DETAILS
Should the United States get involved in foreign conflicts?

Voting Has Ended

President Donald Trump authorized an airstrike of an airfield in Syria. The purpose of this strike was, in part, to punish the Assad regime for using chemical weapons against its own people, and is the latest example of the US getting involved in a foreign conflict.

Supporters of the United States engaging in foreign conflicts believe the USA has a duty to intervene, and support people from around the world from repressive or dangerous governments. According to members of this camp, the US has a moral obligation to oppose oppressive governments.

Opponents of US involvement in foreign conflicts believe that it is a waste of resources, lives, and money as the United States’ immediate welfare is not at risk. Members of this camp conclude that US resources should only be used when the benefits directly impact its citizens.

The US airstrike against Syria begs the question, should the United States get involved in foreign conflicts?

Current Standings:
Yes: 62%
No: 38%
  • Cathy from Missouri

    Yes, with limits. It is not simple enough to say we, as a country, should involve ourselves in every conflict. However, if a conflict grows to a point where our country is threatened, or her people are becoming highly uncomfortable with a situation, there is a good chance that the country needs to become involved in some situations. Also, if there are cases where our allied countries are under attack or pressure, we should step in when it is necessary to secure the other countries liberties, as well as our own. However, in many cases, involving the United States of America causes a chance of war, and because of that, I believe that Congress should have an overall debate and decide whether or not to involve the country in foreign affairs. Primarily because, if the United States were to, for example, bomb the wrong area, and trigger a war, then it might make the United States situation worse, and also impact other countries negatively, being that most of the times, people tend to choose sides. If our country was to make a decision that ended up poorly, it would be our responsibility to admit our faults and give reparations to other countries, and we are not at the best standpoint economically to have to repay other countries for damages. Of course there is a sense of right in wrong when attempting to put action into foreign affairs, and though everybody has different standpoints on nearly every global and national issue to date, there should be an overall agreement between both citizens and Congress on whether or not we should involve ourselves. For every action, there is a reaction, and depending on the actions that our government takes, the reaction could either help the situation and give the United States credit towards their participation in whatever the situation may be, or, on the flip-side, if something turns to a crisis, the United States may find itself in a much more significant amount of debt, lose respect as a country, and possible lose allies. The worse possibility that could come out of pushing ourselves into foreign affairs would be to trigger another world war, being that times are tough as it is, and there are friction between nearly every section of people who aren’t on the same page. If used correctly, though, interacting in foreign affairs could turn situations for the better, and get rid of things that have been troubling many nations, and many groups of people. With nearly anything, things can be good or bad, it just depends how you use them, and, in my opinion, as long as decisions are made thoughtfully, and not on a whim, interacting with foreign issues can be a very positive thing, and sometimes necessary for our country to participate in.

    [read less]

    Yes, with limits. It is not simple enough to say we, as a country, should involve ourselves in every conflict. However, if a conflict grows to a point…

    [read more]
    6
  • Hope from Michigan

    Hope Meyers from Michigan

    Yes, I believe it’s very important that the United States is and becomes more involved in foreign affairs. By the United States coming together with other countries helping them, supporting them, saving their people… that can only do better. Better as in allies. If the United States continues to stay involved and help countries in need of help, then that could put our country at greater risk with being good allies. If sometime in the future our country is in trouble, There would be a chance that maybe another allied country would help us. Alliances are formed and the United States is helping save people from those countries of bad governments. The Syria bombing killed adults, women, CHILDREN. If by helping those people, the United States would be saving lives. But, it is also important that the United States doesn’t infringe too much. Meaning, there could be disagreements, complications with foreign countries. It’s important to try not to upset those countries and the governments or else unwanted war could be brought upon. To not provoke war or attack. The United States intentions would simply be trying to Better and help foreign citizens. The intentions is only to make this world a better place and try to help.

    [read less]

    Hope Meyers from Michigan

    Yes, I believe it’s very important that the United States is and becomes more involved in foreign affairs. By the United St…

    [read more]
    3
    • Leigh from Michigan

      Hope, I respect you opinion and quite honestly I feel that we need to avoid outside conflict. Vietnam is a perfect example of things that happen when we get involved in something that we don’t need to be in. It’s none of our business. Unless it directly impacts us and what we do. I personally feel its smarter for us to just leave the grizzly bear alone and not poke it with a stick and get mauled when we can avoid that happening.

      [read less]

      Hope, I respect you opinion and quite honestly I feel that we need to avoid outside conflict. Vietnam is a perfect example of things that happen when …

      [read more]
      0
  • Abram from Texas

    Just like all of politics, this answer is an opinion because I believe that yes we should be involved in foreign conflict but the U.S. Constitution does not specifically state whether we should get involved in foreign conflicts or not. The constitution gets close to define what the U.S. shall do involving foreign conflict & a little more into foreign affair. The first instance being in the preamble in which it states “Insure domestic tranquility provide for the common defense… secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves & our prosperity”. This part of the preamble is referring to domestic situations but in recent years to protect our domestic policies we have to get involved in foreign affairs, for example, the U.S. had entered WWII when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor to protect the domestic policies. in Article I, Section VIII of the constitution it lists the enumerated powers of Congress & the specific one, in this case, is in Clause XI which it states “To Declare war”. While my citation is vague it does tie in with the preamble because to protect out domestic policies we have to have a way to declare war. In Article II, Section II, Clause II it lists some of the expressed powers of the president but it specifically states “He shall have power… by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors”. The Ambassador is a major “item” in foreign affairs & can lead to foreign conflict. For example in 1979-1980 the U.S. ambassadors & citizens were held hostage in the Iranian hostage crisis the U.S. had to get involved in the conflict with Jimmy Carter attempting to save them at first & then Ronald Reagan finally saving them in 1980. With all that being said my personal belief is that I believe the U.S. should get involved in the foreign conflicts but it seems that it depends on what a majority of congress feels & in my personal opinion I believe that is how it should be because congress was meant to represent the population.

    [read less]

    Just like all of politics, this answer is an opinion because I believe that yes we should be involved in foreign conflict but the U.S. Constitution do…

    [read more]
    3
  • drake from Missouri

    I believe that the united states needs to be tread carefully, but a bystander letting things happen is no better than doing the acts you are trying to prevent or disapprove of. If you see someone being bullied and say nothing are you any better than the bully?

    [read less]

    I believe that the united states needs to be tread carefully, but a bystander letting things happen is no better than doing the acts you are trying to…

    [read more]
    3
    • brianna from Florida

      The United States, should not have feel the obligation to deal with the with the world’s issues. There is no reason that what another country does to their own or to other should have anything response from the United States. For example the bombs in Syria, where not really needed because what they did, did not affect the U.S. directly. Were there any Americans injured, or killed? No so then it was not our business or problem. Due to our President making impulsive decisions there is not threats and concerns of World War III.
      Someone may argue that although it currently is not affecting us later it would. I would like to further explain that if it is happening in foreign territory, reports make public knowledge of EVERYONE, this would only enable the U.S. to silently prepare in the event they attack us. The time that it would take before the foreign country would decide to attack us we would all ready be ready to combat and destroy them. Just because the United States can deal with issues from the world does not mean it is feasible for us to do so.

      [read less]

      The United States, should not have feel the obligation to deal with the with the world’s issues. There is no reason that what another country does to …

      [read more]
      0
    • Leigh from Michigan

      Why should we get involved in something that doesn’t involve us in the first place? It’s smarter to avoid conflict then create conflict. If we avoid it then we are less likely to have our troops die over something that we have no place in. For example Vietnam! We had no business going there and we lost many troops and created a bad name for us for a while because we got involved in something that wasn’t any of out business to begin with, use past examples for what we do next. Yes things might change but history repeats its self consistently.

      [read less]

      Why should we get involved in something that doesn’t involve us in the first place? It’s smarter to avoid conflict then create conflict. If we avoid i…

      [read more]
      0
    • Colin from Ohio

      I agree that the United States must maintain some form of involvement in foreign conflicts but we should not become entirely enveloped with the internal problems of other countries. If we are not economically affected or militarily threatened by a foreign affair we should not become involved. This sort of unjust involvement has caused issues in the past and costed not only the United States lives and money but has also become a detriment to other countries we are attempting to help because they become dependent on us and lose their own sovereignty.

      [read less]

      I agree that the United States must maintain some form of involvement in foreign conflicts but we should not become entirely enveloped with the intern…

      [read more]
      0
    • Kody from Oregon

      Exactly. We can’t just sit back and watch, when it’s something we could easily step in, and solve very quickly. We’re also setting an example for the rest of the world, and proving a point the offenders.

      [read less]

      Exactly. We can’t just sit back and watch, when it’s something we could easily step in, and solve very quickly. We’re also setting an example for the …

      [read more]
      0
    • Michaella from Florida

      I agree with what you are stating, but the U.S has issues itself and most of them are not being fixed. So when the U.S ignore its own issues and focus on other countries’ issues, who will fix the issues in the U.S?

      [read less]

      I agree with what you are stating, but the U.S has issues itself and most of them are not being fixed. So when the U.S ignore its own issues and focus…

      [read more]
      0
    • alejandro from Texas

      i get where youre comijng from but we need to handle business over there

      0
    • Richard from Virginia

      The problem that we have nowadays is that we want everyone in the world to be equal and have freedom and rights, etc. While this would be nice it is just not possible or logical. It is not a government’s job to decide what is moral and what is not for other countries or even within it’s own country, that responsibility is meant for the people and only the people. A government’s job is to make sure that the country it runs is stable and doing the best that it possibly can. If a country is doing something so diabolical that even NATO has decided to step in then obviously the United States should do it’s part, other than that it is simply not our responsibility. Morals do not apply to a government, a government does what it has to do in order to protect it’s own people, if that means letting innocent people die then that’s how it has to be in order to meet our own standards. We work hard to keep peace with other nations and to keep our democracy and standard of living up to par, if other countries truly want that then it’s up to them to make it so, not the U.S.

      [read less]

      The problem that we have nowadays is that we want everyone in the world to be equal and have freedom and rights, etc. While this would be nice it is j…

      [read more]
      0
    • Joshua from Pennsylvania

      The problem with this is that we’re viewing the government as we would view an individual. Yes, it is immoral for a person to just walk by a mugging and do nothing, but a government has its own citizens to worry about first. The citizens’ liberty is too important to risk the dangers associated with constant warfare on behalf of other nations. Now, if we are approached and asked for help, or if immigrants flee to our borders, or if we are attacked along with other nations, we ought absolutely to get involved. But attacking other nations simply on the basis of morality is not what the Constitution is based on. Daniel Webster was once quoted as saying, “It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions” Whatever our intentions, we must weigh our actions against the guard of the Constitution. And involving ourselves militarily in every conflict that goes on around the world is certainly not in accordance with the Constitutional principal of a limited government controlled primarily by the people.

      [read less]

      The problem with this is that we’re viewing the government as we would view an individual. Yes, it is immoral for a person to just walk by a mugging a…

      [read more]
      0
    • Ansh from Tennessee

      I understand this but explain to me if the US is supposed to act to protect the of things we disapprove of should we interfere in China, because one thing US is freedom of speech. However, the Chinese government just banned VPNS, and they also censor the internet. Also, does this give the right to other countries to come in and tell us how to change, because of something of their beliefs.

      [read less]

      I understand this but explain to me if the US is supposed to act to protect the of things we disapprove of should we interfere in China, because one t…

      [read more]
      0
  • Emily from Missouri

    I believe that the US should get involved with foreign countries to some extent, whatever the case may be. If he handled it with respectful authority, it is okay.

    2
    • Sarah from Oregon

      I agree with you, as long as it is done with respect I think it is good the United States is protecting people.

      0
    • Nathan from Oregon

      I completely agree with that, as long as we take an approach that don’t disrespect others that is great. Though there are certain things that we might have to use force.

      0
  • Evelyn from Missouri

    I think the government should get involved with some foreign affairs, especially if it’s in response to things like what Syria did.

    2
    • Colin from Ohio

      On a basis of morality I agree that the events that have happened in Syria are terrible but to some extent countries must resolve issue for themselves. American intervention in some cases can cause disdain to the American intervention and help to escalate a situation. If the United States is solely responsible for preventing tragedies such as those in Syria it would become impossible for countries to become self dependent. This makes intervention a short term solution that will not benefit the country in the long run.

      [read less]

      On a basis of morality I agree that the events that have happened in Syria are terrible but to some extent countries must resolve issue for themselves…

      [read more]
      0
    • Lindsay from Oregon

      I completely agree! Its not fair for a country to harass its own people. Especially with chemical warfare.

      0
  • Ashley from Missouri

    I think the government should be involved as it is there job to step in and make decisions when the lives of people are at stake.

    2
  • Denis from North Carolina

    (Yes) U.S. intervention has always been a “touchy” feeling. Many oppose government involvement abroad, but what they miss is one thing: The U.S. is undoubtedly one of the superpowers of the world, and a responsibility of superpowers is to maintain a realm of peace not only in their nation, but as well as in the rest of the world. Take World War II for example. If it weren’t for the U.S. to eventually join the allied coalition against the axis forces, all of Europe and potentially the world could have been under a fascist/genocidal regime of government. It’s immoral to argue that military action abroad is not justified in some cases (Think about U.S. intervention against the Nazis). There’s always going to be a threat somewhere out there in the world, and it will take not only us, but many foreign governments to act abroad in order to stop it. ISIS, for example, cannot be defeated only by the Syrian, Iranian, and Saudi governments. The entire world must band together in order to stop power-hungry groups like these, which means that government action outside of the country will be needed! Saying that we should “keep to ourselves” is like telling a child who notices bullying to not speak up about it. Thus, it is in the best interests of humanity for the U.S. to involve itself in foreign conflicts as long as it is protecting the state of peace in the world.

    [read less]

    (Yes) U.S. intervention has always been a “touchy” feeling. Many oppose government involvement abroad, but what they miss is one thing: The U.S. is u…

    [read more]
    2
  • antonio from Florida

    I strongly think that we should interfere and help these foreign countries so that we can gain money , prevent bigger issues, create or maintain allies, and to prevent larger catastrophes that could include terrorism.
    Some people might argue that it cost too much money and that we are worrying about other issues when we should worry about what is happening in our country before we help others with their issues. But we are the saviors we are the greatest country of the world we can do multiple things at once we have all they need, we need to give and not worry about the risk. So do i think we should help yes indeed this will also create more bonds with foreign countries.

    [read less]

    I strongly think that we should interfere and help these foreign countries so that we can gain money , prevent bigger issues, create or maintain allie…

    [read more]
    1
  • Colin from Ohio

    Due to circumstances on which the United States was founded, the Constitution and the founders who wrote it expressed opinions of disdain toward foreign intervention in parts of the world isolated from the main country or more specifically the process of colonization. Foreign affairs powers outlined in the Constitution included only the powers to declare war, receive ambassadors, and regulate trade as well s set tariffs. During the period of time following the ratification of the Constitution American foreign policy can best be described as isolated from all foreign affairs besides trade and fiscal lending. This is exemplified through the actions of the United States Government during the the war between France and England at the end of the 18th century in which the United States declared neutrality even after American ships were seized and trade was blocked to both France and England countries. Though this is true our world is not stagnant and since our country’s origin the world has become a more globally interconnected place. The United States has also grown to become a world class economic and military superpower. We have become involved in foreign affairs such as trade agreements, colonization, policing policies, and wars. This radical change make the question of how the United States should fit into foreign affairs very complicated. As a whole I believe that due to the interconnectivity of our global economic system the United States should play a role in stabilizing our own foreign interest in trade and resources as well as become involved in affairs that threaten the imminent or future safety of our country; but we as a country should abstain from policies make the government into an international police force or intrude on affairs that are decidedly another country’s responsibility.
    The American Government has become too involved in the internal political affairs of other countries that do not directly affect our own and has taken over responsibilities that other counties themselves should handle. At no point in our Constitution was it made a responsibility of our government to maintain the affairs of other countries. Even with progression of loose interpretations of the Constitution the there is no room for our country to become a security force which maintains other government’s stability. In fact efforts such as this often make issues worse in other nations, such as our support of the Mujahideen who later grew to become a threat to our Country by means of the support we had given to them. This lack of sensitivity and knowledge to the intricacies of local political conditions in other counties as well as costs to our own country prove that interference into the internal affairs of other countries is detrimental and costly to our country. This form of involvement in other countries does in some cases form a temporary solution but rarely creates lasting benefit for the country we begin to police that country often becomes dependent on American support while at the same time develops disdain toward our intrusion. This is seen in our military occupation of Afghanistan, a country that has become dependent on our military support to prevent radical groups from gaining power. At the same time local people have developed a hatred toward the American occupation and intrusion on their sovereign country. Afghanistan has not developed its own form of internal protection because it has always been provided for them. As a whole our occupation has weakened Afghanistan and created a problem for the United States rather than a solution. Intrusion on the internal affairs of other countries has been proven to create more problems than it is worth due to the costly procedures and lack of long term development for other nations.
    Though we as a country should not become involved in the internal affairs of other countries we must induce foreign policy in order to protect our own interest of trade and resources as well as security. The framers of the Constitution held ideas of lack of intrusions on foreign affairs not only due to experiences of English colonization but also to protect the resources and economy of our contained country. This is still true today but the world economy has developed to become a more globally integrated marketplace and thus foreign policy must now be enacted in order to protect American interests of trade and resources hear and abroad. Trade policies should be implemented without question when they produces goods and bring in resources for our own country yet policies to prevent trade when it becomes detrimental to our country’s businesses and manufacturing should be enacted. Our country is at its strongest when people are at work and we are creating products. This can be seen as the period during and following WW2 which was a height of economic success due to internal manufacturing. But foreign resources that are crucial to Americans should be protected such as oil fields and food resources. The United States should also become involved in foreign affairs that directly affect our own country’s national security. Military intervention in WW2 helped stop the spread of the imminent threat of the Axis Powers who would inevitably have posed a threat to the security and sovereignty of our country. Though American foreign policy should not interfere with the internal workings of other countries is should help facilitate trade and protect resources essential to our country as well as protect the national security of our nation.
    The world as a whole is constantly changing and American policy has adapted and progressed with this changing world. Yet, we as a country should not become to developed in the internal affairs of other nations as this often causes further political unrest and disdain toward the United States. American foreign policy should be limited rather to policies that help to protect and spur our own economy. It is also the ultimate goal of our government as stated in the constitution to protect and preserve the life, liberty and happiness of the people of this country and this should be done through foreign policy that prevents threats to our nation security.

    [read less]

    Due to circumstances on which the United States was founded, the Constitution and the founders who wrote it expressed opinions of disdain toward forei…

    [read more]
    1
  • Taylor from Mississippi

    Yes I do believe that we should get involved, this nation was founded upon the idea of resisting tyranny. With that being said do we as a nation really believe in that ideology if we can not go into the world to defend those being subjected to tyranny?

    [read less]

    Yes I do believe that we should get involved, this nation was founded upon the idea of resisting tyranny. With that being said do we as a nation real…

    [read more]
    1
  • Itan-Ola from Indiana

    The United States should get involved in foreign conflict, because the principle of the United States is the rights for all humanity, knowing the rights of the people. Like the air strike in Syria, was a good example of United States getting involved. Other countries look at the United States for examples, so what the U.S does is what the other countries would look to follow. The air strike in Syria was an absolute thing to be done, because the citizens in Syria deserve their rights, and not to be sprayed with chemical. With the U.S also getting involved, it will let other countries know that the U.S is watching and they will make a move when they need to.

    [read less]

    The United States should get involved in foreign conflict, because the principle of the United States is the rights for all humanity, knowing the righ…

    [read more]
    1
  • Nancy from Massachusetts

    We should at least intervene in some way. It’s not only a moral thing to do, but in the long run, the citizens of the United States will benefit from peace once the war ends. In addition, it will strengthen future political and economic relations with future Syria. On the other hand, being a bystander and letting the war play out is like encouraging the fighting.
    However, there’s no doubt that intervention will be a complex process. If we openly oppose President Bashar al-Assad and make attacks on his government, like what Trump recently issued to do, it will further pull other foreign countries into the war. Russia, who supports Assad, will see this action as aggressive and will counterattack, possibly resulting another Cold War, which is not what’s in the best interest of the United States.
    Instead, I present two options: either put economic pressure on Assad, restricting the supplies that come into his hands and providing as many resources to the Syrian coalition, or meet with other foreign countries involved in the war, including Russia, coming up with a solution that all can agree on. If the first option is considered, it will result in tension between foreign countries, but it will at least prevent direct attacks between the foreign powers. However, we will also need to promise the new government economic aid and government counseling after the war, especially since one of the causes for the revolts is economic turmoil. This might be problematic with Russia, who has economic interests in Syria. So I think the second option is the best one.
    If we understand why Russia supports Assad, most likely due to economic and political factors, we can come up with a compromise on what to do together. We can convince Russia that they should not support the oppressive government. Instead, if they support the coalition, they can play a limited role in intervening in the new Syrian government along with the United States and other countries, establishing new connections still in favor to their interests. This option is difficult to achieve, but it’s at least worth a try. If it works, resources, lives, and money will be saved.

    [read less]

    We should at least intervene in some way. It’s not only a moral thing to do, but in the long run, the citizens of the United States will benefit from …

    [read more]
    1
  • MJ from New York

    Yes, the US should get involved in some foreign conflicts. In cases of genocide, such as the Holocaust or the Somalian genocide, it would make sense that the United States would be proactive, because if no one else intervenes, the probability that millions of lives are lost increases. If the United States were to intervene in cases of genocide, although American lives may be spent, it would not only decrease the the probability of loss of life, but it may stop the genocide altogether, preventing the further loss of life. The world is not in need of yet another incident such as the Holocaust.
    However, if there is no threat to the United States, there is no reason as to why the US should become involved. In the specific case of Syria, it seemed a rather rash, irrational decision that did not even go through Congress. Technically, the decision did not have to go through Congress, but more thought should have been put into it. Theodore Roosevelt may have claimed that the US is the international police, but there are cases when the police simply are not needed and are excessively used.

    [read less]

    Yes, the US should get involved in some foreign conflicts. In cases of genocide, such as the Holocaust or the Somalian genocide, it would make sense t…

    [read more]
    1
    • Crystal from Arkansas

      This was an excellent response. I could not agree more. When you make rash decisions multiple lives pay for it. I don’t think he thought it well through and that is what scares me the most. You have to sit down and weigh ALL your options, not just one side or a few sides. When you hold that much power you weigh EVERYTHING and I don’t think he did at all. After the clip of him not even knowing whom he had bombed, that just made it even more surreal that he truly did make this decision out of order.

      At the end of the day, if you don’t have the Congress there or your allies there to back you up, then you are not making the right decision.

      [read less]

      This was an excellent response. I could not agree more. When you make rash decisions multiple lives pay for it. I don’t think he thought it well throu…

      [read more]
      0
  • Amelia from Kansas

    The United States should get involved with other countries conflicts because if we don’t help or understand what the other countries are going true, then we could make the same mistake. Also if we don’t help with other countries, then we might not become our allies when we are in a war with another country.

    [read less]

    The United States should get involved with other countries conflicts because if we don’t help or understand what the other countries are going true, t…

    [read more]
    0
  • Will from Mississippi

    Yes, I do believe the United States should be involved in foreign conflict because we have always been a country of compassion as well as a beacon of hope for those persecuted by their own country. If one’s own country can’t help its people, who can its people look to? With that said, I do not think the bombings were the best method because it appears it was a show of military power as well as a “test weapon”. It was a misuse of non-nuclear weapons that may or may not have weakened ISIS and/or harmed the innocent.

    [read less]

    Yes, I do believe the United States should be involved in foreign conflict because we have always been a country of compassion as well as a beacon of …

    [read more]
    0
  • Joy from Maryland

    Yes because because America cares about it citizen and to live in America is not a right but an opportunitie so if you get it make use of it.

    0
  • Glenn from California

    More people should think about these things. We need more critical thinking in this country.

    0
  • Haven from Tennessee

    I vote yes, because, WW2 if we struck sooner than we did we would have probably ended that war faster than we did.. Trump had the right to do what he did to Syria because if we didn’t take action as soon as he did who would know what would they have done to anyone else..

    [read less]

    I vote yes, because, WW2 if we struck sooner than we did we would have probably ended that war faster than we did.. Trump had the right to do what he …

    [read more]
    0
  • Patrick from Florida

    I believe we should get involved as long as we have the proper resources to help. If it doesn’t effect our country, then we should provide aid as needed. If another country is in need and does not have the proper resources to defend themselves, another country should get involved if they have what that country needs. It would be wrong to turn a blind eye to a country in dire need of help that is suffering.

    [read less]

    I believe we should get involved as long as we have the proper resources to help. If it doesn’t effect our country, then we should provide aid as need…

    [read more]
    0
  • Joan from Indiana

    Yes. If it is proven, or there are rumors, that a foreign nation is unable to responsibly care for its citizens, then the United States should take it upon themselves, as a First World nation and a model for the rest of the world. If there is a conflict between foreign nations and U.S. interests are at risk due to this conflict, then the U.S. should also take interest in this conflict, as well, and see what can be done, if anything can be done at all.

    [read less]

    Yes. If it is proven, or there are rumors, that a foreign nation is unable to responsibly care for its citizens, then the United States should take it…

    [read more]
    0
  • William from Texas

    For me I would say that it is an issue depending on the topic. If what we are doing is militaristic, it most likely shouldn’t be done. We are by getting involved in military conflicts with other countries, ruining our relationship with them. If the type of foreign movement is in aid of the citizens then it is better. I think foreign aid is spectacular as long as we are not involved with violence. My opinion is that helping the people in other countries gives them a chance to catch up to the global market, allowing for more prosperity globally. When our foreign “aid” becomes violent, there is little point in doing it, and we just hurt more people that way.

    [read less]

    For me I would say that it is an issue depending on the topic. If what we are doing is militaristic, it most likely shouldn’t be done. We are by getti…

    [read more]
    0
  • bernouilly from Florida

    i think we should involved on that because we can’t stay quiet forever we gonna show what we got

    0
  • Dounia from Louisiana

    Yes, I think that the US should not turn a blind eye to horrendous or indecent foreign affairs, but with a limit. The US should not try to be a mediator between each and every country in the world. I know in the US we have a strong sense of justice, but if two countries are fighting for their own personal reasons, I believe the US should stay out of it. I understand wanting to protect everyone, but unless basic human rights are being denied, one country is obviously disadvantaged(ie if a huge country like Russia attacked some small country in Africa), or the country is threatening the US, we really don’t have any kind of reason to try and find a solution for the opposing countries.

    [read less]

    Yes, I think that the US should not turn a blind eye to horrendous or indecent foreign affairs, but with a limit. The US should not try to be a mediat…

    [read more]
    0
  • Sean from Texas

    Not only have terrorist threats become very serious lately, but in the past few years, the leftist government did next to nothing about it. While innocent people were getting slaughtered by idiotic insurgents, the government was working on ways to help the economy and other things that once researched, were completely unnecessary.

    [read less]

    Not only have terrorist threats become very serious lately, but in the past few years, the leftist government did next to nothing about it. While inno…

    [read more]
    0
  • Anita from Virginia

    Yeah

    0
  • Anthony from Arizona

    I believe that the United States should be involved with issues of foreign policy because, in the bombing of the Assad regime, it assures other countries against the Assad regime that we stand with them. It also tells other nations of the world that America is an upholder of international law, which also strengthens foreign relationships. There is also an issue of morality in foreign policy regarding the Assad regime. The use of chemical weapons is inhumane, these poor refugees are suffering at the hand of these weapons. Intervening also sets a moral example for America that other countries should certainly follow.

    [read less]

    I believe that the United States should be involved with issues of foreign policy because, in the bombing of the Assad regime, it assures other countr…

    [read more]
    0
  • Edmund from Massachusetts

    Yes

    0
  • Gage from Kentucky

    I believe, as a well developed country, we have some responsibility to help other countries become free of tyranny and poverty if the government is the cause of said poverty.

    0
  • Hailey from California

    As a global superpower (meaning a nation with plentiful recourses and powerful military might), the United States has a responsibility to defend the Syrian people against the inhumane chemical attacks they faced. We don’t want a repeat of Nazi Germany, where Hitler’s aggressions before the attack on Poland were not responded to by Western powers. This lead to an increase in military ambition and ultimately a world war. I’m not saying that Assad’s regime will escalate their chemical attacks into a global conflict, but I am saying that the United States must prevent more chemical attacks like this so Assad doesn’t get any furthur ideas.

    [read less]

    As a global superpower (meaning a nation with plentiful recourses and powerful military might), the United States has a responsibility to defend the S…

    [read more]
    0
  • Emma from Utah

    Yes, but depends on certain situations. For example, we don’t just bomb another country to save face. We shouldn’t just start wars because of our ego. However, there are times were we should have stepped in and didn’t. For example, the Rwandan Genocide. This was a situation where we could have saved so many lives.

    [read less]

    Yes, but depends on certain situations. For example, we don’t just bomb another country to save face. We shouldn’t just start wars because of our ego….

    [read more]
    0
  • Genevieve from California

    We turned away Jewish people looking for refuge from the Nazis during WWII; we cannot make that same mistake again. The United States is a nation that was built on immigration (and the natives did not always receive us amicably), it is our responsibility to help people that need us too.

    [read less]

    We turned away Jewish people looking for refuge from the Nazis during WWII; we cannot make that same mistake again. The United States is a nation that…

    [read more]
    0
  • Damaris from California

    I think that America should get involved with foreign problems to an extent because our surrounding to affect us as a country, and we don’t want to be isolated from the rest of the world because that wouldn’t help us at all.

    [read less]

    I think that America should get involved with foreign problems to an extent because our surrounding to affect us as a country, and we don’t want to be…

    [read more]
    0
  • Charles from North Carolina

    Since its very first president, the U.S has known the risks of stepping into foreign affairs. Looking back on history, when we see the U.S. exhibiting more isolationist policies, typically we may also see more intent and focus on domestic issues, as well as economic stability. That being said, the U.S. has risen to its rank in the world by means of imperialism and globalism, two things very far from isolationism. When someone acquires as much respect and ability that the U.S. has, a responsibility forms. Sure by continually dipping into the conflict in the Middle East we are making things a good deal riskier for ourselves, but if we didn’t, we’d be ignoring something that we potentially could very well aid in defeating.

    [read less]

    Since its very first president, the U.S has known the risks of stepping into foreign affairs. Looking back on history, when we see the U.S. exhibiting…

    [read more]
    0
  • Shira from Massachusetts

    I think that to a certain extent, the U.S has the responsibility that is afflicted by being a global super power. Our job, however, should not just use other countries for our own self interest. If part of it is self interest, that is fine, but if all of it is, then we should stay out of it. However, I sincerely hope that as a global super power, we can think of the world at large instead of just ourselves and help. I think the air strike on Syria for example was completely justifiable, as we destroyed weaponry from the Syrian government that could continue to cause harm towards Syrian civilians.

    [read less]

    I think that to a certain extent, the U.S has the responsibility that is afflicted by being a global super power. Our job, however, should not just us…

    [read more]
    0
  • Bennett from Massachusetts

    It is necessary and even essential at some points that countries are involved in foreign affairs when they go against their beliefs, because the world is everyone’s and it needs to be protected by everyone.

    Focusing on the topic of the American bombings of Syria, it becomes a problem of protecting humanity rather than just a country’s individual right to decide its affairs. Government organizations don’t have the right to decide the value of human life and they cannot unjustly attack thousands of people when they feel like it through chemical attacks.

    [read less]

    It is necessary and even essential at some points that countries are involved in foreign affairs when they go against their beliefs, because the world…

    [read more]
    0
  • Diego from Alabama

    Again we must fight for justice

    0
  • jackson from Ohio

    It’s important that American values guide our actions

    0
  • maria from Florida

    I believe that the U.S should be involved in foreign policies even though it is not our problem. The reason for this is because the war going around us will compel the U.S. into the issues and help if any of the U.S allies are attacked. If we are involved we can prevent any bigger issues from starting. Furthermore, being involved in foreign issues might change the circumstances to stop the problem even though it can also be the beginning of a bigger issue. The U.S is one of the most powerful countries in the world and with the equipment and army forces and the help of allies, it can overcome any issues or war.

    In contrary, others may say we need to stay out of foreign policy issues because we may gain enemies. It is not a bad thing to become enemies with other countries because after all there will always be conflicts with other countries and that is the reason for wars within countries. At the same time we can gain allies to help us go to war and help with other issues. Also, our soldiers will die at war if we get involved but we need to stop bigger issues from happening and we need to stop using resources. Foreign policy issues are something that are always going to surround us and involved or not there must be something done to stop them.

    [read less]

    I believe that the U.S should be involved in foreign policies even though it is not our problem. The reason for this is because the war going around u…

    [read more]
    0
  • Trever from Florida

    While it is imperative that we remain careful when entering foreign affairs, it is a bad decision to steer clear of them entirely. Standing aside and watching as our enemies grow and our allies weaken is a terrible thing to do. Making things more difficult for ourselves much later and possibly even leading to mistakes impossible to correct. Without America’s strong, influential hand guiding small, war-torn nations down the correct paths we can expect nothing but poor results.
    Some may argue that it would be best to focus our resources at home and think about AMERICA FIRST, though I wholeheartedly disagree. Helping those in need is an American ideal, and something that we should strive for not only when dealing with our brethren, but also our neighbors. If we allow these problems to persist then they may soon overtake us, drowning us in a pool of issues of which we’ll never resurface. We must help those around us, in order to truly better ourselves.

    [read less]

    While it is imperative that we remain careful when entering foreign affairs, it is a bad decision to steer clear of them entirely. Standing aside and …

    [read more]
    0
  • Amanda from Michigan

    I believe that we should get involved to help the people of other countries, but do not influence to make them to come after us and start a war. But President trump should be more worried about Korea because that is an issue my sister is joining the army, I hope he dicides in certainly that he will actually help and not start another war that is not necessary.

    [read less]

    I believe that we should get involved to help the people of other countries, but do not influence to make them to come after us and start a war. But P…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jalevpha from Florida

    The United States shall continue to engage in foreign affairs due to assisting vulnerable countries and strengthening relationships with other countries. Our country may not be the most stable of its own, however, we are more stable and resourced than majority of the outside countries. If are able to give assistance to the country and its people, then we should. In doing so, we build stronger relationships with the aided country. Stronger relationships allow for us to have reliable countries to aid us when we are in trouble and our people are being strongly affected. Morals overturn monetary matters.
    One against engaging in foreign affairs may argue that doing so will break the treaties and compromises that were made prior to our reason for assisting the other country. Though that may be true, when discussing morals, it always reigns. That is like watching a person be bullied and chose to ignore the situation due to the bully being someone you used to fight with and squashed it. It is not right, and never will be. Therefore, we should be involved in foreign policy.

    [read less]

    The United States shall continue to engage in foreign affairs due to assisting vulnerable countries and strengthening relationships with other countri…

    [read more]
    0
  • Matthew from Michigan

    If the United States does not enter foreign conflicts, things often go south. we should act on the behalf of others safety no matter if they are a direct ally or not. Take a look at Syria. We were not involved, until Syria endangered its own people. They killed its own citizens. If we had not gotten involved, more people could have, and almost certainly would have.

    [read less]

    If the United States does not enter foreign conflicts, things often go south. we should act on the behalf of others safety no matter if they are a dir…

    [read more]
    0
  • josh from Michigan

    Yes, but only if those conflicts directly effect the united states, or the safety of its citizens. I do feel that a lot of america’s actions on foreign land are unnecessary and not our issue

    [read less]

    Yes, but only if those conflicts directly effect the united states, or the safety of its citizens. I do feel that a lot of america’s actions on foreig…

    [read more]
    0
  • Cal from Wisconsin

    I believe that the United States should engage in foreign conflicts. If a foreign conflict arises and action from the US would be beneficial to everyone involved in the long run, then engaging is necessary. Working together as nations is vital to create a peaceful world.

    [read less]

    I believe that the United States should engage in foreign conflicts. If a foreign conflict arises and action from the US would be beneficial to everyo…

    [read more]
    0
  • Austen from Michigan

    Yes we should, it can affect trade with the world. If a countries leader is getting out of control and treating its citizens badly then we should step in and lend a hand in stopping the madness.

    [read less]

    Yes we should, it can affect trade with the world. If a countries leader is getting out of control and treating its citizens badly then we should step…

    [read more]
    0
  • Adrian from Florida

    In short, American is a bastion of freedom and justice in the western, if not whole world. In order to keep that title, we have a duty, not only as citizens of the earth but as humans to intervene whenever we see injustice done.

    [read less]

    In short, American is a bastion of freedom and justice in the western, if not whole world. In order to keep that title, we have a duty, not only as ci…

    [read more]
    0
  • Tori from Utah

    My official opinion is, “Yes, but as cautiously as possible.”
    We need to leave nations alone, unless it’s absolutely necessary. If a problem gets to big, we need to stay out of it. We shouldn’t interfere with different countries that are solving their own problems. We need to have a good relationship with nations, but not be a part of their messes.
    George Washington once said, “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 connection as possible.” We need to be careful when entering other nations’ business.
    Americans should come first, but a sentence stands out, silently protesting this idea. A sentence that has lasted for 240 years. It has been repeated, changed, loved, and scorned.
    “All men are equal.”
    When the time comes that mass amounts of people are in danger of dying, or someone is doing something that we know is morally horribly wrong, we need to help. We can’t just pretend it’s not there. There are men, women, and children who should have natural human rights that we need to protect. The line isn’t inapplicable just because of someone’s skin color, gender, race, religion, disabilities, or anything. We need to stand for this phrase, for this is why America works.

    [read less]

    My official opinion is, “Yes, but as cautiously as possible.”
    We need to leave nations alone, unless it’s absolutely necessary. If a problem gets to b…

    [read more]
    0
  • Brogan from Oregon

    Throughout history, the United States has always gotten involved in foreign conflicts. I admit, there have been a few times when getting involved wasnt the best idea, and had no benefit to the U.S. so honestly, this argument could go either way, however, im going to have to side with yes, the U.S. should get involved. My reasoning for this is the fact that many of these lesser developed countries are being forced into terrible circumstances, and very harsh ways of life. Many people say that the United States has a moral obligation to do the right thing, I believe that is true. The Constitution was made to promote equality, and keep a balance of power. Therefore if power is being abused, shouldnt someone step in and set things right? Now, i want to talk about the syrian airstrike, President Trump ordered an airstrike on the syrian base that launched chemical weapons on its own people. There was no physical benefit to the U.S. because of this, however, the Syrian people lack sufficient means to protect themselves from their leaders, and therefore, the only one that has chosen to help them, and to show Syrian leaders what they are doing is wrong, has been the United States. Another thing to look at is the fact that throughout history, the world, not just the U.S. has experienced and recognized the horror of chemical weapons, and all nations of the world previously agreed not to use chemical weapons for anything. Syrian officials have broken this agreement as well as others time and time again, and no one has taken a stand or done anything to show them that there will be consequences. Until now. I believe that it was right of President Trump to order an airstrike, and I strongly beilieve that to honor our fore-fathers, and to consider ourselves Americans, we must promote good moral standings with the rest of the world, and that is ultimately why we should get involved in foreign conflict.

    [read less]

    Throughout history, the United States has always gotten involved in foreign conflicts. I admit, there have been a few times when getting involved wasn…

    [read more]
    0
  • Kody from Oregon

    I feel that the United States has every right to step into foreign affairs when necessary. When a situation is dire enough, somebody has to come in and make things right, and set an example that should be modeled after. With Syria using chemical weapons, which are against all the laws of the Geneva Convention, on civilians, somebody has to do something when no other country would. We had to prove a point. That point being that such insubordinate behavior will not be tolerated, as it is inhumane and un-ethical. Just because our country takes action on foreign grounds, doesn’t mean that our government isn’t trying to better our country internally either. Foreign relations have just been the more pressing matter since during the election, with Russia being accused of hacking in order to get Trump in office. We want to smooth things out with the rest of the world. Sure, bombing another country to make friends doesn’t seem like the brightest idea, but I feel that we all have a common enemy in that scenario. As the saying goes, “The enemy of my enemy, is my friend”.

    [read less]

    I feel that the United States has every right to step into foreign affairs when necessary. When a situation is dire enough, somebody has to come in an…

    [read more]
    0
  • caleb from Oregon

    I believe that the United States should get involved for payback they wont back down of a challenge.

    0
  • MaKenzie from Oregon

    I believe that while the United States should be put first, we have a moral obligation to protect the innocent people of the wolrd. What the Syrian government did to it’s own people, civilians, not military personel or foriegners but women and children, was horrendous. It showed just how far they are willing to go to prove their power. President Trump was right to send the missiles. He said, “No child of God should suffer that horror,” and I couldnt agree more. Now, I don’t think we should get involved in foreign policy. We shouldnt try to force them to change their laws. But this had nothing to do with the law and everything to do with an out-of-control Syrian government trying to prove a point.

    [read less]

    I believe that while the United States should be put first, we have a moral obligation to protect the innocent people of the wolrd. What the Syrian go…

    [read more]
    0
  • Sarah from Oregon

    Yes, I think that the United States should get involved in foreign conflicts such as the one with Syria. The United States should stand up for the people who support them and should do what they did was right. The chemical attacks in Syria is a perfect example of this. Civilians couldn’t do anything about the attacks because the government has more resources and power. The fact that the United States did something about it was very impressive to me and shows that they won’t let that happen to anyone, especially when they said they wouldn’t use chemicals ever.

    [read less]

    Yes, I think that the United States should get involved in foreign conflicts such as the one with Syria. The United States should stand up for the peo…

    [read more]
    0
  • Nathan from Oregon

    I believe that it’s okay to get involved in certain situations, such as the one that took place in Syria. I feel that if we didn’t get involved then the civilians would have been terrified and if they tried to strike back they’d use chemicals again. If it’s politics on the other hand, then we shouldn’t get involved, unless they ask us or contact us about it.

    [read less]

    I believe that it’s okay to get involved in certain situations, such as the one that took place in Syria. I feel that if we didn’t get involved then t…

    [read more]
    0
  • Lindsay from Oregon

    I think the U.S. should get involved with foreign conflicts, but only to an extent. For instance what happened in Syria, where they bombed their own civilians with chemicals, which they signed off on that they wouldn’t use, I do think it was necessary that we stepped in and showed them they have to be responsible for their actions.

    [read less]

    I think the U.S. should get involved with foreign conflicts, but only to an extent. For instance what happened in Syria, where they bombed their own c…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jordan from Kansas

    I believe that the United States has the right to protect country’s from their oppressive governments, one most of the places with oppressive governments the people don’t have the means to defend them self’s because the government just has to much power. Also a direct point Syria did sign the 1925 Geneva protocol prohibiting the use of chemical weapons and using them on their own people breaks that protocol and its also just wrong. And the United States is trying to help everyone who needs it, So I do believe that the united states does have a right to interfere in foreign conflicts as long as we have the resources and man power to keep our country safe. We are trying to make the world a better and safer place to live. And if tyranny gets in the way of that then the united states and her allies will try their hardest to change it peaceful and if not peacefully then they will use force.

    [read less]

    I believe that the United States has the right to protect country’s from their oppressive governments, one most of the places with oppressive governme…

    [read more]
    0
  • Marilyn from Georgia

    The United States should get involved with forego conflicts because countries have little to no capability to defending themselves. The United States, while others may disagree or ever will understand why we get involved, get involved into these conflicts to balance one’s power and to not let other countries overrule what is not theirs. Although many people believe the United States would be wasting money in unnecessary involvements and that the conflicts between other countries should be resolved on its own, we should not ignore those who need our help, or it states in the Preamble. We are to give fairness to all and the children, which should especially include those who need our help. The United States should get involved into foreign conflicts because we are set to believe everyone should have a fair chance, even if it seems like we are causing more damage.

    [read less]

    The United States should get involved with forego conflicts because countries have little to no capability to defending themselves. The United States,…

    [read more]
    0
  • Tevin from Kansas

    I believe that the united states should get involved in the foreign conflict because all threw out history america has came to the aid of many small country’s. Now that doesn’t mean we’ve always been there because that of course would be false. the united states has played this big brother type of role with other presidents and dictators as such. Syria needs our help and they should receive as much as they need from us because how are you gonna say that we have priority’s in america by not allowing Syrian refugees into our borders but yet we decide to take military action when the Syrian people are hit with a deadly chemical attack. now I understand that we had a policy not allowing the use of chemical agents in war but still if we would have let the refugees come to the united states there could have been a tremendous drop in casualties revolving around the attack.

    [read less]

    I believe that the united states should get involved in the foreign conflict because all threw out history america has came to the aid of many small c…

    [read more]
    0
  • Simon from Texas

    We should not get into every single conflict in the world, but if we see human rights’ violations, it is our moral duty to interfere.

    0
  • LAL from Georgia

    Yes, i believe that the United State should involve in foreign conflicts. It may seems like a downward and negative effects to our nation or other countries view. However, some countries like Syria have such a corrupted government who demolish and kill their innocent citizens that include young children, they use a Chemical weapons to take people lives. it is not right and they shouldn’t be doing that but the people can’t do nothing. So, as a human being it is our responsibilities to look after each other, not because we’re American. Yes, it is not our responsibilities to rule over their country but the least thing we can do is help and stop the killing. When we involve in other countries, we also gain benefits for our nation. For instance, we sent troops and fight in Iran and Afghanistan, not because we want the victory or the power but because of the Oil that help our nation and the benefit we gain from it. At the same times, it should be taken to public opinions and let the people have their voices before making such a decisions, because it is our brothers and sister who fought in those war. Most of the other nation seek the united state as the father, and when they faced wars and natural disasters they always seek for our help and it is our job to help them.

    [read less]

    Yes, i believe that the United State should involve in foreign conflicts. It may seems like a downward and negative effects to our nation or other cou…

    [read more]
    0
  • Harvey from Florida

    I believe the United States should get involved in foreign conflicts because as a human being I and everyone,have a moral obligation to help other people.Imagine your relative was in another country at the wrong time. Wouldn’t you want to help them? Knowing innocent people are dying,from this country or not, we need to help.According to the Constitution the president is the commander in chief of the army and navy of the United States so he should be able to help along with the rest of the government

    [read less]

    I believe the United States should get involved in foreign conflicts because as a human being I and everyone,have a moral obligation to help other peo…

    [read more]
    0
    • Rashiya from Florida

      I respectfully disagree because I think we shouldn’t help in a war that doesn’t involve us.

      0
  • Kevon from Florida

    No because, I think the U.S should not get in foreign country conflict it’s not our business. The preamble of the constitution talks about how you should state the fact and listen to the people and give them a chance to speak. Everybody should have a say and I think getting in a conflict will have people lying dead. I don’t want to get kill.

    [read less]

    No because, I think the U.S should not get in foreign country conflict it’s not our business. The preamble of the constitution talks about how you sho…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ken from Kansas

    We should totally get involved because why sit on the sidelines and watch people be stupid until they attack when we could get right out there and fight them

    0
  • Julie from Kansas

    I believe that we should because if we ever need help from another country, like the Syrians needed ours because of what their leader was doing to them, then we should get help. But we should help others in their time of need as well. We may have our own issues to deal with but lives matter more than money. We might have people dying or being killed here but in other countries people are being massacred for things like how they look or their religion. We shouldn’t stand by and let people die, even if it’s not our problem. Doing something and trying to help is better than letting more and more people die.

    [read less]

    I believe that we should because if we ever need help from another country, like the Syrians needed ours because of what their leader was doing to the…

    [read more]
    0
  • Daniel from Kansas

    America has freedom and is a military superpower. I think we have the responsibility to try to help give those freedoms that we enjoy to other countries by helping them fight off their problems. We shouldn’t just ignore other countries in need of support just because we are already in a good state. Killing off terrorist organizations like ISIS isn’t going to happen anytime soon without support from a powerful military. We are that military.

    [read less]

    America has freedom and is a military superpower. I think we have the responsibility to try to help give those freedoms that we enjoy to other countri…

    [read more]
    0
  • maria from Georgia

    as i see it and have seen it for as long as i have been able to understand the US should help those countries that are in need but to a certain extent. morally we help them and usually watch our backs. but being involved, violently in foreign deputes will hurt our nation and what is left of it under trumps control. as part of ‘We the people’ had no say and no idea that the attack and decision was to take action. the attack now and any in the future will affect us greatly. if the conflict was between two nations and one needed help, or the people needed help we could have intervened in another way. the fact we have a man child driving our country to war due to his unrealistic ideas is immoral. he had no okay from congress or any house and has put our nations at risk. we have many enemies, why make a stupid decision and make even more.
    if we were to keep being involved in foreign conflict we should be careful how we approach things. the way we approach things now should be taken lightly, everything is on a ticking time bomb.

    [read less]

    as i see it and have seen it for as long as i have been able to understand the US should help those countries that are in need but to a certain extent…

    [read more]
    0
  • Michael from Georgia

    I don’t agree with the United States supporting a country for selfish gains or providing weaponry to it’s people because it would provoke more violence. I am opposed to Washington sending arms and military supplies to Ukrain’s government, as it deals with pro-Russian separatists. After the 9/11 attacks interventionist mindsets were the norm, and people/country leaders began to feel that there its a duty to keep groups from rising and attacking innocent people. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan took care of some of the big terrorist threats, reminding Americans that military actions often have unforeseen consequences. Participating in violence among two countries (Russian and Ukraine) has no gain for us. We don’t gain anything but taking resources from countries as compensation for a debt or service. Ex-President Obama gave a short speech on international intervention and said,” I don’t know but my job as commander-in-chief is to look at what’s going to advance our security/military over the long term. To keep our military in reserve for when we absolutely need it”. So, ex-President Obama was saying we should have soldiers on foreign grounds awaiting conflict or government attack. I don’t agree with this unless he is referring to local countries/neighboring countries., because when you have soldiers from foreign countries on your land, it automatically provokes violence and war. If we are going to have soldiers based on foreign grounds, they shall either help around the countries community or get involved with police work. That way the country can be benefiting in the short run and also build connections for warfare assistance in the long run. Economically speaking, every country already has its own elements and they should focus on using its own materials. The U.S should not be own foreign grounds demanding (using force or threats) or requesting resources, because then we will be taking from other countries in which in most cases they don’t have an abundant supply themselves. The U.S is pretty good on its own resources, but it just cost too much to maintain them on our lands. Politically speaking, helping foreign countries who neighbor us, is really good social ethics. If our citizens see our country having a really good connection with another country, than our people will want to travel there and get involved some way. In terms of normality and what people “should feel is right,” the U.S should leave countries who are struggling alone and acting peevish when a country can’t afford to repay a debt. So, yes we should engage ourselves with foreign conflict, but only if we are supporting a country who is in need or it’s people are in jeopardy.

    [read less]

    I don’t agree with the United States supporting a country for selfish gains or providing weaponry to it’s people because it would provoke more violenc…

    [read more]
    0
  • Fahad from Georgia

    Who are we to get involved in conflict that don’t concern us. however as humans, we must interject ourselves in conflicts that need a resolution in order to sustain peace and order throughout the world. If there are situations that hinder this responsibility, it is out job as one human being to another to resolve such a situation. If there are people that hinder our ability to do so or is rather ‘evil’ by doing the opposite of such a responsibility, should be brought down before such a person is given power. If there is a person(s)that instead seek to bring chaos and disorder to the world, it is our job as an economic, military, and political superpower to do our part in maintaining goodness in the Earth. However, as the Preamble states “We the People” must decide before such a decision is made.

    [read less]

    Who are we to get involved in conflict that don’t concern us. however as humans, we must interject ourselves in conflicts that need a resolution in or…

    [read more]
    0
  • Kevin from Georgia

    I strongly believe that the United States should get involved in foreign conflicts, but only if it has been discussed. Many people believe that Donald Trump did a good job in launching those tomahawk missiles. What most people fail to notice is that he didn’t seek approval from congress. What he did was a rash decision and demonstrate that he is the bigger power. His actions has only caused more harm than peace. Not only to Syrian civilians but to everyone around the world. What Bashar al-Assad has done to his people is outrageous. This is the man that his people voted for, this man was their leader . Now he has the blood of hundreds of innocent people on his hands. It is atrocious to believe that the United States should not get involved in foreign conflicts. The people of Syria have been abandoned by their leader, and it would be inhumane if we as people do not help them out. Before we ever take action in any foreign conflicts, Trump needs to seek approval and advice to seek a more peaceful resolution. I believe that the United States could get involved and avoid any conflict, but refusing to help these people is foolish. Us not helping these people out is just as wrong as what Bashar al-Assad has done to them.

    [read less]

    I strongly believe that the United States should get involved in foreign conflicts, but only if it has been discussed. Many people believe that Donald…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ruby from Georgia

    Yes, i do believe that the U.S should get involved in foreign conflict because although the repression and suffering of others does not directly affect us, it is our moral duty and responsibility to help those who cannot help themselves when we hold the power to do so. As Americans, it would be wrong to say we should just stand by and watch a harmful government commit genocide against its own people when our own founding fathers ordained and stated in our constitution that we must secure the blessings of things such as justice, domestic tranquility, and liberty to not only ourselves; but to all people. Although, i personally see encouraging interference on our behalf, as a step towards world peace and order; i believe it should be in a less aggressive and more civil form in order to preserve the peace for as long, and to protect as many lives as possible.

    [read less]

    Yes, i do believe that the U.S should get involved in foreign conflict because although the repression and suffering of others does not directly affec…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jaqueline from Georgia

    The United States shouldn’t get involved in foreign conflict, it can cause so many different conflicts for us as a nation. It could cause World War III. Technology has advanced greatly since the the last World War. Weapons are even more deadly than before. Bombs are unmerciful. Where a bomb falls it destroys everything and everyone there. If one bomb lands in a major city in the United States it would cause great chaos and pain to us. Not joining foreign conflicts wont make the United States selfish. We as a nation have to watch out for ourselves.

    [read less]

    The United States shouldn’t get involved in foreign conflict, it can cause so many different conflicts for us as a nation. It could cause World War II…

    [read more]
    0
  • Daniel from Arkansas

    The early US has always avoided foreign relations and remained isolated from the rest of the world. The US started to become involved in foreign conflicts such as World War 1 and 2 which made it what it is today, the leading world power. After this however recent wars such as the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the war on ISIS, and especially the Vietnam War have not helped it at all and may even have hurt it. Despite this the US has very eager to get into foreign conflicts time after time. During the Cold War, the US befriended Russia’s small neighbors so that Soviet Russia couldn’t spread their iron curtain and communist ideology to these countries.
    I believe that the US should continue to extensively get involved in foreign relations and conflicts. The US has the most allies in the world and shoud continue to stay this way. They have friends in every region of the world even with countries like Saudi Arabia with very different political and cultural beliefs. President Trump doesn’t want the US to be involved in many foreign conflicts and thinks countries owe the US for its protection. This might affect the future of the US’s interest in foreign conflicts.

    [read less]

    The early US has always avoided foreign relations and remained isolated from the rest of the world. The US started to become involved in foreign confl…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jaron from Michigan

    I believe that we need to be involved in more foreign conflict. There are some weak countries that are fighting with stronger countries and have no chance of victory. If we just standby and watch, we will soon be fighting the same battle as those before us, but the opposition will be stronger, and we will be unprepared. As an example, what was happening in Syria. Bashar al-Assad, the leader of Syria, launched the chemical weapon, killing many people. As a result, President Trump launched an airstrike on the military base that sent the attack. We are getting involved in foreign conflicts to defend our allies.

    [read less]

    I believe that we need to be involved in more foreign conflict. There are some weak countries that are fighting with stronger countries and have no ch…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jacob from Virginia

    The president should have the authority (along with the approval of congress) to attack back against Syria and other countries if they are harmed in any way that affects lives via weapon. Chemical attacks not only kill lives, other countries will cut off trade and commerce, so the economy of the country will collapse and then soon Syria will be poor, with chemical weapons, aircraft, and soldiers to pay, but no one can afford the taxes, rebellions will start and people won’t get paid. If you send a message (airstrike, peaceful talk or other) to them (Syria in this case) then maybe they won’t do this anymore and Syria will live in peace. Though Syria has had some rebel and ISIS issues recently, their attack on the people was uncalled for. The President Donald Trump made the right call. Innocent people died that day and someone (Syria) should be punished.

    [read less]

    The president should have the authority (along with the approval of congress) to attack back against Syria and other countries if they are harmed in a…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ernest from North Carolina

    The U.S. should get involved with foreign conflicts for multiple reasons. First of all, an image problem. The U.S. is considered either the World’s Bully or the World’s Police, even that might be a battle call for American isolation, we need to change our Foreign Policy while getting involved. When the U.S. Gets involved in foreign conflicts, with American foreign aid we breed democracies and rebuild shattered nations. We expressed those virtues with South Korea and Vietnam and now those countries are flourishing democracies. Even though that the Founding Fathers were non-interventionist, the values of the 18th century changes for in 1947, Harry S. Truman created the Truman Doctrine which established the United States would provide political, military and economic assistance to all democratic nations under threat from external or internal authoritarian forces. 12 presidents later, it has not been repealed and since Post-WWII, the U.S. no longer becoming an isolationist nation has been giving aid to failing countries keeping with its allies the world from falling apart with diplomacy and times of no militaristic campaigns. In conclusion, the U.S. should get involved with foreign conflicts to help the world in times of darkness and since that the Constitution, the law of the land does not specifically state foreign policy we can do it and make this proud of its virtues towards foreign problems.

    [read less]

    The U.S. should get involved with foreign conflicts for multiple reasons. First of all, an image problem. The U.S. is considered either the World’s Bu…

    [read more]
    0
  • Noah from West Virginia

    There are many people in counties that cannot defend themselves in many ways and when we come in we protect them. Yes we do not need to jump in and stop every little rock that is thrown. I do ,however, think that we have a right to fight to protect people and counties that cannot stand up and fight for what they believe is right. They do need to tell us before we do something and cause a stir somewhere for trying to help them or someone else.

    [read less]

    There are many people in counties that cannot defend themselves in many ways and when we come in we protect them. Yes we do not need to jump in and st…

    [read more]
    0
  • Mariah from New Jersey

    The United States needs to get involved with foreign affairs. George Washington’s wishes of the United States staying out of foreign affairs was not granted; almost right away, the country was getting involved with other countries’ problems. However, today it is almost impossible to not get involved with the rest of the world. To build allies and to fight for what is morally right, the United States must intervene and let these countries know that they aren’t going to get away with what they’re doing. The world wars could have been prevented had people gotten involved much sooner. No matter how hard presidents may try to stay out of wars and foreign conflicts, it is close to impossible to do so. In order to preclude conflicts from building up and becoming a large problem to the world, it is a necessity for the US to get involved. In addition, the United States uses natural resources from other countries like fossil fuels. China manufactures a lot of the products available to us today as well. Other countries have things that we need, therefore, we must get involved with these countries. Because of the fact that war is unavoidable and that America needs things that other countries have, we must get involved in foreign affairs as it is necessary for the country to run properly and have the resources needed.

    [read less]

    The United States needs to get involved with foreign affairs. George Washington’s wishes of the United States staying out of foreign affairs was not g…

    [read more]
    0
  • Kirsten from Louisiana

    I think the U.S should get involved in foreign affairs if the situation is very dangerous or unfair. A big argument for people that don’t believe this is because they think we should finish dealing with our own problems first. There won’t ever be a time where the U.S is 100% problem free, and other places have it a lot worse so I think the US should help out if we are able to. People migrate to the US because of really bad social or economic conditions. Conditions are so bad at home that they would rather risk dying trying to escape then staying there. The US allows refugees, which is a burden on us, but if we completely cut off and ignore all outside problems and focus on our own problems, then the rest of the world will still be struggling while we are focusing on problems that are not life or death situations. So if we shouldn’t involve in internal affairs that can cause the same problems, then should we also ban refugee camps? Also, its not like the US never needed help. It would be unfair to get receive help from other countries, but never offer any help. After 9/11 the US got help from places like France, and Britain that are also better off. They sent troops with the US forces to fight against terrors. The same people that don’t have a problem with this are probably the same people that have a problem with intervention in foreign affairs. The US stands for freedom and human rights, so the message wouldn’t be true if this only applied to people within a certain boundary. This is not to say that the US should police and get involved in every single conflict, but we are better socially better off than many places and if it doesn’t cause a threat and lives are at risk and we are in a position to help we should.

    [read less]

    I think the U.S should get involved in foreign affairs if the situation is very dangerous or unfair. A big argument for people that don’t believe this…

    [read more]
    0
  • Tanner from Iowa

    I think the US should get involved in foreign conflicts because our allies, like south Korea, have communist countries near them or on top of them. Our allies like Korea or Vietnam had communist countries to the north and they called for our help when the communists invaded them.

    [read less]

    I think the US should get involved in foreign conflicts because our allies, like south Korea, have communist countries near them or on top of them. Ou…

    [read more]
    0
  • Tobias from South Carolina

    I feel like we should get involved in some, but not all foreign affairs. If there is a possible threat to our people or our allies we must take the Necessary actions to protect them. Recently with terrorism in the Middle East I feel like we should be involved to neutralize the possibility of US citizens getting harmed in any way.

    [read less]

    I feel like we should get involved in some, but not all foreign affairs. If there is a possible threat to our people or our allies we must take the Ne…

    [read more]
    0
  • Michaela from Wisconsin

    United States is not alone in this world and I feel that helping others and lending out our hands, shows other countries that we can help. It also gives people hope, for the innocent people being chemically abused by their own government, it would be inhuman if we did not get involved. It would be in comparison to Hitler coming back, and we let him him kill all the Jews. We would only be standing by, and watching people kill full on races of others. We need to be involved, because people who use their powers over others are corrupt and inhumane.

    [read less]

    United States is not alone in this world and I feel that helping others and lending out our hands, shows other countries that we can help. It also giv…

    [read more]
    0
  • Abi from Wisconsin

    I think we should but, with limits. I think the U.S should get involved with foreign conflicts like what happened in Syria though I wish we could have done it a different way than what Trump did. I think we should because it’s not fair to citizens of other countries to be suffering under a dictatorship who kill their own people. I don’t think we should ever create a war because let’s be honest what do we ever achieve with war? We lose more than we gain. But I still think we need to do something for those people who are suffering under those circumstances.

    [read less]

    I think we should but, with limits. I think the U.S should get involved with foreign conflicts like what happened in Syria though I wish we could have…

    [read more]
    0
  • Zach from Wisconsin

    I believe that the united states should get involved in foreign affairs. The only way we should be allowed to get involved is it has to pass through congress. The air strike on Syria was an executive decision made solely by the president. If to start a war you need to go through congress then for any foreign interactions that would have a drastic affect should also have to go through congress. If the two countries(or however many) are fighting over things that doesnt involve the united states, then they should stay out, unless they are asked to aid a country

    [read less]

    I believe that the united states should get involved in foreign affairs. The only way we should be allowed to get involved is it has to pass through c…

    [read more]
    0
  • Brandon from Wisconsin

    Yes, we should get involved in foreign conflicts if it is necessary to do so as a humanitarian intervention. As one of the most powerful nations in the world, it is our responsibility to stand up for the basic human rights of all people. If we just turned a blind eye to humanitarian crises happening in the rest of the world, we would be hypocrites; we should advocate for the basic inalienable rights of people all over the world, not just those within our own borders. However, we should avoid getting involved in foreign conflicts if it is not a humanitarian intervention; we have enough issues in our own country without getting dragged into someone else’s war.

    [read less]

    Yes, we should get involved in foreign conflicts if it is necessary to do so as a humanitarian intervention. As one of the most powerful nations in th…

    [read more]
    0
  • Dylan from West Virginia

    I think the United States should get involved to protect ourselves and others like how they went over to Syria because they had no reason for chemicals to be dropped on them and kill some of them in Syria and the U.S. is very powerful and as long as they try to do it peacefully I think they should get involved

    [read less]

    I think the United States should get involved to protect ourselves and others like how they went over to Syria because they had no reason for chemical…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jon from Wisconsin

    Yes, I believe the United States should get involved for multiple reason. Every country agreed on no chemical or nuclear warfare. Also the U.S is a powerhouse and should take charge on every incident. I believe there should be a limit because we can’t get out of control and just bomb every country that does the wrong.

    [read less]

    Yes, I believe the United States should get involved for multiple reason. Every country agreed on no chemical or nuclear warfare. Also the U.S is a po…

    [read more]
    0
  • Brice from Wisconsin

    i think that we should get involved in foreign affairs to a certain extent. there is a poinyt where it is pointless and a point where it is necessary. we should be getting involved in foreign affairs such as dealing with Syria.

    [read less]

    i think that we should get involved in foreign affairs to a certain extent. there is a poinyt where it is pointless and a point where it is necessary….

    [read more]
    0
  • Cody from Wisconsin

    As a powerful country we should lead other countries. When they use their power in horrible ways, there needs to be a consequence. Using chemical weapons on your own citizens is inexcusable. The USA isn’t using power to be a bully, they’re using it to set them straight and the difference between right and wrong.

    [read less]

    As a powerful country we should lead other countries. When they use their power in horrible ways, there needs to be a consequence. Using chemical we…

    [read more]
    0
  • randy from Wisconsin

    I believe That the united states has the power to conflict with other countries yet the force that we contain we should tread softly with forgen affairs only flexing our military muscle when completely necessary. using force only for appropriate points not just to prove a point.

    [read less]

    I believe That the united states has the power to conflict with other countries yet the force that we contain we should tread softly with forgen affai…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jared from Wisconsin

    Yes I believe that the U.S. should be involved in foreign affairs because they are a powerhouse in the world. It is their duty to make sure everything is under control and to keep the peace. They are one of the few countries in the world that has the power to do this so they should be the ones keeping the peace between countries and peace within countries.

    [read less]

    Yes I believe that the U.S. should be involved in foreign affairs because they are a powerhouse in the world. It is their duty to make sure everything…

    [read more]
    0
  • Logan from Wisconsin

    Yes to an extent. Its not that if we see some sort of disruption or any minor problem that we should immediately jump up and help. I think that we need to really asses the situation and determine the outcome if we were to provide any sort of aid. In the end it just depends on the country and their standing with us and if and how this might benefit us.

    [read less]

    Yes to an extent. Its not that if we see some sort of disruption or any minor problem that we should immediately jump up and help. I think that we nee…

    [read more]
    0
  • Nathan from Virginia

    The United States should get involved in the Syrian civil war because some of the biggest problems that Americans face right now can be fixed through the restoration of Syria. The refugee crisis will be solved because the syrians would be able to return to their own country. Also, terrorism would decrease because we would be able to destroy ISIS and once Syria is restored we would have a vital ally in the middle east who could help to eliminate future terrorist threats. I do believe that once we do get involved the US should treas carefully until some agreement is made with Russia so that the world does not plunge into a second world war. In conclusion, it is most beneficial for everyone if the United States intervenes in Syria.

    [read less]

    The United States should get involved in the Syrian civil war because some of the biggest problems that Americans face right now can be fixed through …

    [read more]
    0
  • Heather from Oklahoma

    I vote yes we should for one reason, we have so many of our people over seas fighting for us. Why should we sit back let our soldiers get killed without retaliation? We have had presidents before Trump that when our soldiers are fighting and getting killed, they did nothing. Now we have a president who is actually doing something about it and we complain about it. Yes innocent people overseas are being killed by our retaliation, but how do we know that if any of them were actually innocent? How can we just sit and let the people we love and care about get killed and the who murder them get off without punishment. I know that they signed up to be in the army, but how is anything that happens to them fair?

    [read less]

    I vote yes we should for one reason, we have so many of our people over seas fighting for us. Why should we sit back let our soldiers get killed with…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jasmine from Michigan

    (My original comment glitched and didn’t post) Yes, the U.S. should get involved in foreign affairs, but to a certain extent. If the situation is hazardous and a threat to the United States, then we should get involved before it becomes uncontrollable and more threatening. When civilians including men, women, and children are affected, there needs to be something done. For example, in Syria they were killing their own people with chemical weapons which are banned through the United Nations. A hazardous situation that could become a threat to us needed to be stopped and it was. America is the leading nation of the world and therefore needs to make sure their civilians are safe and that other nations don’t get to the point to become an immediate threat.

    [read less]

    (My original comment glitched and didn’t post) Yes, the U.S. should get involved in foreign affairs, but to a certain extent. If the situation is ha…

    [read more]
    0
  • Christopher from Michigan

    Yes because if the President thinks we are threatened then we should show them that we are not scaredof people trying to take over we will be defended by people trying to kill us to show North Korea what we are made of

    [read less]

    Yes because if the President thinks we are threatened then we should show them that we are not scaredof people trying to take over we will be defended…

    [read more]
    0
  • Viridiana from Georgia

    I believe that the United States of America should be included into foreign fluent conflicts, because we as a nation have the prosperity to defend and protect our nation. In order to insure domestic tranquility and be able to provide for the common defense, and secure our people and have the opportunity to protect others and provide ourselves and those in needs who don’t have the basic needs, because I believe that as human beings that we are, We are born with natural rights, that were given to us as nurture and other intentions that will make us to be better citizens.

    [read less]

    I believe that the United States of America should be included into foreign fluent conflicts, because we as a nation have the prosperity to defend and…

    [read more]
    0
  • Sean from Michigan

    Yes, I believe the United States should be involved in foreign affairs. Hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians everyday are injured or killed by brutal governments or groups attacks. For example, in the video, Donald J Trump talked about how the Syrian government used chemical strikes against it’s own people. He also said how the United Nations has a ban against chemical weapons. The chemical strikes choked out the lives of helpless men, women, and even children. It was a slow and brutal death for so many — even beautiful babies were cruelly murdered in this very barbaric attack. No child of God should ever suffer such horror. Also Trump said all civilized nations to join us in seeking to end the slaughter and bloodshed in Syria, and also to end terrorism of all kinds and all types. We ask for God’s wisdom as we face the challenge of our very troubled world. And we hope that as long as America stands for justice, then peace and harmony will in the end prevail. Our government as the “ world police officer” should be more than capable of being able to keep other nations in their place if they aren’t upholding as well as violating of citizens rights. The United States needs to intervene in foreign conflicts to keep peace and protect the people.

    [read less]

    Yes, I believe the United States should be involved in foreign affairs. Hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians everyday are injured or killed by …

    [read more]
    0
  • Amber from Michigan

    The United States should get involved in foreign conflicts. It is a national security interest to get involved. Past attempts in Syria have failed so the refugee crisis continues to deepen and destabilize. This threatens the U.S. and our allies so it is only in our best interest that we get involved in foreign conflicts. Getting involved in foreign affairs such as the one in Syria can prevent the spread of deadly chemical weapons and terrorism. Getting involved in foreign conflicts is for the good of the country.

    [read less]

    The United States should get involved in foreign conflicts. It is a national security interest to get involved. Past attempts in Syria have failed so…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jacob from Michigan

    Yes, I believe that the United States should get involved in foreign conflict but it is important to make sure that the United States understand what’s going on in these countries before they use any military.The United States goal should be to save people’s lives and protect the citizens.

    [read less]

    Yes, I believe that the United States should get involved in foreign conflict but it is important to make sure that the United States understand what’…

    [read more]
    0
  • Kaden from Louisiana

    I believe that since the US is ne of the strongest nations in the world it is our responsibility to help the weaker countries. The US also has the right to intervene when its own interests are at stake and the safety of its citizens can be jeopardized. I also believe that the US has the rights to get involved in other countries’ business when that country breaks the rules of war and commits acts of terror on its people. The Unites States also has to look out for the safety of its allies and their interests. So yes, I believe that the US has the right and should, if necessary, get involved in foreign affairs.

    [read less]

    I believe that since the US is ne of the strongest nations in the world it is our responsibility to help the weaker countries. The US also has the rig…

    [read more]
    0
  • Hayley from Michigan

    I believe that the United States should get involved with foreign conflicts to a certain extent. For example in the Donald Trump video he talked about how the Syrian government was using chemical weapons against its own people, killing many innocent civilians especially small children. According to the United Nations the usage of chemical weapons is banned. No country should want to be the bystander and do nothing about it, killing innocent lives with chemical weapons should never be ignored or ok in anyone’s book.

    [read less]

    I believe that the United States should get involved with foreign conflicts to a certain extent. For example in the Donald Trump video he talked about…

    [read more]
    0
  • Kyle from New York

    The US should be involved in foreign affairs, as should every other country. Is it the sole responsibility of the US to police the world, no, but we should take interest in the affairs of other nations. For safety, alliances, trade, the environment, and general well-being of the people in those countries. Not saying that the US is responsible for everybody on the planet, but if another country is going around gassing its innocent civilians, something needs to be done about it.

    [read less]

    The US should be involved in foreign affairs, as should every other country. Is it the sole responsibility of the US to police the world, no, but we s…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jazz from Washington

    Yes, the United States should get involved in foreign conflicts because we are currently the only Superpower country in the world. We have a large amount of influence, and using that to, for example, push towards an end to dictatorship like we recently have in Syria can be extremely beneficial. Although it can involve in bigger conflicts, like it has the potential to with Russia siding with President Assad, it’s unlikely that anything with the power to cause mutually assured destruction will occur for the sake of both countries.

    [read less]

    Yes, the United States should get involved in foreign conflicts because we are currently the only Superpower country in the world. We have a large amo…

    [read more]
    0
  • dane from Arkansas

    The US needs to lay low. Their recent actions with Syria, Russia, and north Korea have made their social appearance not scarce whatsoever. The US needs to overall keep an eye on Russia and north korea and their actions. This is extremely dire to the US safety and security.
    Trump needs to be more aware of his surrounding in forgien affairs. this will furthermore help the US in their endeavors. Russia is pretty dangerous to the US right now and that’s why the US must be aware. North korea must be monitored as well.

    [read less]

    The US needs to lay low. Their recent actions with Syria, Russia, and north Korea have made their social appearance not scarce whatsoever. The US need…

    [read more]
    0
  • Om from Arkansas

    I believe that the United States is obligated to get involved in foreign conflicts, even if it will not directly benefit them. Much of the foreign conflicts, however, do pertain direct effects to the US and require it to address the issue. An example of this conflict includes corrupted political officials in foreign countries. This issue was directly addressed by Donald Trump with an airstrike that was called on an airfield in Syria as a way to implement US foreign engagement in Syria. Not only did this address the situation in Syria, but also implemented US foreign involvement in Syria. I believe that this action was necessary to put Assad in his place and make sure more outrageous and inhumane actions are not taken by him. Many times in the past, the US has become a larger and more prominent country through engaging in foreign conflicts. This serves as motivation for the US to take a stronger position in foreign conflicts.

    I also believe that the United States can face harsh consequences by not getting involved in foreign conflicts. An event or conflict could potentially sway in the direction that is not favorable to the United States, and the US could face the repercussions. An example of this is if the US does not become involved in the Middle Eastern region and major economic issues could occur. If the infrastructure of certain middle eastern countries collapse and a new power comes to reign, their interests may conflict with the US and many agreements and treaties could be broken. Some of these things could include the loss of oil trade or US military sanctions in place.

    [read less]

    I believe that the United States is obligated to get involved in foreign conflicts, even if it will not directly benefit them. Much of the foreign con…

    [read more]
    0
  • Max from Arkansas

    I believe that the U.S. should go into foreign conflicts to the certain extents depending on the situation. An example of this is if they are asked by close allies to intervene in some type of conflict with the caliber of becoming something more, then yes they should intervene. There are also times where the U.S. should not intervene to a certain extent, such as the past attack on Syria. I believe that the U.S. should not have gone as far as bombing an air field to punish the regime, but instead should have punished on a diplomatic level. This could have happened by going to the UN and discuss the issue with other countries to hear all other opinions. This would have avoided any conflict as well as casualties, but unfortunately with the current administration it did not happen.

    Due to the current administration countries are questioning the capability of the U.S.. This is clearly evident with the country of North Korea who stated that if the U.S. shows any type of aggression towards them they will attack. This did not happen when President Obama was in office to this extent and our office has no idea of what to do. This is totally unacceptable and there needs to be a change. If there is not a change in the current office the result could be devastating for the country.

    [read less]

    I believe that the U.S. should go into foreign conflicts to the certain extents depending on the situation. An example of this is if they are asked by…

    [read more]
    0
  • AnnaLee from Arkansas

    The United States should not feel restrained regarding their involvement in foreign affairs. All countries on Earth must somewhat coexist. That includes all populations and all governments. Attacks against innocent people will not go unnoticed especially when they are orchestrated by their governments whose priority is to protect their people. That, of course, doesn’t give the U.S. authority to intrude on all terms of foreign relations, so certain limits should be set on their inclusion of input.

    [read less]

    The United States should not feel restrained regarding their involvement in foreign affairs. All countries on Earth must somewhat coexist. That includ…

    [read more]
    0
  • David from Arkansas

    I think that the United States needs to continue to involve ourselves in foreign conflicts because, historically, it’s worked well. For instance, without our involvement in World War II, not only would Japan have not surrendered, Germany would have made an atomic bomb first and used it against much more. As one of, if not the world’s power, we have an obligation to stay on top of the world’s issues, and furthermore, involved in them, in enough depth to restrain smaller countries in conflict to preserve peace to some degree. Regardless of past instances, though the United States has inarguably been reformative in the past, the help of us is much needed now. As our allies have made moves towards Syria after the missile strike, we need to as well, in order to stand in solidarity with our allies. Moreover, as a free country, it’s our duty to preserve rights everywhere. As Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere,” and as the Geneva Convention has declared, the use of chemical weapons are essentially a human rights violation.

    [read less]

    I think that the United States needs to continue to involve ourselves in foreign conflicts because, historically, it’s worked well. For instance, with…

    [read more]
    0
  • Joseph from Arkansas

    The United States should feel the obligation to be involved in these foreign conflicts and issues that take place around our world, moderately often. For example the most recent issue with US involvement was when President Donald Trump sent airstrikes to Syria to rebuke against the atrocious crime that took place with the Chemical Weapon attack. Due to Trump getting involved he ameliorated the country of Syria by wiping out where the previous chemical weapons were stored disabling the Assad regime from an attack like this to happen again to the country’s citizens. This is an inordinate example of how the Unite States early involvement in these global issues is potentially able to save hundreds of innocent citizens lives.
    I believe that the United States should not get us involved in every diminutive conflict but focus on the more immense issues that rise across the world for instance as the Syria attack. An example of a virtuous struggle that the US must get involved with is one in which involves our country directly, or a conflict in which revolves around our allies such as Germany, France, Japan, Israel, and many of our other allies. Lastly if our countries perceives a spark or instinct of war from any foreign country the United States must step up and get involved early rather than late, because most likely our country will get involved at some point and if we are able to step up soon we can halt the issue before it progresses and deteriorates other countries around the world.

    [read less]

    The United States should feel the obligation to be involved in these foreign conflicts and issues that take place around our world, moderately often. …

    [read more]
    0
  • Alex from Arkansas

    Since its formation 1776, the U.S. has always promoted the ideas of equality and democracy. The United States to many serve as a symbol of hope and justice. If the U.S. would go back to its isolationist policies from the 1930s it would not only be detrimental to the U.S. relations but also detrimental to the U.S. as a whole. Personally, I believe that the U.S. should take reasonability to intervene in foreign conflicts. There are million of innocent people suffering in these war zones such as Syria and Sudan. If we do not intervene in these conflicts, we would be going against everything we stand for. The U.S. main goal should be to not only protect the welfare of the American people but also protect the welfare of the whole word. Many American people want to see the reduce of refugees and want to see these volatile regions such as the Middle East and East Africa become safer and improve, but the only way for these goals to achieve is if the U.S. intervenes. U.S. interventionism is a core part of American politics for over 70 years. We should not let the opinions of other countries hinder of actions. So what if Russia is an ally of Assad, we still need to do everything we can to bring the civil war to an end. For too long we have let the views of foreign nations control what we do. We are the U.S., the most powerful nation of all time, we should use that power to spread the ideas of democracy and promote the rights of people from all walks of life no matter the cost.

    [read less]

    Since its formation 1776, the U.S. has always promoted the ideas of equality and democracy. The United States to many serve as a symbol of hope and ju…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jeffery from Arkansas

    Yes, I believe that the United States should intervene in foreign conflicts. We are one of the strongest world powers and smaller countries need our help and military to become stronger and get through conflicts. It is our job to be a country to look up to and act strongly to the world. Even though some people think that the U.S. should not intervene in foreign conflicts, I believe that we should. With innocent people suffering, they need the United State’s help to get through the hardships they are going through. With the intervention of the U.S. possible conflicts could be stopped and more lives can not be in the line of danger.

    Recently, President Trump launched Tomahawk cruise missiles off two battleships in the eastern Mediterranean Sea. I believe that president Trump made the right decision to shoot missiles at the Syrian government help air force base. The U.S. had intelligence that a plane had come from that specific base and dropped numerous chemical bombs on a town in Syria. The bomb caused the deaths of about 100 innocent people. These people had done nothing wrong and suffered from it. The United States was right to intervene and fight from a distance against the Assad Regime. The attack was a warning that if the Assad Regime used chemical weapons again, there would be a bigger problem. The missiles shot by the U.S. was not meant to kill innocent civilians. Its goal was to be a warning shot to the Assad Regime and destroy the base controlled by them. In the future, I believe that the U.S should always intervene in anything it thinks that is necessary to fight against in order to protect innocent civilians and humanity.

    [read less]

    Yes, I believe that the United States should intervene in foreign conflicts. We are one of the strongest world powers and smaller countries need our h…

    [read more]
    0
  • Olivia from Arkansas

    The United States, since its foundation, has been revered by oppressed people around the world and stood as a pillar of democracy, liberty, and freedom. While our nation is far from perfect, at its core, it stands for truly noble ideals. But those noble ideals are nothing short of meaningless if they are not spread beyond our borders, and have no effect outside of our territory. American citizens have reaped the benefits of these values for centuries, and we must ensure that they are spread to the rest of the world whenever possible.

