Should The Us End Overseas Military Operations Politics Essay
Do we really feel the protection that our country is giving us. Are wars productive for a nation. Do we have to fight with other to get better. The United States has always been involved in international issues because they always want to be the saviors of the world. The planet earth is composed of wonderful and fascinating places in which humans live, but wars in the economy and social area destroy those wonderful and exciting places.
Wars bring severe consequences to our society and economy that causes destruction and lives lost. Today, sometimes distinguish between armed conflicts and wars. According to this view, a conflict would only be a war if the groups have made a formal declaration of the same. In a conception of U.S. military doctrine no distinction is made, it is referrer to armed conflict as fourth generation wars. Invasions by the United States in the world in many countries, war against terrorism and progressive impairments through the years. Although U.S. troops were on the battlefields of France in 1918, there were not serious confrontations between these countries.
President Wilson wins reelection on campaign promise of maintaining neutrality, but United States is soon drawn into war raging across Europe. World War I proves to be bloodiest war in world history, often referred to as "The Great War" or "The War to End All Wars". After World War I, disagreements arise regarding proper U.S. role as regulator of world affairs.
At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? American losses 48,000 killed in battle, 56,000 lost to disease seemed trifling compared to the staggering costs paid by other countries. Germany lost 1.8 million people; Russia, 1.7 million; France, 1.4 million; Austria-Hungary, 1.2 million; and Britain, 950,000. "The War to End All Wars," as it was called, turned out to be just another test of humans' aptitude for killing other humans in large quantities.
Will the U.S.-led military coalition hold together even as France and others dash for the exits in coming months? Will enough Afghans come to embrace the corrupt government in Kabul as a preferred alternative to the militant Taliban? "We are probably headed for stalemate in 2014," says Stephen Biddle, a George Washington University political science professor who has advised U.S. commanders in Afghanistan and Iraq. If that is the case, the U.S. will have to pump billions of dollars a year into Afghanistan for decades to prevent its collapse, Biddle says.
"There's no reason why Americans should die when Afghans are perfectly capable of defending their own country," Obama said.
Terrorism: According to Martin Indyk, vice president and director of Foreign Policy at the Brookings Institution, the tragedy of 9/11, and the subsequent war on terrorism waged by the Bush administration affected the U.S. role in the world. "In the future, the U.S. administration will depend much of the Joint Special Operations Command, a military body étite secret that has increased tenfold in the last decade," said The Washington Post.
As American interests in the Pacific expanded, easy access to the region became vital. For that reason, U.S. leaders proposed a canal to connect the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Some people in Latin America and the United States opposed Roosevelt's actions. They believed that he had interfered in Colombia's affairs in order to cheat it out of land. In 1921, the United States finally paid Colombia $25 million for the loss of Panama.
The Panama Canal was only one sign of U.S. involvement in Latin America. As the U.S. economy continued to grow, so did Americans' interest in the resources of their southern neighbors. As economic interests drew the United States deeper into Latin American affairs, U.S. leaders became concerned about political stability in the region. They were especially worried that instability might tempt European nations to intervene in the region.
The War in Afghanistan (2001-present) began on October 7, 2001, as Operation Enduring Freedom, a response to the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States of America (U.S.). This marked the beginning of the U.S. War on Terrorism. The stated purpose of the invasion was to capture Osama bin Laden, destroy al-Qaeda, and remove the Taliban regime which had provided support and safe harbour to al-Qaeda.
The imperative to monitor, suppress, attack, and ultimately eradicate international terrorist groups seeking to strike the United States, its citizens, its interests, and its allies is prompting significant changes in the demands placed on the armed forces of the United States. U.S. forces will often be called upon to assist foreign governments that wish to eradicate terrorist groups on their territory but lack the capabilities to do so on their own.
Despite a surge of troops to nearly 150,000 soldiers, the country remains a war zone. Earlier this month, 30 American soldiers were killed when their helicopter was shot down by the Taliban, bringing our death count for 2011 to 299. This, combined with a major Taliban offensive in May and the assassinations of prominent leaders, such as Karzai's half-brother and the governor of the Oruzgan Province, indicates that military success is unlikely.
It shows that U.S. has paid for its wars either through debt [World War II, Cold War, Afghanistan/Iraq], taxation [Korean War] or inflation [Vietnam]. When comparing the direct multiplier effects of military spending to other forms of government spending, it is not as productive in economic terms as spending in infrastructure, education, or even as tax cuts to increase household consumption. The U.S. economy has other problems, but Europe's troubles have undermined consumer and business confidence on both sides of the Atlantic. And the deeply divided U.S. political system has delivered growth-chilling uncertainty.
The economy shed a staggering 8.8 million jobs during and shortly after the recession. Since employment hit bottom, the economy has created just over 4 million jobs. So the new hiring has replaced 46 percent of the lost jobs, by far the worst performance since World War II.
"The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labor. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent." Said George Orwell.
Findley suggests that war can alter a person's behaviour negatively. War has been a constant part of human history. It has greatly affected the lives of people around the world. These effects, however, are extremely detrimental. Soldiers must shoulder extreme stress on the battlefield. Those that cannot mentally overcome these challenges may develop Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Sadly, some resort to suicide to escape their insecurities. Soldiers, however, are not the only ones affected by wars; family members also experience mental hardships when their loved ones are sent to war.
I disagree with the wars because besides many innocent lives lost, we also lose millions of money that we could invest in schools, our seniors, in top positions work for all Americans and the millions of immigrants entering each year day in this country.
In conclusion, I say that the wars against other countries are not the way how we are going to deal with the problem with have in our planet. The wars against weak countries are unfair and damaging more lives because they cannot defend themselves because they do not have weapons necessary and not even often lack the mentality to fight against others. Although the United States is a country rich in many fields, is losing the essence and respect for other countries because of wars. The money spent each day for these foolish wars we could use it in areas that really need help to grow and move forward as a nation entities. The economy suffers with the wars and with it we also suffer because a country without a stable economy does not help its citizens to get what they want. Wars not help but destroy.
Tran, Hinh. "America should no longer be involved in costly wars overseas". The Daily Californian. August 21, 2011. Opinion. October 24, 2012.
Rand Office of Media Relations. "Americans Will Back Military Action Overseas If They Believe the United States Has "Important Stakes" in a Battle". For Release May 29, 2005. Web. October 24, 2012.
Bingham, Amy. "War in Afghanistan". ABC News. Oct. 15, 2012. Web. October 1, 2012.
Bowman, Steve. "Iraq: U.S. Military Operations". Congressional Research Service. July 15, 2007. Web. October 24, 2012.
Ochmanek, David. "Military Operations Against Terrorist Groups Abroad: Implications for the United States Air Force". Monograph Reports. December 3, 2003. Web. October 26, 2012.
Burns, Robert. "New Afghan war phase, with no decisive end seen". AP National Security Writer. October 26, 2012. Web. October 29, 2012.
If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have the essay published on the UK Essays website then please click on the link below to request removal: