outlining the situation was "what can America do?". We can do nothing. We can let that country run it's course just like every other country has. Just like we have. Let them have their revolution. Let them develop their own form of government that works best for them. WITHOUT INTERFERENCE. The world doesn't need a bunch of mini-me Americas running around. It needs governments that work for the individuals in that country.
As long as a country's government isn't treading on human rights then we don't need to interfere. Iran is already handling their business. People are protesting. A recount of votes has been called and if it comes down to it there will be a revolution and change will occur. We don't need to step in and try to be a catalyst for change. Change has already begun. All we'll do by stepping in is spend the money our country needs in another country, creating and fighting a war that is not our own. More soldiers will leave their families and there will inevitably be some killed. The reasoning for America stepping into to every other country's issues is always that America is the leader of the world. Well can we learn to lead by example and walk a country through any little hiccup it has? Can we learn to let them learn on their own? If they really need our help they can ask.
Note: I'm not anti-help others in need. I'm just pick your help cases wisely. I love America but sometimes i don't love what government does. I assume I'm like any American in this case. So take my opinion for what it is, an opinion, and if you don't like it oh well.
9 comments:
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1904876,00.html
related article it's good. Compliments of Sukie
Totally agree. I particularly hate the idea that our values need to be all people's values. Everything from democracy to Christianity. The western world acts like that is the "right" way to be. It might be for our values and culture, particularly when our nation was founded, but that doesn't mean it is for everyone. I think we've bastardized enough nation's cultures and should probably lay off now that we've seen some of the results (American Indians anyone?)
As your friend, I respectfully and most humbly disagree with your assessment of the situation in Iran. There are telltale signs of future problems in Iran, not just within, but problems that the United States will likely face, down the road.
As Americans, we must be prepared to act for the greater good. Our hearts and minds must be open to solutions of any kind that will spare human lives raise the standards of living for our fellow man, wherever they may be. This means that on occasion, we are required to act - we can't simply sit back and watch as evil prevails, simply because it is somewhere distant and the local populace seems disgruntled enough already.
However, in this case, the president of Iran may actually have been reelected legitimately, which does not really change my opinion of Iran.
Well, that's enough out of me.
Good Points!
What about Darfur? Why isn't our nation in there more? I would classify it was official genocide but I don't see our nation jumping to arms to defend the ppl there. Yet we jump in when riots erupt for an election. Come on!!!
I think we're just cherry pickin' who to help.
If we're going to be the big brother to nations then lets be the brother to all nations. Not just ones that could benefit us or threatens us.
I HATE CHERRY PICKERS!!!
Striker - WHERE U @ DAWG!!?? I'd like to hear my ultra republican's views on this.
Also, if we did lay off the intervention then other countries who usually defer to the US to take care of these problems would have to step up. If we are out to help the underdogs then all the powers that are able ie. western europe, asia should be in it just as much as we are.
First off, I haven’t seen the Today show, or really read up too much on proposed American intervention (if any), so I can’t really say whether or not I agree with America’s stance on this issue. Secondly, I would say that as a patriotic American, whether or not I agreed with the choice, our responsible is to support our elected President, as long as he/she is acting: A) in the best interest of the American people, and B) in the best interest of our Constitution. As soon as they decide that their personal or party issues and opinions take precedence over the Constitution, they have overstepped their original boundaries, and regardless of how popular or unpopular they may be at the time, they need to be checked.
Having said this, I believe that American intervention can have a positive effect. For example, recently President Obama has declared that a nuclear-armed North Korea would be a ‘grave threat’. He pledged that we as a country would aggressively enforce fresh international penalties. Is this an example of American intervention? Yes. Should we not intervene in the nuclear evolution of North Korea? Why are we intervening in that country’s blossoming nuclear capability? Is it because that country could provide a threat to the American way of life?
Here’s another side to this story: currently no Western nation is recognizing this re-election (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6515177.ece). Why would we not recognize this? Is it because we realize that this re-election is a sham? President Obama has said that “people’s voices should be heard and not suppressed” in the Islamic Republic. If you saw a bully on the street beat up 5 smaller kids, would you step in, or would you shout encouragement from the sideline?
As to Sukie’s comment about “cherry picking”, of course we as a nation cherry pick. Why? Quite simply, it’s because we don’t have the resources to help everyone. I wouldn’t condemn our country for helping one nation and not helping another. But just because you have don’t have the resources to help assist one nation, doesn’t mean that you should stop assisting all the nations.
Also, I don’t think we jump in “everytime” a nation doesn’t do things as we would like. Take for example, the new BRIC bloc (Brazil-Russia-India-China). They have called for a “multipolar world order”, diplomatic code for a rejection of America’s position as the sole global superpower. Last time I checked, we haven’t had any official declarations of war or invasions against any of those countries.
Frankly, I’m proud to be an American. I’m happy that I have a job that pays decent money, that I can come home at night and relax, and that I can travel within this country without having to worry about riots, or military/police violence (for the most part). As far as political interventions, I feel that if the President has declared a foreign situation to be dangerous to the American way of life, we should do something to intervene. I would rather instigate military action, then be caught in the wake of another 9/11.
Sarah, I apologize if any of this is offensive. I wouldn’t have blogged this comment if someone hadn’t asked to hear my opinion. If you would like me to delete it, I will! ;)
You're fine striker. Diverse opinions are good. I can see both sides of the issue. Oh and also it was McCain that was calling for the intervention which i thought was stupid. To date i haven't heard Obama mention anything regarding the Iran problem.
I do agree that we should be somewhat involved in the North Korea issue because, like you say, it does threaten our security and that of others. I guess i just don't see how an election is threatening to the world and why we should intervene on those grounds.
Post a Comment