    Make no mistake, it is not America’s job to be the world’s policeman, and we can not intervene in every conflict that comes about in the world, but whenever a cause comes about that directly violates what it is that we stand for, we can not allow it to go ignored. Any threat made to freedom and justice, no matter the location, merits the interference of a world power to whom those values are of great importance. The United States has always had noble values, it was founded on the very concept of freedom from oppression. But when we refuse to act on those values and defend them when threatened, we lose all credibility. How can the world possibly take us seriously is we do not act upon the beliefs we speak so confidently of? It is not only in our best interest, but it is absolutely our sovereign duty to involve ourselves in any global affairs that threaten what we stand for. This involvement can not, and will not, always be of a military or forceful nature, but we must in some way make our opinion known. As a nation who is able to defend our own people, we must involve ourselves in cases where our interests are threatened.

    Additionally, the United States would not be the global power that it is had we not gotten involved in global conflicts. It was our involvement in World War 1 which made us a key player on the global scale, a status further solidified by our victory alongside the allies in World War 2. The United States is not revered because it remains silent. We have always fought for the freedom our people are privileged to have. How tragic would it be if we discontinued that fight, turning a blind eye to global conflicts that threaten all we stand for?

    Often, in the counterargument, it is brought up that our first President, George Washington, in his farewell address, urged the nation not to involve themselves in the affairs of other nations. While this is undeniably true and certainly wise advice for the time, it is simply no longer applicable. At the time of this speech, America was barely a nation able to support itself, and any conflict whatsoever with other, much more powerful nations would have surely ended in a tragic demise for the young country. Furthermore, America was still developing its own identity, not yet sure of what all it stood for. Plainly, it was not in the right state to involve itself in global conflicts. Now, over 200 years later, this could not be further from true. Our identity is concrete and we are well equipped to match nearly any global power we choose. We can and must now, with confidence, invest our resources into any cause worthy of our backing.

    In summary, America is a nation that prides itself on its values, and rightfully so. But our values are meaningless if we do not speak up for them, defending them by involving ourselves in any global conflict where they are threatened. We are a strong, capable power which is able to back any cause we so choose, but we can not lose the drive to do so, lest we grow comfortable here at home and grow indifferent to the conflicts outside which, bear in mind, may have a greater effect on us than we realize until it is too late.

    [read less]

    The United States, since its foundation, has been revered by oppressed people around the world and stood as a pillar of democracy, liberty, and freedo…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jackson from Arkansas

    The United States sent a powerful message to Syria that their use of chemical won’t be tolerated after they have signed an agreement that they won’t use those weapons. A simple missile strike put no American lives at stake and told Syria to back down. Hopefully this will show Assad that if he does this again, there will be bigger implications from the United States.

    [read less]

    The United States sent a powerful message to Syria that their use of chemical won’t be tolerated after they have signed an agreement that they won’t u…

    [read more]
    0
  • Christopher from Pennsylvania

    Of course our first obligation is to lead by example. Economic sanctions should be another top option. However, sometimes there are extreme circumstances that would be morally wrong for anyone with power and conscience to ignore. Figuring out where the line exists is the difficult part. History is an excellent guide at these times.

    [read less]

    Of course our first obligation is to lead by example. Economic sanctions should be another top option. However, sometimes there are extreme circumstan…

    [read more]
    0
  • Raghav from North Carolina

    I support the President’s actions in bombing Syria. He has bombed them because he is trying to overthrew a man with unconditional power, a man who brutally killed his citizens, a man who killed babies in cold blood. He has not only done the above, but his means of doing so get even worse. He made infants tolerate chemical attacks which were banned by the CWC, a treaty which stops the use of chemical weapons. That man is Bashar al-Assad the heartless leader of Syria. President Trump has exploited the cruelty of this man and has bombed sights in which chemical weapon operations have occurred. His actions follow those of justice and coincide with the Constitution of the United States of America. One of the purposes of the constitution itself is to establish justice. He is also acting like President Roosevelt and his four freedoms. Or more specifically the freedom from want and fear. His actions are not unprecedented as they have been done before in history and they express the common opinions of the world. So if the cause is right and the tranquility of citizen’s of any state are disturbed, I believe the U.S must step up and make the decision to enforce justice as coincides with the Constitution.

    [read less]

    I support the President’s actions in bombing Syria. He has bombed them because he is trying to overthrew a man with unconditional power, a man who bru…

    [read more]
    0
  • Lainie and Mackenzie from Illinois

    We believe that the United States should get involved in forging conflicts because it’s not fair for the innocent people who are getting victimized; they need our help. The United States is often looked as the bigger brother, so we are obligated to keep peace throughout the world. By intervening in foreign affairs, the U.S is supporting those citizens who aren’t involved in their countries wrongdoing.

    [read less]

    We believe that the United States should get involved in forging conflicts because it’s not fair for the innocent people who are getting victimized; t…

    [read more]
    0
  • Taylor from Michigan

    Yes, the government should engage with other countries as long as it is within reason. Something I would consider a reason to intervene would be why trump dropped the m.o.a.b Syria. If a country is killing innocent civilians/children then it is our job to keep them in check. They are violating their citizens right to life which should is unexceptable in the eyes of all governments everywhere. Our government as the “international police officer” should be more than capable of being able to keep other nations in their place if they aren’t upholding as well as violating their people’s rights.

    [read less]

    Yes, the government should engage with other countries as long as it is within reason. Something I would consider a reason to intervene would be why t…

    [read more]
    0
  • Cassandra from Indiana

    I believe that the US has an obligation to its people to protect them from within and outside the US. Although many people have been critical of President Trump’s decision, I find it proactive of him to engage in foreign affairs as a means to make our country safer. By becoming involved with world affairs, it not only shows where the US stands on issues, but also shows are allegiance to the prosperity of the world and its people. Often times, America gets too caught up in itself and forgets about the rest of the world and the real problems going on. In addition, when chemical weapons are used, it needs to be stopped and obviously Syria can’t stop what started in their own country. Therefore it is our duty to engage in the process to better the whole world. At the end of the day, one must ask themselves if we were the ones in trouble, would it really be a waste for someone to help save our lives? Let’s take a step back from America’s egotistical thinking. Sometimes sacrifices are necessary in order to improve a collective group.

    [read less]

    I believe that the US has an obligation to its people to protect them from within and outside the US. Although many people have been critical of Presi…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ryan from Louisiana

    Yes, since the US is a super power I believe that it is right for any country to step in if the government is harming its citizens. The US should help others that are in need.

    0
  • Cade from Mississippi

    I believe we should be involved in certain affairs when it comes to the well being of the people. We are known to get in the middle of other countries problems, and help the country out. However, sometimes we can not be able to help everyone out they need to be able to take care of their country. Whenever we get involved in other countries problems and solve them, it makes the countries government seem weak.

    [read less]

    I believe we should be involved in certain affairs when it comes to the well being of the people. We are known to get in the middle of other countries…

    [read more]
    0
  • Keivonte from Mississippi

    We should get into some foreign affairs but not all because again we don’t want to cause anymore controversy with any nations. We have to think as if we were in that situation, we would want help or at least to get the person who is causing it.

    [read less]

    We should get into some foreign affairs but not all because again we don’t want to cause anymore controversy with any nations. We have to think as if …

    [read more]
    0
  • Daijuana from Mississippi

    The United States needs to intervene in foreign conflicts to keep peace and protect the people.

    0
  • Lauren from Mississippi

    I believe the United States should involve ourselves in foreign conflicts if we are benefiting another country while still keeping ourselves safe. Helping other countries can strengthen our allies and allow us to gain support anytime we need help. If we are harming ourselves or putting our nation at risk, I feel that we should stop interfering with foreign affairs and conflicts.

    [read less]

    I believe the United States should involve ourselves in foreign conflicts if we are benefiting another country while still keeping ourselves safe. He…

    [read more]
    0
  • olivia from Mississippi

    i think the united states should get involved in foreign conflicts IF we can help people, protect others or our selves. if we are getting involved for the right reasons having helpful sources and information than it is good, if we are getting involved just to get involved than it is not smart

    [read less]

    i think the united states should get involved in foreign conflicts IF we can help people, protect others or our selves. if we are getting involved for…

    [read more]
    0
  • Shannon from Illinois

    I feel we need to get involved in foreign affairs as the US is a leading superpower, however, we can’t go too far. I feel like we should get involved only when necessary, and not rashly as we have in the past.

    [read less]

    I feel we need to get involved in foreign affairs as the US is a leading superpower, however, we can’t go too far. I feel like we should get involved …

    [read more]
    0
  • Dominic from Michigan

    I do feel that we should assist in some foreign conflicts, though I do also feel we should stick to the original idea of only assisting when it has to do with a violent group or oppressive government, such as in the Middle East. Toning back the foreign aid would be good, but I don’t think we should completely get rid of it. I feel it’s good to assist others, but we should also worry about ourselves.

    [read less]

    I do feel that we should assist in some foreign conflicts, though I do also feel we should stick to the original idea of only assisting when it has to…

    [read more]
    0
  • Josh from Michigan

    Yes the United States should get involved in foreign conflicts because, in the video, Donald Trump talked about how the Syrian government used chemical strikes against it’s own people. He also said how the United Nations has a ban against chemical weapons. The United States should not stand for such a blatant breach of international laws, and we should not stand idly by while innocent civilians are killed in the worst way imaginable.

    [read less]

    Yes the United States should get involved in foreign conflicts because, in the video, Donald Trump talked about how the Syrian government used chemica…

    [read more]
    0
  • Alyssa from Michigan

    I believe the United States should be involved in foreign affairs. Hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians everyday are injured or killed by brutal governments. The chemical weapons used in Syria are a great example. The government abused women and children who were innocent. The United States has a duty to prevent these horrors because nobody should be treated like this, no matter the nationality people are ultimately people. The country needs to stand up for the civilians that can not stand up for themselves not because it is easy or cheap but because it will make the world is a better place.

    [read less]

    I believe the United States should be involved in foreign affairs. Hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians everyday are injured or killed by brut…

    [read more]
    0
  • Andrew from Ohio

    Yes, I believe the US should get involved in foreign conflicts, but only to an extent. If the United States is to get involved in conflicts, they should deal only with matters that concern the imminent and definite loss of human lives and liberties. As a powerful country with a strong military, it is our duty that we work to end terrorist activity and aid in the disposal of dictatorships and communist governments that infringe on the natural rights of a human being. Actions should be taken against these threats not only for the reason that it is the right thing to do in terms of aiding our fellow human beings, but it also allows for the protection of American citizens, whom should be the primary focus of the government. Destruction of terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda or ISIS protect Americans in America and overseas from losing their lives. The destruction of dictatorships brings about a greater safety in the world from single rulers becoming too powerful (which could bring about warmongering, attempts at conquest for economic purposes, and oppression of mass groups of people). Wars to stimulate economic growth or success or conflicts that are merely off of a “hunch” should be avoided at all costs because, If we attempt to be involved in every conflict, we will 1) lose incredible amounts of resources, 2) waste money, 3) irritate foreign powers and 4) lose human lives, whether they be our own soldiers or civilians. The unnecessary and excessive involvement in foreign conflicts could result in the loss of resources that begins a slowing down or regression in terms of success of our country as the more resources that we have in the US, the more prosperous we can become and the more we can grow as a civilization in terms of economic, social, and technological advancements. We are already heavily in debt, currently standing at $18.96 trillion and since war and conflict are immensely costly and make up an enormous portion of the national budget, too much involvement in conflicts can result in an inability to pay off the debt we have accumulated and an impediment to the growth and development of the country for advancements in technology and infrastructure as well as programs that aid the destitute in terms of basic health care, food, and shelter. If our actions and involvement in these conflicts irritates foreign powers, it separates the United States from potential trade/military alliances due to perceptions of the US as a warmongering state and also gives rise to potential revenge/coalition conflicts/wars from other strong foreign powers. Finally, the loss of human lives if we go into a plethora of conflicts will rise, as there are more chances that people can be killed. If we continuously become involved in conflicts, the number of mothers who lost sons, fathers who lost their daughters, children who lost their parents, and people who lost their spouses will grow at an alarming, unnecessary, exponential rate. There are of course times when war and conflicts are necessary. However, for these reasons, the United States needs to excruciatingly analyse the pros and cons of these conflicts in order to determine if they are absolutely necessary or not. One such requirement that can be used to determine if the pros outweigh the cons is to determine if without the conflict the American people will be in danger. While this does not help everyone and in turn does not eliminate all problems in the world, it will decrease the number of conflicts the United States enters as it removes several “policing” aspects of the military thus eliminating good chunk of negative side effects of these conflicts.

    [read less]

    Yes, I believe the US should get involved in foreign conflicts, but only to an extent. If the United States is to get involved in conflicts, they shou…

    [read more]
    0
  • Benjamin from Texas

    I believe that the United States should get involved with foreign conflicts to some degree. I believe that it is the duty of the United States as a superpower in the world to always advocate for peace and prosperity when possible, but should not shy away from implementing Theodore Roosevelt’s Big Stick Policy, and show the world that we do not tolerate terrorism, communism, and other policies that threaten peace and others’ basic human rights. I believe that this is especially true with the Middle East and North Korea today. I believe that we as a country should not be shy from defending the rights of others from ISIS and other radical Muslim groups, as well as the communist regime of North Korea.

    [read less]

    I believe that the United States should get involved with foreign conflicts to some degree. I believe that it is the duty of the United States as a su…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ryan from New Hampshire

    I say yes, but to a certain extent. Our country has one of the most powerful militaries in the world, but we should not be mistreating its power. However, in certain circumstances, we absolutely should be involved, for the benefit of our own country. for instance, if there is a war between two other countries, and we don’t get involved, than the winning country can gain power to have a war with us. at this current time, it seems that world war 3 is approaching, and if we don’t get involved, than north korea could strike us by surprise with an EMP that wipes out the whole country. But if we do get involved, than we can put a stop to the whole war before they go to such measures.

    [read less]

    I say yes, but to a certain extent. Our country has one of the most powerful militaries in the world, but we should not be mistreating its power. Howe…

    [read more]
    0
  • Isaac from Texas

    Yes because I some cases it helped the USA greatly in the past like when we helped Texas to separate from the mexico

    0
  • Kate from North Carolina

    The United States should most definitely get involved in foreign affairs. There are too many people in this world who are being hurt and killed by corrupt governments and terrorist groups to just sit back and watch. If actions are not taken immediately then we are only allowing these evil groups to go on with their actions. Why would anyone want to let INNOCENT PEOPLE get hurt in any country? Safety should be of utmost importance for people in all countries and if we do not take any authoritarian action to maintain it, we will be negatively influencing worldwide communications.

    [read less]

    The United States should most definitely get involved in foreign affairs. There are too many people in this world who are being hurt and killed by cor…

    [read more]
    0
  • Regency from Ohio

    I think that we have a duty to the world when it comes to protecting peace and liberty; however, we must also look and see if we are doing things that are benefiting other people. We have to make sure we aren’t doing things that may worsen the conditions of the innocent. Then when those innocent people want to come to the land that destroyed the threat and their homes, they realize that they will only be helped from a distance. It a constant debate that will truly have no definite answer.

    [read less]

    I think that we have a duty to the world when it comes to protecting peace and liberty; however, we must also look and see if we are doing things that…

    [read more]
    0
    • James from Ohio

      I agree

      0
  • Jose from California

    The United States entire history is composed of foreign intervention, however, we were founded on the principle that another country should not be allowed to regulate and rule us. The United States does not rule and regulate other nations however, with obvious exceptions to US territories. we simply help other nations to the best place that we believe we can get them. However this means that we make a dedication to that nation, and to the world. The United States within its constitution promises that it will keep its people safe, we must do so by making the world safe. President Trump has taken rash action against some areas in the world, but he himself likely believes this was the best course of action he could have taken, and that is all we can ask of a President.

    [read less]

    The United States entire history is composed of foreign intervention, however, we were founded on the principle that another country should not be all…

    [read more]
    0
    • Andrew from Ohio

      This is very true. We should not enter into conflicts for the sake of entering and being a presence as the “police force of the world.” The nation has a duty to protect its citizens and joining conflicts certainly can do that, to an extent. Too much involvement can result in our forces being too focused outwards and defending other people instead of our own country and our own people. However, too little involvement allows for the growth of foreign threats that can eventually harm American citizens. The fact that these threats can grow and harm citizens really should be the center of focus for our government.

      [read less]

      This is very true. We should not enter into conflicts for the sake of entering and being a presence as the “police force of the world.” The nation…

      [read more]
      0
  • Logan from Arizona

    Yes, I think we should give some assistance to other countries but only to a certain extent. We do not need to set ourselves up as the ultimate lawgivers/peacekeepers though. Everyone always bags on Trump for everything he seems to do wrong but we are all Americans and are all involved in politics whether we like it or not.

    [read less]

    Yes, I think we should give some assistance to other countries but only to a certain extent. We do not need to set ourselves up as the ultimate lawgiv…

    [read more]
    0
  • Kyesha from Arkansas

    Yes, I believe that the United States should get involved in foreign affairs but only when it is necessary. The United States shouldn’t get involved if they are ignorant on what is going on. They shouldn’t go in blinded.

    [read less]

    Yes, I believe that the United States should get involved in foreign affairs but only when it is necessary. The United States shouldn’t get involved i…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jasmine from Texas

    I believe we should help to a certain extent. However, we also need look out for ourselves. As selfish as it may sound, the US has to put the protection of citizens before anything. By getting too involved with foreign affairs, we are putting our own people at risk. With that being said, I do believe we should aid other countries if possible.

    [read less]

    I believe we should help to a certain extent. However, we also need look out for ourselves. As selfish as it may sound, the US has to put the protecti…

    [read more]
    0
  • kendra from California

    everybody needs some type of help every once in a while , can’t do everything alone sometimes we need to get involved in things dealing with other countries like they do us

    0
  • candy from Arkansas

    yes, i think we should help other countries by joining together we become better as one. And when we need any help they’ll be there to help us.

    0
  • Alexis from Arkansas

    I think that he wasn’t wrong but it depend on the way you handle it. I mean cause if we help the ones that in a helping need, then if we get into something we would need help also. Getting into that we would also know what we are getting into with the weapon they using , we could come back harder.

    [read less]

    I think that he wasn’t wrong but it depend on the way you handle it. I mean cause if we help the ones that in a helping need, then if we get into some…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ra'Meshia from Arkansas

    Yes, I think we should give some assistance to other countries because if we’re in danger nine times out of ten we are going to need some help from other countries. I don’t think it would hurt to give help when needed. I don’t think Trump was wrong, yes I say he could’ve handled it another way but he did what he had to to.

    [read less]

    Yes, I think we should give some assistance to other countries because if we’re in danger nine times out of ten we are going to need some help from ot…

    [read more]
    0
  • Khari from Arkansas

    A little help is okay and too much is bad.

    0
  • Kadijah from Arkansas

    He should think about what he do before he actually do it. It would ultimally affect our country as a whole. Lives could be ended because he made a poor discussion before actually going into action. We may need allies to help us also.

    [read less]

    He should think about what he do before he actually do it. It would ultimally affect our country as a whole. Lives could be ended because he made a po…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ryan from Texas

    Working together with other countries ensures the United States’ prosperity. Alliances are formed to help others in times of need. In order to get something out of the alliance, we have to put something in. Working together is the most important way to secure this prosperity. Cooperation is key. Having a strong foreign arsenal of alliances ensures that we have protection as well. An alliance is a two-way street; we get something out of it, just like the other country does.

    [read less]

    Working together with other countries ensures the United States’ prosperity. Alliances are formed to help others in times of need. In order to get som…

    [read more]
    0
  • Gillian from Pennsylvania

    Yes, I think the United States should give assistance to other countries but only to a certain extent and only in certain situations. If there is a clear human rights violation or a government that is clearly abusing its power I think that we as a well established and developed nation have a responsibility to get involved. Now, this doesn’t mean drop bombs this could be providing aid or taking in some refugees. We shouldn’t get involved in other countries personal political problems though. If a nation is having political and social instability I think that we should let that nation try to figure it out. There is a point where us getting involved would only further damage the country we get involved in.

    [read less]

    Yes, I think the United States should give assistance to other countries but only to a certain extent and only in certain situations. If there is a cl…

    [read more]
    0
  • Cydney from West Virginia

    To an extent, yes we should, however bombing Syria was a rather ignorant move. We should let citizens of countries that are being killed/hurt by their government have asylum and come here. Bombing can and will hurt innocent civilians.

    [read less]

    To an extent, yes we should, however bombing Syria was a rather ignorant move. We should let citizens of countries that are being killed/hurt by their…

    [read more]
    0
  • Julia from Georgia

    While it is vital for us to involve ourselves in the influence of peace around the globe, one should avoid all violent contact unless completely necessary. Although this is true, this should not adhere in our aid for foreign issues.

    [read less]

    While it is vital for us to involve ourselves in the influence of peace around the globe, one should avoid all violent contact unless completely neces…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jon from Michigan

    Yes, the United States should and will continue to get involved in foreign affairs. Looking back at the history of the United States we got involved in foreign affairs. That is something that is in our nature as a Country. However, if the intended outcome is to start a war then we should not, but if the goal is to help save the people from their radical government, then yes the United States should get involved.

    [read less]

    Yes, the United States should and will continue to get involved in foreign affairs. Looking back at the history of the United States we got involved i…

    [read more]
    0
    • Ansh from Tennessee

      However, how can we define radicalism?Does it come for the US job to put the world on its back?I mean if it is our job to bring freedom. Then should we not be at war with China and Russia. What if people do not wish to be saved and they wish to live under dictatorship. I am not saying I approve of those governments, but what gives us the right to say what is right and wrong.

      [read less]

      However, how can we define radicalism?Does it come for the US job to put the world on its back?I mean if it is our job to bring freedom. Then should w…

      [read more]
      0
  • Sarah from Michigan

    Without the United States being involved, our allies would be lacking help in wars, domestic disputes, and other foreign affairs.

    0
  • Eleanor from Tennessee

    Yes, I think we should give some assistance to other country, but to some instinct. I think Trump did not take his time to think about what to do about the situation. He said when he was running for president he wanted a war. The rate he’s going his wish will come true.

    [read less]

    Yes, I think we should give some assistance to other country, but to some instinct. I think Trump did not take his time to think about what to do abou…

    [read more]
    0
    • Kadijah from Arkansas

      you are right

      0
  • Anna from Illinois

    The United States should get involved in foreign conflicts. Every country goes through hard times, but if another country comes and helps them it helps make their conflict easier to handle. Also the country that we help could also help the United States later on. Also in the past America has had to get help from other countries.

    [read less]

    The United States should get involved in foreign conflicts. Every country goes through hard times, but if another country comes and helps them it help…

    [read more]
    -1
  • Makala from Kansas

    I am actually quite glad that the US is finally getting involved with foreign countries to some extent. It is better for our government to get involved, then sit back and wait for us to get some sort of attack. I feel like Trump is making a difference, and is actually being productive in his work. Trump is taking action, and I like that.

    [read less]

    I am actually quite glad that the US is finally getting involved with foreign countries to some extent. It is better for our government to get involve…

    [read more]
    -1
  • Coby from Kansas

    I believe that president Trump made the right call we have waited to long and stood by with hollow threats while under president Obama i personally believe thats its about time we show our power.

    [read less]

    I believe that president Trump made the right call we have waited to long and stood by with hollow threats while under president Obama i personally be…

    [read more]
    -1
  • James from Mississippi

    I believe that the United States should show that other countries should not be able to do wrong things. In reference to the bombing of Syria, Donald Trump was just showing a warning shot saying that what they did was wrong.

    [read less]

    I believe that the United States should show that other countries should not be able to do wrong things. In reference to the bombing of Syria, Donald …

    [read more]
    -1
  • Marilyn from Georgia

    The United States should get involved with foreign conflicts because many countries have little to no defense themselves.

    -1
  • Ashley from Missouri

    Yes, I believe that the United States should assist other countries when necessary. I am glad that President Trump made the decision to bomb Northern Syria for multiple reasons. First, the Syrian chemical attack was completely inhumane and something needed to be done about it. Trump took control and actually did something about the issue. Also, it is a goal for the United States to defeat Isis and Al-Qaeda in Syria so the bombing is proving that the United States will fight if necessary. I support it 100%!!!

    [read less]

    Yes, I believe that the United States should assist other countries when necessary. I am glad that President Trump made the decision to bomb Northern …

    [read more]
    -1
  • Kylie from Ohio

    Yes, I believe we should it least give some assistance to other countries, but to some instinct. I don’t think Trump took his time thinking about this situation and jumped to a conclusion without weighing his other options. If he would have weighed his options he probably would have decided it was better for the U.S to just stay out of it so we don’t get pulled in to another war. While Trump was running for president he said he wanted war, so now that this has happened I feel that it was part of his decision making. If he keeps trying to interfere to much we will get thrown into the mix of war along with other countries.

    [read less]

    Yes, I believe we should it least give some assistance to other countries, but to some instinct. I don’t think Trump took his time thinking about this…

    [read more]
    -1
  • Justin from Mississippi

    Yes, I believe that we should be involved in foreign conflicts to a certain extent. Chemical warfare is not acceptable because it’s against the Geneva Convention.

    -1
  • Ashley from Minnesota

    Yes, I believe that the United States should get involved with foreign issues but I believe that President Donald Trump went about it all wrong. What he did is more likely to cause war and only further American hate for foreign countries. Bombing Syria is not seen as a good thing by either the conservative OR liberal people. Conservatives are more likely to not want to get involved with foreign countries and liberals don’t agree with bombing them as a solution. My belief is that we should only get involves with other countries in a peaceful manner instead of resorting to bombing them in order to use some sort of scare tactics.

    [read less]

    Yes, I believe that the United States should get involved with foreign issues but I believe that President Donald Trump went about it all wrong. What …

    [read more]
    -1
  • Tationna from Texas

    Yes the U.S. should get involved like the rest of the other countries, being that the United States is an important role in world politics and being that we have the power to influence , i think it should cause the interest of its own citizens and its relationships with other countries to get involved in foreign conflict if there is a sense of threat to its safety and if important consequences are at stake . Many mistakes are made and were in the past by the United States of course, many that caused great damage but you cannot be a worldwide leader without having a sense of your own influence in foreign policies, it’s impossible. The United States can not function without the aid, support or relationships with other countries for it to achieve its social or political frameworks. A lot of problems have surrounded the act of th US in foreign conflicts in the past especially because of the power of its condition of being involved and most Western countries do intrude themselves in their counterparts’ conflicts such as Canada, Germany, UK, Japan, France, etc. So yes the United States should be involved in the international relations and help

    [read less]

    Yes the U.S. should get involved like the rest of the other countries, being that the United States is an important role in world politics and being …

    [read more]
    -1
  • Kaleb from Mississippi

    Yes, the decision to bomb the airfield in Syria was a good move. Although events in Syria may not affect America directly, they still end up affecting us and the whole word indirectly. Putting an end (or showing our opposition) to the gas attacks in Syria proves that we have not only the power to protect ourselves but also the power to fight for the good of others.

    [read less]

    Yes, the decision to bomb the airfield in Syria was a good move. Although events in Syria may not affect America directly, they still end up affecting…

    [read more]
    -1
  • Henry from Kansas

    One of the main roles of government is to protect the land it controls and the citizens who live upon that land. In the modern world, it is easier than ever with advanced technologies to harm people and their property from outside of the area of attack. Therefore, one of the ways that a government can protect its land is to keep enemies at bay using various strategies, including diplomatic, socioeconomic, and military. When a outside state will not listen to diplomatic or socioeconomic means, than a military strategy must be used.

    [read less]

    One of the main roles of government is to protect the land it controls and the citizens who live upon that land. In the modern world, it is easier tha…

    [read more]
    -1
  • Destiny from Mississippi

    Human beings being killed is the United States concern. The United States has their own people over there and can use that as a reason to get back at Syria.

    -1
  • Andrew Tristan Jacob from Illinois

    Yes, we think the US should get involved in foreign conflicts. It is our duty to protect those who can’t protect themselves. ISIS needs to be taken out.

    -1
  • Tyler and Matt from Illinois

    Yes, because it can create and open up new relations with other countries. With our help towards other countries, they will help us in return. The addition of new allies can be very beneficial towards conflicts with other countries.

    [read less]

    Yes, because it can create and open up new relations with other countries. With our help towards other countries, they will help us in return. The add…

    [read more]
    -1
  • Jordan, Trey, Payne from Illinois

    We believe that we should be involved in foreign affairs because we feel like we are the policing government in the world. Also, it shows our dominance and helps protect us from potential attacks.

    [read less]

    We believe that we should be involved in foreign affairs because we feel like we are the policing government in the world. Also, it shows our dominanc…

    [read more]
    -1
  • Jaylen from Louisiana

    Yes, I feel that since the U.S. is a superpower it is our duty to help others who are in lower power . It should at least be a consideration by us to help just like when Haiti had the deadly earthquake and we continuously try to contribute to those starving in Africa. This should be a must in the case of Syria though innocent people dying from chemicals released by those who they thought were protecting them it’s just inhumane. So yes I agree we should give assistance when it is necessary his situation by Trump may have been rushed but it could save the lives of many, and it could also increase the amount of respect for the U.S. by other countries.

    [read less]

    Yes, I feel that since the U.S. is a superpower it is our duty to help others who are in lower power . It should at least be a consideration by us to …

    [read more]
    -1
  • Grayson from Louisiana

    I feel that the United States should get involved in foreign conflicts in certain situations. I don’t think that the United States should get involved militarily in foreign conflicts because this will almost always lead to foreigners looking at the United States as a bully who uses their enormous military to get involved in conflicts we don’t understand. I feel that the United States should get involved in foreign conflicts in a political way so as to try and appease both sides of any conflict. I feel this way because in most situations when the United States gets involved militarily some foreign power rises up and oppresses that nation doing anything they can, even killing civilians, to kick the United States out of “their” nation.

    [read less]

    I feel that the United States should get involved in foreign conflicts in certain situations. I don’t think that the United States should get involved…

    [read more]
    -1
  • Henry from Washington

    Wealth, power, and history mean that US leads regardless of US foreign policy. US government should guide foreign policy with intentionality and reflection of US values.

    -1
  • Ethan from Indiana

    The slaughter of innocent lives is a horrible crime that must be stopped. The U.S. has an obligation to stop anyone killing defenseless people such as the ones in Syria. If action is not taken who will save these people? The U.S. foreign policy states that incidents like this are a crime under international law and that we are committed to both preventing and punishing those responsible. The U.S. should dedicate itself to the betterment of the world by being the protector of the weak and defenseless in whatever way necessary.

    [read less]

    The slaughter of innocent lives is a horrible crime that must be stopped. The U.S. has an obligation to stop anyone killing defenseless people such as…

    [read more]
    -1
  • Noah from Michigan

    I personally would say yes we should get involved with other countries. We need someone in office who can minipulate people very well though. We need someone who can get other countries to do our dirty work. Trump should have tried to get China to mess with North Korea. Then if something bad happened china would take the brunt of the assault from North Korea. While we could back them up and take minimal damage. The problem with this would be getting someone in office that could actually get minipulate people in such a precise way. China wouldnt be a problem as long as we backed them up in the effort against North Korea. The hardest part would be getting China to think they came up with the idea. If China thought they came up with the idea then we would have a lot bigger chance they would go for the idea of going against North Korea. While China would be on the front lines attaking we would attack from behind or from the waters on both sides of North Korea. This way we would habe them surrounded. We could also probably get South Korea to join in on the attack. Thus we would have North Korea surrounded. They would have no where to go and would be slaughtered. Getting invloved in foreign conflicts isnt bad. It can be very dangerous if not played carefully. On what i have explaimed aboe would be a safe and effective way to go against North Korea with te help of China and possibly South Korea. We would box North Korea in together. Nooth Korea couldnt drop a nuke on us, u less they would bomb their own people. Through this effort we could boost relations with China and maybe even South Korea. If we have a president who knew how to talk to people ,and could minipulate is words well and gain allies. Then yes we should get involved in foreign conflicts. If Trump can do those things then i would say we would be perfectly fine joining in on foregin conflicts.

    [read less]

    I personally would say yes we should get involved with other countries. We need someone in office who can minipulate people very well though. We need …

    [read more]
    -1
  • Ashton from Alabama

    Yes, i think it would help a little but i just think that Trump should take some more time to think about what to do about bombing or destroying other countries. I think we or other countries should step in if only countries using illegal weapons like chemical gas, shojld do something about it. Like we did.

    [read less]

    Yes, i think it would help a little but i just think that Trump should take some more time to think about what to do about bombing or destroying other…

    [read more]
    -1
  • Jacob from Michigan

    I believe that it is important for the US Government to interfere in foreign politics in extreme situations. For example, if a government is killing innocent civilians, I feel that it is the civic duty of our government to protect the lives and freedom of all people. This may be difficult, however, our government officals should be more than capable of handling these challenges. It should also be noted that our government should attempt to act with care, as not to provoke a military attack from countries that we anger. Also, our government needs to ensure that its actions are actually helping the foreign citizens, and not making matters worse for them.

    [read less]

    I believe that it is important for the US Government to interfere in foreign politics in extreme situations. For example, if a government is killing i…

    [read more]
    -1
  • Stuart from Michigan

    Yes, other countries need our help which we can provide. We do need to precaution when dealing with other countries problems.

    -1
  • John from New York

    With foreign conflicts raging, the U.S.A. is faced with a decision to make: should we step up to the plate on the world stage and uphold human rights, or should America sink so low as to turn a blind eye to suffering and put greater emphasis on national security? It should be self-evident that in times of conflict, the United States should be more focused on civil liberties and human rights, which absolutely supersede national security. Look at our actions during the Holocaust: the U.S.A. decided to sit back, relax, and not lift a finger to help when we could have done something about it. The human rights violations in Syria could be a repeat of this event if the U.S. doesn’t get involved and help these poor people out. We cannot let our apathy yield results of dead Syrians or others worldwide. It is time for the U.S. to have the realization that the lives of innocent human beings carry more weight than some pride or national security. All importance should be placed on the well-being of our fellow human beings, and we should stick up for them when genocide is going on.

    [read less]

    With foreign conflicts raging, the U.S.A. is faced with a decision to make: should we step up to the plate on the world stage and uphold human rights…

    [read more]
    -1
  • shurouq from Mississippi

    The “war” with Syria is brought by the evidence showing that Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad,used deadly sarin gas on more than 1,000 of its people on August 21, including more than 400 children. Obama said, “what happened to those people, to those children, is not only a violation of international law, it’s also a danger to our security.” The plan of action is to target a military strike aimed at deterring Assad from using chemical weapons and degrading his ability to use them again.

    [read less]

    The “war” with Syria is brought by the evidence showing that Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad,used deadly sarin gas on more than 1,000 of its people …

    [read more]
    -2
  • Jacey from Mississippi

    Yes, I think the United States has the right to intervene in foreign affairs. America has always been involved in improving the lives of others.

    -2
  • Tamiah from Mississippi

    I think that most of the time, there needs to be a third “person” to step in a help settle a dispute. Without the interruption of the third “person,” the foreign affair would come to a staccato or a harsh problem that could affect other countries. It is better to stop the problem before it happens to save a bunch of time, money and lives.

    [read less]

    I think that most of the time, there needs to be a third “person” to step in a help settle a dispute. Without the interruption of the third “person,” …

    [read more]
    -2
  • Tate from Mississippi

    Yes it is good for us to get involved in foreign conflicts. It shows that we are the country in control of the world. We are the ones making everything happen.

    -2
  • Anna from Illinois

    The United States should become involved with foreign affairs. We as a country have a duty to protect our allies and their people. However, often times the US going along the wrong way of helping foreign countries. Often the United States will enter a country and do thing the way that they believe is right with no regards to the country itself. If the United States was more conscientious of foreign countries we would have a better relationship with them, rather than going in and trying to deal with a problem without them. The United States should be involved in foreign affairs but only if the help is wanted and the United States respect the foreign nation.

    [read less]

    The United States should become involved with foreign affairs. We as a country have a duty to protect our allies and their people. However, often time…

    [read more]
    -2
  • Kyle Nick Taylor from Illinois

    We need to be involved in foreign affairs because it is important for citizens of other countries to be treated fairly. If they are not, it should be someones job to do so, and that should be ours.

    [read less]

    We need to be involved in foreign affairs because it is important for citizens of other countries to be treated fairly. If they are not, it should be…

    [read more]
    -2
  • Alex & Breanna from Illinois

    Yes, I believe that the United States should at times take actions that are retaliatory or preventative. Other countries tend to take the sidelines after horrific events. For example, after the Assad used sarrin gas against his own people no country was willing to take any action against Assad. However, the USA stepped up to the plate and delivered a powerful message to countries around the world. While large scale involvement with tens of thousands troops is costly idea, sending a message of strength can be effective to prevent tragedies in the future.

    [read less]

    Yes, I believe that the United States should at times take actions that are retaliatory or preventative. Other countries tend to take the sidelines af…

    [read more]
    -2
  • Elliott from Illinois

    The U.S. is the only country with the people, and technology necessary to be the “world police”. Because of that we have to help who we see before a different country takes the mantle and dose harmful acts.

    [read less]

    The U.S. is the only country with the people, and technology necessary to be the “world police”. Because of that we have to help who we see before a d…

    [read more]
    -2
  • Marshall and Keaton from Illinois

    We say yes because it helps build relationships with other countries that we help so when we need help, it will be there.

    -2
  • Mackenzie from Illinois

    I think we should become involved with foreign affairs more. I think that President Trump needs to slow down and think things through and make sure its the best thing that he can do to help them. So I think we should get more involved in foreign affairs, but make sure we have the best plan out their.

    [read less]

    I think we should become involved with foreign affairs more. I think that President Trump needs to slow down and think things through and make sure it…

    [read more]
    -3
  • Kyrstin from Ohio

    I believe that the United States should get involved with foreign countries to some extent.

    -3
  • Nancy from Georgia

    Yes, the United States is known to be a country that is always at war somewhere, and although people would suggest for this country to mind their own business, that all war does is separate families and destroy lives, it is the right thing to do – to aid when in need. Even if they are miles away, we must not forget that we are all one kind, human.

    [read less]

    Yes, the United States is known to be a country that is always at war somewhere, and although people would suggest for this country to mind their own …

    [read more]
    -3
  • Dante from Ohio

    Yes, we should get involved with foreign conflict. Obama threaten to bomb Syria if they used chemical gases to kill people but that never happened. As soon as Trump became president the Syria leader used the chemical gases and so Trump bombed him trying to warn him to what will happen next if he doesn’t stop.

    [read less]

    Yes, we should get involved with foreign conflict. Obama threaten to bomb Syria if they used chemical gases to kill people but that never happened. As…

    [read more]
    -3
  • Karsyn from Michigan

    I believe that we should think before us or President Donald Trump makes a mistake from what they’re about to do, It would go downhill from what happens between the president and the allies. We should take this situation more seriously about Foreign Conflict and not go over our heads with it. We should bring others together and help Foreign Conflict. But we dont want to get involved with everything that would just make people get hurt and would make people start dying, we dont want that for our Country and for our Nations.

    [read less]

    I believe that we should think before us or President Donald Trump makes a mistake from what they’re about to do, It would go downhill from what happe…

    [read more]
    -3
  • Brandi from Illinois

    Yes I believe America can help other countries but not with Trump as President. The next one probably won’t bomb Syria or try degrading people like Trump does. Bombing a troubled country isn’t right. Developing countries need our surplus of many resources. As rich country in a way America could actually do some good and is right should be helping other countries.

    [read less]

    Yes I believe America can help other countries but not with Trump as President. The next one probably won’t bomb Syria or try degrading people like Tr…

    [read more]
    -4
  • Joshua from Pennsylvania

    The Constitution is silent on this issue. The answer is found in the reasoning of the men who crafted it—they noted several points relating to this subject, and I shall here attempt to apply them in support of my vote. My argument will be as follows:
    First, that involvement in foreign conflicts would result in the necessity of a sizable standing army.
    Second, that the aforesaid involvement would also result in almost a constant state of war.
    That these two combined lead to the imbalance of central power, and ultimately a loss of liberty.
    I contend that instead, as Thomas Jefferson so eloquently put it, “peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none” should be one of the “essential principles of our government”. (1)

    First, involvement in foreign conflicts would result in a standing army. This is readily seen today. Our military is one of the most powerful in the world… all the time. We possess a standing army—one that doesn’t go away in peacetime—and it is a necessity as a result of our intervention philosophy. If we don’t possess a standing army of considerable size, we’re unable to intervene when we feel the need to.

    Second, intervention results in nearly constant warfare. This is also testified to by our recent history. According to infoplease, since World War II the U.S. has been involved in 14 major conflicts, including the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the Iraqi War. Since 1950—67 years ago—we’ve spent 38 years in a state of warfare. (2) Out of 67 years, we’ve had only 29 years of peace. Notice that none of these wars were fought in defense of our continental soil. Most, if not all, were fought as a result of our interventionist philosophy.

    My contention is that the consequence of these two is an imbalance of power within the Federal government, ultimately resulting in loss of liberty.
    In Federalist 8, Hamilton describes this very outcome, stating that strengthening the executive branch is inevitable: “It is of the nature of war to increase the executive at the expence of the legislative authority.” (3) This is never good; our country is built on the concept of a separation and balance of powers. When one branch becomes too powerful, there is a danger of lost freedom. However, we have seen this happen; the president is perhaps the most powerful man in the world. This was never intended.
    Hamilton then goes on to describe the difference between a country with a powerful standing army and one without one; he says that a small standing army is not too dangerous, as “The smallness of the army renders the natural strength of the community an overmatch for it”. However, with a large one, the citizens’ rights are sacrificed for the sake of the military. To be fair, he is referring to a larger army based on the continent, but it is evident nonetheless that we are in a similar situation. We are in such a predicament that the citizens of our country could never prevail should we be forced to fight against our government for our rights.
    Therefore, as intervention puts us at a perilous situation—with a large standing army and a constant state of warfare—we ought to instead adopt more of an isolationist stance.

    So then, what shall we do, if we ought not engage in foreign conflicts? I tend to lean more towards Jefferson’s objectives. A small military is necessary for defense, but we ought not to intervene unless we are asked. The militia ought to be brought back as a tool of national defense, placing power back into the hands of the people. We ought to attempt to be at peace with all nations, with open trade and honest friendship, for this will allow us the advantage of assistance and peace from all. We ought not be involved in any alliances that force us to become involved along with another country, for this wastes our resources and the lives of our soldiers. However, we ought to be approachable, and willing to help if asked. Of course, we should be open to immigrants. But we should not involve ourselves in the affairs of other nations. This endangers our own citizens, both directly and indirectly; resulting in those we were trying to help having no freedom left to flee to.

    1: http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch4s33.html
    2: https://www.infoplease.com/timelines/major-military-operations-world-war-ii
    3: http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_8_12s12.html#note1

    [read less]

    The Constitution is silent on this issue. The answer is found in the reasoning of the men who crafted it—they noted several points relating to this …

    [read more]
    5
    • Garrett from Pennsylvania

      Awesome

      0
    • Joshua from Pennsylvania

      I think all of you are missing a point that would greatly strengthen your argument. Yes, we ought not get involved in foreign conflicts, but why not? Yes, to protect our own citizens. But that’s not all. We don’t just let everyone else die while we survive—we’re providing a safe haven for the oppressed to flee to! That’s why all of this ends up mattering! As I built in my defense above, and as you all have alluded to, involvement in foreign conflicts endangers our citizens in both their lives and their freedom. But what is also true is that it also endangers any FUTURE citizens’ lives and freedom! By protecting our country, we provide a place for others to flee to. By keeping peace and harmony with all other nations, we ensure that the suffering and oppressed will always have a place to go. It’s about our country, yes, but it’s ultimately about them as well.

      [read less]

      I think all of you are missing a point that would greatly strengthen your argument. Yes, we ought not get involved in foreign conflicts, but why not? …

      [read more]
      0
    • Damion from Michigan

      We are a dying nation and us getting involved will just make the national debt even more which is already enough of an issue on its own so spending money on something that we don’t even need to do wich just make things ten times worse then they need to be. We also have other things we need to deal with like the war in space that is making connections even harder to get and the U.S. runs on internet so shouldn’t we be working on that problem more than things that don’t even have to deal with us. Now if they start attacking us then that is a reason to get involved, yet unless it has to deal with us I don’t think that this is a good idea.

      [read less]

      We are a dying nation and us getting involved will just make the national debt even more which is already enough of an issue on its own so spending mo…

      [read more]
      0
    • Sara from Florida

      I feel as if the America should stay out of foreign conflicts. If the United States has no involvement or affiliation with what affairs are happening in other countries, why put our troops in danger? Already, the U.S. is in great debt and a big reason for this is military spending. If we continue becoming involved in foreign affairs it would just raise the cost of our military spending and put us in more debt that we do not need. Another reason the U.S. should stay out of foreign conflicts is that it would be putting our country in danger. When the president goes ahead and reacts to a conflict, he is only thinking about what would happen now, but really it could still affect our country in the long run.
      People who oppose the United States staying out of foreign affairs, believe that we shouldn’t just watch conflicts happen in other countries. They think we should take a stand and resolve some of the disputes over there. When you think about it though, that is risking american lives when we have no business getting ourselves involved. Many American troops are lost fighting for other countries problems when really their job is to fight and solve issues for America or who we are involved with. The United States should stay out of foreign conflicts and worry about the conflicts that are involved with us and figure out how to solve them instead.

      [read less]

      I feel as if the America should stay out of foreign conflicts. If the United States has no involvement or affiliation with what affairs are happening …

      [read more]
      0
    • christopher from Florida

      I think that we should not be involved in foreign policy. We will be safer as a country if we just mind our own business and keep our noses clean. One example is Donald Trump bombing Syria, Russia warned us that if it happens again they would start a war. This could’ve been avoided if we would have just let Syria keep gassing their own people. Another reason why we shouldn’t get involved in foreign policy is that it could cost a lot of our troops their lives by starting an unnecessary war.
      Others opposed to us turning our heads when something’s going on in other countries will probably argue that it is morally right to protect other countries. This however could cause us to fight someone else’s fight. There is no reason for us to lose American lives for another country. If we stick our nose in someone else’s business it could cause tension between countries inevitably leading to a war, possibly WWlll. If we just focus on our own problems instead of others maybe we would see growth in our economy and in our country.

      [read less]

      I think that we should not be involved in foreign policy. We will be safer as a country if we just mind our own business and keep our noses clean. One…

      [read more]
      0
    • Kimberli from Georgia

      In my opinion, I think the U.S shouldn’t get involved with what Syria is doing. Yes, they’re having innocent people die but if the U.S intervenes with Syria there’s a fifty- fifty chance that the dilemma would get more worst than t already is. The risk getting involved may either make the conflict go away or cause the world war III which will doom the economy. The U.S cant afford having other equipment being handed to us which will be very costly. Also the preamble states that in order to establish justice .

      [read less]

      In my opinion, I think the U.S shouldn’t get involved with what Syria is doing. Yes, they’re having innocent people die but if the U.S intervenes with…

      [read more]
      0
  • Abigael from Texas

    The United States should not feel the obligation to solve the worlds problems through means of force and firm control. George Washington in his farewell address told us to be weary of getting involved in foreign politics and we tried hard to follow his advice until the end of world war two then we decided that it was our god given duty to look after the people of the world. However, when we started focusing on foreigners we lost sight of taking care of ourselves. This is a problem.
    If we look at every country as a person, we can easily make connections with the situation. How many times have we heard a story of somebody getting to caught up in other peoples problems that their own life started falling apart. This is what is happening with the United States.
    The group that should be trying to regulate foreign conflicts is the United Nations. It is everyone’s duty as a whole to ensure that peace remains intact throughout the lands; not our sole duty as a world power.

    [read less]

    The United States should not feel the obligation to solve the worlds problems through means of force and firm control. George Washington in his farewe…

    [read more]
    2
    • 0
    • Joshua from Pennsylvania

      I agree with most of what you said, Abigail, and I particularly liked your comparison to looking at people. I definitely agree with Washington; his opinion is clear in his farewell address. Jefferson’s First Inaugural address also supports this.
      However, I disagree about the United Nations. I agree that it is not our duty as a world power, for that would be world domination, but I disagree that the United Nations should be the peacekeepers. We would entrust our peace to a panel of corrupt political leaders from countries we openly question the integrity and honesty of? How does this make sense? Washington had quite much to say on this subject:
      “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 connection as possible.” He provides the example of Europe:
      “Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence therefore it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships, or enmities” Alliances get us into trouble by involving us where we don’t need to be involved. As he says later,

      “‘Tis our true policy to steer clear of permanent Alliances, with any portion of the foreign world.”

      The UN is a danger to American interests and, more importantly, sovereignty and liberty. We should not allow the UN to govern or influence any aspect of our law or policy.

      [read less]

      I agree with most of what you said, Abigail, and I particularly liked your comparison to looking at people. I definitely agree with Washington; his op…

      [read more]
      0
    • Sara from Michigan

      The United States had been in the Middle East fighting for a false hope of peace for years. That is unexpectable and is more of a loss to us then a gain. Washington in his farewell address urged us not to get involved in foreign conflicts, he knew the troubles it would bring us.
      The more the United States tries to get involved the more it hurts us overall. If an accident happens in another country not involving us there is no reason we have to intervene. Only in extreme situations, where it is negatively effecting us should we get involved.

      [read less]

      The United States had been in the Middle East fighting for a false hope of peace for years. That is unexpectable and is more of a loss to us then a ga…

      [read more]
      0
  • brittany from Florida

    The United States should not be getting involved in foreign policy with other countries. You never know what another country may have up their sleeve. We should not be sticking our nose in othes business. Usually that never seems to take anyone very far. Forcing ourselves into other countries matter would be creating far too many unnecessary issues for us. As a country who is already 13.62 trillion dollars in debt is it a good idea to waste our own valuable resources on other countries just because we are looked up to as a “savior”? No. We have way too many issues going on at home that we should be focusing on before trying to save others. Let’s improve the lives of our own American people first. Improvements are desperately needed in social security, health care, and we need to create jobs so our people can feed their families.
    The U.S. cannot be the policemen of the world. Nor should we be expected to. It’s no doubt that there are very very tragic things going on in the world but attacking those who have not attacked us would do nothing but damage the U.S. People argue that helping these syrian refugees or anyone for that matter will create allies who will one day be there for us. While creating allies is nice, creating enemies isn’t. Involving ourselves in foreign policy with other regions especially when we’re talking about war would create so many enemies along the way. They will one day, most likely, retaliate against us… all for what? So we could look like the good guys who saved the day? It’s not worth the recognition.

    [read less]

    The United States should not be getting involved in foreign policy with other countries. You never know what another country may have up their sleeve….

    [read more]
    1
  • Tim from Michigan

    Our country is hardly stable as it is, our voting system is corrupt and backwards where the popular vote doesn’t matter because the electoral college can undermine it. Our health care is a completely different issue where we want great coverage but don’t want the tax from it. There are many other crucial things our country needs to fix before it becomes involved in foreign conflict.

    [read less]

    Our country is hardly stable as it is, our voting system is corrupt and backwards where the popular vote doesn’t matter because the electoral college …

    [read more]
    1
  • Zephaniah from Mississippi

    The United States has its own economical problems. Before any war is started, I think this country should focus on the “wars” within its own country.

    1
    • jaidyn from Kansas

      i totally agree we have our own problems going on here in the united states that we need to handle and take care of those issues first before we go starting war with another country, all of this could have been avoided.

      [read less]

      i totally agree we have our own problems going on here in the united states that we need to handle and take care of those issues first before we go st…

      [read more]
      0
  • Theodore from Wisconsin

    America was built on non-interventionist principles. Our founding fathers believed that in order to preserve our liberties, we must resist meddling in foreign affairs unless it directly puts the United States at risk. James Madison said the following: “If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.” It’s a simple point of logic; if the US puts too much effort into mitigating foreign conflicts, they fail to prioritize the protection of it’s own citizens.

    That touches on a HUGE dilemma with the recent missile strike on Syrian airfields. President Trump has constantly pushed for the ideology of “America first”, and “Make America great again,” yet has now contradicted that stance by being continually involved in the Syrian civil war. Now, the main justification for the strike on Syria is that it was making a moral statement, a way to show that we will not stand for injustices. The chemical attacks were certainly a terrible and evil thing. However, according to Ron Paul: “Setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through the force of arms.” In short, America should not be the world’s policeman, but serve as the example.

    The identity of the policeman, unfortunately, was created in the aftermath of WW2, as America established themselves as a superpower. Due to this fact, non-interventionism, in practice, is impossible to maintain in our modern day. Yet the principle still stands. There have been, and will be times when America will have to participate in worldwide conflicts for the explicit purpose of our own protection, but outside this requirement, America should NOT involve themselves in foreign conflicts.

    [read less]

    America was built on non-interventionist principles. Our founding fathers believed that in order to preserve our liberties, we must resist meddling in…

    [read more]
    1
    • Richard from Virginia

      I agree with you almost one hundred percent. James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, and George Washington, some of the most important and influential people in our nation, have all stated very clearly that the United States should stay within it’s own conflicts and not step outside of those. What I do not agree with is your concept of a lack of involvement in Syria. The Geneva Protocol of 1925 and the chemical weapons convention of 1997 both clearly state that poisonous gas and other chemical weapons are strictly prohibited from being used under any circumstances by any government. The world has decided that chemical weapons are too horrible and cruel to be used on people and the United States is part of the world. It may be different if it had been terrorists or another attacker that is not held to the standards of these conventions but instead the attacks were carried out by an established government and said government should be reprimanded for it’s actions. That being said I do not believe we should launch a full scale invasion on Syria or anything but we should do something in order to show the Syrian government that this is not acceptable and will not be tolerated. I believe the smaller actions that we took were clear in stating just that and if the government should do something like this again then the consequences should become more and more severe as it continues. The only fault in this ideology in my opinion is the fact that the United Nations and the developed countries within it have not done their part in order to conserve the rules set by the two conventions previously stated and if they aren’t getting involved then I can see how it is unfair to the United States to have to take matters into our own hands. In conclusion, I believe that the U.S. should do only what it must in order to keep Syria from treating it’s people like it has but if the other nations of the world won’t back us then our efforts may be ceased, but for now some intervention in Syria is quite acceptable.

      [read less]

      I agree with you almost one hundred percent. James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, and George Washington, some of the most important and influential people…

      [read more]
      0
    • Joshua from Pennsylvania

      I agree, Theodore. There is an incredible amount of wisdom in what you’ve said. We were indeed built on non-interventionist principles: as Thomas Jefferson said, one of the “essential principles of our Government” is “peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none”
      On a side note, good to have you back.

      [read less]

      I agree, Theodore. There is an incredible amount of wisdom in what you’ve said. We were indeed built on non-interventionist principles: as Thomas Jeff…

      [read more]
      0
  • Laura from Pennsylvania

    The saying, “don’t bite off more than you can chew”, has been a lesson that most Americans don’t see as related to foreign involvement. This saying should guide our foreign policy. Using history as a model- the Vietnam War and the Iraq War- shows that America hasn’t followed the proverb carefully.

    The winner of the Vietnam War is controversial. However, the negative sentiments in America late into the war is indisputable. The motivation to get involved was moral and just. However, America simply didn’t have a good plan. What happened when America took control of South Vietnam? They allowed Diem to become a leading figure. America turned its back towards the unlawful, cruel things that happened in Diem’s regime. He was a Christian who did not tolerate any other religion. People knew that he was behind the murders of Buddhist monks. The famous picture of the monk who set himself on fire as a protest added fuel to the anti-Vietnam War sentiments. America didn’t do a single thing to help. All that mattered was that Diem was not a communist. America tried to help by helping Diem into power as a President. However, America failed to act when its plans were flawed.

    The thing that America lacks is responsibility. Look back to the Iraq War. Sure, America succeeded in killing Saddam Hussein; it failed to help completely rebuild the country after the war. Years later, everyone has heard about ISIS- which originates in the country that America had freed.

    America had bitten more than it can chew in both situations. The cause to free both countries from threats was noble. Even if there was success in driving out the threat in Iraq, there was so much instability that remained unfixed. America simply did not plan ahead and turn their goals into reality.

    Even if there was victory in battle regarding foreign affairs, the United States can’t seem to commit to taking responsibility of the nation it will free. This is a huge problem because the instability can create greater problems such as ISIS to plague the world.

    The great losses in life and money hurts America. The United States should be more focused on solving disputes peacefully and diplomatically and to think before getting involved. The Vietnam War took away from Johnson’s plan of the Great Society. Getting involved in foreign affairs will hurt domestic affairs as well. As in the Korean War, America once involved, cannot escape. Even today, there are Americans situated on the border between North Korea and South Korea.

    [read less]

    The saying, “don’t bite off more than you can chew”, has been a lesson that most Americans don’t see as related to foreign involvement. This saying sh…

    [read more]
    1
  • Tyler from Florida

    We have issues in our own country and our territories, we should not go into other countries.

    0
  • Ashley from New York

    In George Washingtons Farwell address, he stated to stay neutral and by the United States not following his guidelines we ended up in world war 1 and world war 2

    0
  • Isaiah from New York

    The intervention of US in the foreign conflict is enough for cold war. Since Bush started the war on the terror, nothing have been resolved but ISIS. Although President Obama attempted to end the conflict in Afghanistan in 2012, the situation got worsen. The role of U.S. as a ‘world police’ should be stop. Rising conflict in Korean Peninsula should be an issue between DPRK and ROK, not the United States.

    [read less]

    The intervention of US in the foreign conflict is enough for cold war. Since Bush started the war on the terror, nothing have been resolved but ISIS. …

    [read more]
    0
  • Peyton from Ohio

    Wasting tax payer dollars and American troops lives for what!?

    0
  • Adam from Nevada

    Donald Trump really wants to make America Great Again!? Well I really dont see that happening with America sticking its nose in places where it doesnt belong. We as a country are in no position to be throwing bombs at any country that does something problematic. We should be focusing on ourselves and our internal economic and social issues rather than another countries! How can we help others when we cant even help ourselves!?

    [read less]

    Donald Trump really wants to make America Great Again!? Well I really dont see that happening with America sticking its nose in places where it doesnt…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jesse from Massachusetts

    This isn’t to say we shouldn’t help our allies when they need it, but we shouldn’t get involved in affairs that don’t involve us. Look hope Korea and Vietnam turned out for us.

    0
  • Brendon from Ohio

    I believe that the United States should remain out of foreign affairs due to the fact that we should be focusing on ourselves instead, building the economy and fixing what is broken in the country. We should focus on us and not others, we should come first and not people of different countries.

    [read less]

    I believe that the United States should remain out of foreign affairs due to the fact that we should be focusing on ourselves instead, building the ec…

    [read more]
    0
  • Lauren from Texas

    Foreign affairs are the reason we are deep into debt, and is also the main reason we get involved in other nations’ wars.

    0
  • Lisa from South Carolina

    No they shouldn’t

    0
  • Tristan from Kansas

    Should we get involved in foreign conflicts? It really depends on the situation. In most cases, such as the Middle East, we should not get involved. But why? For years and years now we have been fighting in the Middle East. We have toppled dictators. We have droned thousands of innocent people. What has happened after all of this? ISIS. This foreign policy will not or never will work.

    [read less]

    Should we get involved in foreign conflicts? It really depends on the situation. In most cases, such as the Middle East, we should not get involved. B…

    [read more]
    0
  • Sasha from Alabama

    I believe we shouldn’t get involved. We shouldn’t waste our money on people in other countries and then say we don’t have enough money for our own citizens. It’s not fair to the people of the United States to suffer while our government hands out money left and right for people who aren’t even Americans.

    [read less]

    I believe we shouldn’t get involved. We shouldn’t waste our money on people in other countries and then say we don’t have enough money for our own cit…

    [read more]
    0
  • Regan from Florida

    Throughout United States Foreign Policy has caused substandard conflicts. I believe the United State should not be involved; if we are not involved in the first place. War is a conflict that we are still having today and slowly becoming corrupt. The United States should not proceed to brawl with other countries. If we become involved it will creates enemies with countries that we didn’t have issue with, or may cause major wars.
    In spite the fact that the United States does not want enemies; it creates allies among us and other countries. It could cause peace with other countries as well. Although, the allies could additionally cause more wars and long term effects due to being involved with their countries problems, when we have plenty of problems on our own. We should be careful with foreign policy, and not get involved with things we are not involved in.

    [read less]

    Throughout United States Foreign Policy has caused substandard conflicts. I believe the United State should not be involved; if we are not involved in…

    [read more]
    0
  • Tylyn from Florida

    Foreign policy and the idea of whether or not the U.S. should become involved in foreign conflicts has become a rising issue within the United States. We should be focussed on problems within the country, although they are not as great as problems out of the country, before our resources are depleted over seas. So much money is being spent on the military and resources and they are only being put to use towards someone else’s problems. Although I don’t think what is happening in Syria is humane, I don’t think the United States should get involved in something that doesn’t pertain to them in any way. The United States is already in a great amount of debt, and by spending money on resources that are being used out of the country, we are only digging ourselves deeper in the hole we’re already in. Another reason why I don’t think the U.S. should get involved in foreign conflicts is because it can lead to creating future conflicts within the states and abroad. By involving our country in a problem between 2 others, we are putting ourselves in the middle of it. This could lead to the enemy country becoming enemies with the states, and possibly even trying to threaten or attempt a foreign attack. I know that American citizens live in fear of the possibilities of World War 3 occurring… so why involve ourselves in other’s conflicts and risk that possibility of becoming a reality?
    One might say that involving the U.S. in foreign conflicts is good because it could prevent catastrophes and even maybe stop the problem completely. Think about reality and what it requires of our military personnel to do in order to even attempt to assist in the foreign problem occurring. Think about the number of American soldiers who have suffered injuries or even death from being involved overseas. Is some other country’s problem worth losing the lives of our American people? The object of offering help is to save lives, not risk them. Gaining allies is another thing the majority of people look at when asked the question: Should the U.S. get involved in foreign conflicts? Yes, you may gain an ally by assisting them in their home country problem, but you are also at risk of gaining an enemy from the country doing the damage. I don’t think it is worth gaining an enemy from a potentially strong country in order to help a weak one overcome their situation.

    [read less]

    Foreign policy and the idea of whether or not the U.S. should become involved in foreign conflicts has become a rising issue within the United States….

    [read more]
    0
  • Jennyfer from Florida

    Due to the fact that there are so many issues between foreign countries, many believe that it will be best for the U.S to simply stay to themselves. Agreeing to this, I believe that the best thing for the U.S would to in fact, keep out of issues we are not involved in. Getting involved into problems may cause enemies and lack of resources. When trying to fix everyone else’s issue, we will tend to try to use all equipment necessary to try to win, doing so will cause the U.S to be short on resources that we may need for ourselves. Another problem with getting involved is enemies, which will definitely not help us out in the long run. By trying to help out others, we may gain a lot of people who disagree with our actions and will turn faces when we are in need of allies.

    Furthermore, some may agree to the fact that we should get involved. Trying to prevent bigger issues and gaining income may cause one to think that being involved is the best thing to do. While being in a situation you do not belong in in the first place, other will automatically shut you out. Those who try to say that getting into it to prevent issues, do not see the side where if we do get involved that can simply cause issues for ourselves. To gain income, means to get more money from others when you try to help them out. Yes they may pay you to use your equipment or to simply help out, but you are also using most of your own resources to fight a fight that does not involve you.

    [read less]

    Due to the fact that there are so many issues between foreign countries, many believe that it will be best for the U.S to simply stay to themselves. A…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jason from Florida

    In the discussion about the US being involved what happened in other countries or not. MY standing is without a doubt strongly on the side of “mind your business”. How can a country try to help another country’s problem when there are problems abroad on your own soil. Or with the issue of the money and where it’s gonna come from, the us is in debt with china for a total of 19.8 trillion dollars.
    But on the flip side of things a person could possibly say that we are “obligated” to help out others. The american people do have a strong standing for what is called “morals”. When you see a person in need or in pain the first thing in response to do is to help, helping to the US is obviously doing the same thing back to them that happened. Eye for an eye I guess.
    Even with those standards set aside. We still need to mind our business because the american people’s safety and well-being should be the top priority for the US president before he goes off blowing people up. If there’s no beef don’t start any beef. Don’t be a hero! Heros don’t live long….

    [read less]

    In the discussion about the US being involved what happened in other countries or not. MY standing is without a doubt strongly on the side of “mind …

    [read more]
    0
  • Alex from Florida

    As a country, I believe that the United States of America should just stay out of any foreign affairs. Right or wrong, what happens in other countries shouldn’t affect us because we always get involved in something and someone blows it way out of proportion and the damage is devastating. The U.S. just had to interfere with the bombing of Syria which aggravated Russia which down the line is going to cause problems with us. Had we not done anything about it there would be no tension between the U.S. and Russia.
    Although I believe that we should stay out of anything to do with other countries, we should still have morals. Had the President starting gassing us up in the streets I’d want other countries to intervene to help us out. He made an executive decision that upset many people but I am almost certain that most countries wanted to do something but were too scared too.

    [read less]

    As a country, I believe that the United States of America should just stay out of any foreign affairs. Right or wrong, what happens in other countries…

    [read more]
    0
  • Tamia from Florida

    One may contend that Donald Trump’s decision on authorizing an airstrike on Syrian leaders is righteous and that being a first world country, it’s our duty to get involved. Some people are screaming that we should get involved and help those people in need. I believe that getting involved in foreign affairs is dangerous. I believe that the United States shouldn’t be playing the role as big brother when other countries are getting bullied. Yes, I completely understand that people are dying and citizens who weren’t involved are getting hurt but let’s play Devil’s advocate here. With the current social issues going on in our country, the recent defunding of Planned Parenthood and the high levels of police killing unarmed citizens, would we all be okay if another country that didn’t necessarily agree with that stance, started to drop bombs on us? I believe that we as a country have our own problems to fix before we tried to fix everyone else’s. Time and time again, we seen that getting involved in foreign policies has resulted in us with casualties of our own people, valuable time, and of course money. Getting involved always result in some type of retaliation. Our founding father Thomas Jefferson believe we should be peaceful with other nations and not get entangled with alliances. George Washington also warned against having alliances and getting involved in foreign affairs. If the founding fathers said not to involve ourselves, then why are we going against that?

    [read less]

    One may contend that Donald Trump’s decision on authorizing an airstrike on Syrian leaders is righteous and that being a first world country, it’s o…

    [read more]
    0
  • rebecca from Florida

    Foreign policy, ranging from something like trade to something with significant aftermath such as war. The U.S. being a big leader in today’s world that it is, many believe that we should be more intertwined in the affairs of foreign countries– the bombing in Syria for example. One can contend that by doing so the U.S. was right to act this way to stop Isis from attacking its own people, I on the other hand believe that we should extract our selves from this kind of foreign interaction to prevent an even detrimental attack on the U.S. By intervening in their affairs we could draw more attention on our nation and gift them with even more fuel to their fire for destruction, bringing on a chaos of war and death. I understand that it is not in human nature to deprive those in need of aid the help they deserve, even then, it would cause a worse ending then if we let i be.
    Others argue that we should intervene to prevent the death of those innocent, and the destruction of those who deserve it. Thus I rebut with the simple fact that even though it is in our hearts to do what is right, sometimes what is right in moral is not what is the right thing to do. We will save many more lives by distancing ourselves from the harsher side of foreign policy and focusing on the subjects that will replenish and sustain our country, and others as well in means of food, water, and clothing.

    [read less]

    Foreign policy, ranging from something like trade to something with significant aftermath such as war. The U.S. being a big leader in today’s world th…

    [read more]
    0
  • Wyatt from Florida

    The United States should not get involved in foreign conflicts unless they directly affect the us. Getting involved wastes resources and puts military lives at risk when not getting involved would have avoided it. Our country has it’s own issues that need to be handled and the government should be focused on them rather than focusing on other countries issues. By getting into other countries issues it also creates more conflict with those countries allies. For example, trying to help the Syrian citizens who are in need has created tension with Russia.

    Opponents would feel the United states should get involved in Foreign conflicts. This group feels are military is powerful enough to settle foreign affairs and keep international peace.They feel we have a duty to intervene and support people from around the world from repressive or dangerous governments. According to their members the U.S has a moral obligation to step in and help. People who disagree with that would feel the U.S also has a moral obligation to it’s own people and should use its resources to help us first instead of on other countries.

    [read less]

    The United States should not get involved in foreign conflicts unless they directly affect the us. Getting involved wastes resources and puts military…

    [read more]
    0
  • Leonardo from Florida

    The United States should not interfere in foreign affairs. When the U.S. interferes with other countries problems, it just causes more issues for us. An example would be the airstrike in Syria. When we bombed syria, it caused conflict between the U.S. and Russia because Russia is allied with Syria. Also, the U.S. should focus on the issues they have within the country before having more pressure from other countries make out issues exacerbate.
    However, interfering with other countries issues can have its benefits. One example would be if we don’t help now it will come back and affect us later. Although this is a good argument, if we just go in messing with other countries problems it would cause countless problems now that we would have to deal with.

    [read less]

    The United States should not interfere in foreign affairs. When the U.S. interferes with other countries problems, it just causes more issues for us. …

    [read more]
    0
  • Marco from Florida

    The United States, in my opinion, should not be intervening in any foreign policy issues. Should us as a country be a aware of the world around us, yes. But should we as a country intervene if the need not pertains to us, no. Why should we become involved in others affairs when yet our own worth isn’t anything to galvanize towards. By this logic, joining in on any type of foreign farce is nonsense. America has been fighting the wars of others for too long. Wasting american money, resources, and it’s people.
    But what about american interest such as imported goods like oil, america has to intervene in foreign issues to continue to obtain oil. Not necessarily. America has rich UNTAPPED oil deposits across the country, notably in Alaska. So to say America has to intervene strictly on the basis that it NEEDS resources is ridiculous. America has the full capability to take care and maintain itself for plenty of years. The question of “why aren’t we doing that now?” is a different question for another topic.

    [read less]

    The United States, in my opinion, should not be intervening in any foreign policy issues. Should us as a country be a aware of the world around us, ye…

    [read more]
    0
  • Hannah from Michigan

    The US should not be involved with foreign affairs due to the fact that they are already being torn apart from their own issues with scarcity of resources and money. Think about it, the US is slowly depleting their resources with other issues and involvement would further contribute to the issue.

    [read less]

    The US should not be involved with foreign affairs due to the fact that they are already being torn apart from their own issues with scarcity of resou…

    [read more]
    0
  • Margaret from Michigan

    No, we should not get involved in foreign conflicts because we are the world’s number one terrorists and we have Donald Trump for a Commander in Chief who has obviously no real knowledge on foreign affairs because he tried to implement an unconstitutional travel ban that was racist. We need to focus on issues in our own country such as getting everyone access to heath care rather than invading a country who we think have nuclear weapons when they just don’t. In conclusion, this country is a joke.

    [read less]

    No, we should not get involved in foreign conflicts because we are the world’s number one terrorists and we have Donald Trump for a Commander in Chief…

    [read more]
    0
  • julianna from Michigan

    Getting involved with such things isn’t doing us any good. Mixing the country up where it doesn’t belong puts the people in danger. We go to assist another country or attempt to interfere with an issue and it backlashes more often that not. If you stick your nose into others business be prepared to have it broken.

    [read less]

    Getting involved with such things isn’t doing us any good. Mixing the country up where it doesn’t belong puts the people in danger. We go to assist an…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jazmine from Michigan

    It causes war and other problems in countries and with the united states that shouldn’t involve us.

    0
  • Maddy from Virginia

    While I don’t agree with what happened before, there was no large reason to let that airstrike happen. By doing so, we’ve risked involving the US-and many innocent people and their homes and lives-in a war we could’ve stayed out of. Is it really worth all that just to tell someone no?

    [read less]

    While I don’t agree with what happened before, there was no large reason to let that airstrike happen. By doing so, we’ve risked involving the US-and …

    [read more]
    0
  • Robert from Texas

    Without a direct threat posed against the United States, we should not get involved. This is not an easy position to take, because its easy to sympathize with with people who feel differently. Its the saddest thing in the world to have to look at photos of people scarred and killed by Bashur al Assads chemical weapons attack and say that we cant help them, but not getting involved and letting them solve their own problems is the only path to lasting peace.

    Look at it from the perspective of a child in Syria, if a US bombing run meant to “send a message” killed my father, and my mother is forced to work herself to death to feed me and my siblings; If U.S soldiers occupying my village in the name of freedom point their guns at my friends and I because we could be terrorists; i would grow up to justifiably hate america. Whole sections of countries grow up like this because of US involvment in the middle east, spreading the problem all throughout the reigon. This combined with the power vaccum left over any time America pulls out of the nations it occupies essentially creates the very problem were trying to fight. What it comes down to is that hate and violence cannot be defeated with more hate and violence.

    [read less]

    Without a direct threat posed against the United States, we should not get involved. This is not an easy position to take, because its easy to sympath…

    [read more]
    0
  • kevin from Georgia

    I believe that the united states should not be involved with foreign conflicts unless it renders us to .We should only join a foreign conflict if it contains issues that might harm the united states. The preamble states that we the people of the unites states in order to form a more perfect union secures the blessing of liberty to ourselves which means to me that the united states thrives to become a better union. So to become involved with foreign conflict will push us away from focusing on our goal to become perfect.

    [read less]

    I believe that the united states should not be involved with foreign conflicts unless it renders us to .We should only join a foreign conflict if it c…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ethan from Kansas

    SHOULD THE UNITED STATES GET INVOLVED IN FOREIGN CONFLICTS?
    I think the United States should not get involved in other countries conflicts. People are dying, but if the United States tries to stop what’s going on there, there is a chance that whats going on would and could get a lot worse than it already is. There is risk in getting involved because it could make the conflict go away or be the cause world war 3, which will doom the united states and it economy. This will cause people to lose lives, money, we could end up losing our country forever.

    [read less]

    SHOULD THE UNITED STATES GET INVOLVED IN FOREIGN CONFLICTS?
    I think the United States should not get involved in other countries conflicts. People ar…

    [read more]
    0
  • Biliana-Maria from Indiana

    Helping foreign entities is arguably a moral duty of the United States. Yet, too, often, intervention in foreign affairs is not true help. If America were to act militantly against terrorist forces overseas, then we should also provide the assistance the nation in question will undoubtedly require post factum. In the past, America has instead refrained from the latter portion. We have attacked rulers whom we have deemed as infringing on human rights, yet we have failed to provide the nations which we have attacked with the proper means to return to a peaceful state. After bombing the terrorists, we must help the establishment of a fair and just government in the foreign entity we meddle with, or else a new malevolent group might seize power in the aftermath of our actions. If we only drop bombs and refuse to offer help afterwards, then our help is no help at all. Tearing down a negative force is useless if one does not replace it with a positive one. Leaving nations in the rubble is no help at all.

    [read less]

    Helping foreign entities is arguably a moral duty of the United States. Yet, too, often, intervention in foreign affairs is not true help. If America …

    [read more]
    0
  • Lauren from Georgia

    The United States has plenty of internal conflict on it’s own. While I understand that people want the US to be the police of the world, we simply don’t have the rights to do so. By involving ourselves we are putting our citizens at risk- for what? A pat on the back from the citizens of it’s own country should never be used to justify military use.

    [read less]

    The United States has plenty of internal conflict on it’s own. While I understand that people want the US to be the police of the world, we simply don…

    [read more]
    0
  • Brooke from Texas

    While the Constitution does not clarify much in regards to foreign policy, it does detail that the presidency holds most of the power in deciding whether or not international intervention is necessary. The presidential position, however, is also constitutionally obligated to be checked and balanced by the Senate, Supreme Court, and Congress on any issue or decision made. This lack of mentioning of foreign policy in the Constitution is largely due to the fact that many of the men who played a role in the drafting of it, including the first president, George Washington, believed that America should focus on itself before intervening globally. While these opinions were held in 1787, they are still applicable today. The United States is still a young country in comparison to the rest of the world, yet since the beginning of our formation, we have insisted that our input is necessary on every global issue. That preconceived notion that America can fix anything has only grown in size throughout history. This opinion has gotten so large that many believe that it is America’s job to keep the world in line. As a federal government, we often intervene in global conflicts with a serious lack of local knowledge. These spontaneous interventions are often solely justified by how much of a “powerhouse country” America is. Instead of continuing these careless engagements, the lawmakers of America should instead consult each other, as the Constitution encourages them to do, and perform extensive research on the possible side effects their attacks or interventions could have in the specific country, While the Constitution does leave most foreign policy in the hands of the president, foreign policy is too large of an issue for one nation, let alone one person, to take on.

    [read less]

    While the Constitution does not clarify much in regards to foreign policy, it does detail that the presidency holds most of the power in deciding whet…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jada from Florida

    We the US citizens shall not interfere with the foolishness of President Donald Trump. He has been dropping bombs in Syria and destroying their land and villages. He is talking about building a wall however, he is somewhat provoking terrorists and people from foreign countries to come to the US and destroy or kill anyone and everyone. As it says in Amendment 1, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Therefore, he has no right to punish those who are not a part of the United States.

    [read less]

    We the US citizens shall not interfere with the foolishness of President Donald Trump. He has been dropping bombs in Syria and destroying their land a…

    [read more]
    0
  • Seriya from Florida

    Unfortunately, the United States should not get involved in foreign conflicts. To begin, I believe the United States should not get involved in foreign conflicts because we can lose a lot of money that belongs to the United States. For example, once we lose all our money the whole country might end up homeless. Furthermore, the United States should not get involved in foreign conflicts because us americans might lose our lives. For Instance, we might get involved and unexpectedly end up getting killed. Lastly, the United States should not get involved in foreign conflicts because the Constitution states that the right of the people should peacefully assemble to one another. Getting involved in foreign conflicts is not peaceful.

    [read less]

    Unfortunately, the United States should not get involved in foreign conflicts. To begin, I believe the United States should not get involved in foreig…

    [read more]
    0
  • Caira from Florida

    If we try to go to another country and get involved with something then the country will maybe try to harm us. Although it might start a war and no one wants that to happen. In the constitution of the United States it says that the vice president shall be commander in chief of the army and navy. However, he or she shouldn’t be allowed to get involved in foreign conflicts.

    [read less]

    If we try to go to another country and get involved with something then the country will maybe try to harm us. Although it might start a war and no on…

    [read more]
    0
  • Adrianna from Florida

    The US shouldn’t get involved in foreign conflicts because the foreign country could strike back. Also,you can start war. According to Article 2, section 3 however the president ordering naming officers in the armed forces. Also, you can get yourself killed in war. On the hand, you wouldn’t want a country to get in civil war, and a family member might get killed while they are there. Also, you could get more allies, if you don’t have any. I’m Adrianna and I approve this message. THANK YOU!

    [read less]

    The US shouldn’t get involved in foreign conflicts because the foreign country could strike back. Also,you can start war. According to Article 2, sect…

    [read more]
    0
  • Rashiya from Florida

    I think the United States should not get involved in foreign conflicts because it is none of our business. So therefore, if we got involved we would get hurt or we could die. For instance, when Trump bombed Syria if we tried to help we would have gotten hurt maybe died. Article 2 states that we have to get permission to fight for others battles. Even if we get permission I still think we shouldn’t get involved.

    [read less]

    I think the United States should not get involved in foreign conflicts because it is none of our business. So therefore, if we got involved we would g…

    [read more]
    0
  • Tania from Florida

    The US shouldn’t get involved in foreign conflicts it’s not our problem. The president is supposed to take care of it. It is crazy that we should be part of this and the state doesn’t if we have to do it or not. This is why you shouldn’t be involved in foreign conflicts.

    [read less]

    The US shouldn’t get involved in foreign conflicts it’s not our problem. The president is supposed to take care of it. It is crazy that we should be p…

    [read more]
    0
  • Shawn from Georgia

    In response to the question: “Should the United States get involved foreign conflict?”, I say no. Taking action in foreign countries’ affairs is not only risky but also reckless. Sometimes the best action is not taking action. Interfering in foreign conflicts cannot only result in war and lost alliances but it can also put “We The People” and our values in danger. So how can we assure getting involved will not affect our constitutional rights or the Blessing of liberty and how do we know it still will be secure for our posterity? How can we assure our stability when we put all of our accomplishments and achievements, that “We The People” have worked so hard for, on the line? We can’t assure that so as I said before sometimes the best action is not taking action.

    [read less]

    In response to the question: “Should the United States get involved foreign conflict?”, I say no. Taking action in foreign countries’ affairs is…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ja'Maria from Florida

    According to Article 2 the consent of Congress it would be wrong to get involved in foreign conflicts. I understand that we could help them on the other hand, the resources should be used for the people in the United States. That would be a waste to use the resources for non-important things and,that money could be used for the United States. Also,if the United States helped them,then that foreign place can turn against us. Then there will be a conflict between the foreign place and the United States. All i’m trying to say is they can try to kill us for getting in their business. The point is getting in a conflict with other foreign places could cause a conflict for the United States.

    [read less]

    According to Article 2 the consent of Congress it would be wrong to get involved in foreign conflicts. I understand that we could help them on the ot…

    [read more]
    0
  • Tanysa from Florida

    We should not be in President Donald Trump’s business because any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices.Also,we power to grant respectives and pardons offenses.I don’t want to be in his business or try to get killed or any thing else .I don’t want to get killed!

    [read less]

    We should not be in President Donald Trump’s business because any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices.Also,we power to grant r…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jeronique from Florida

    The United States shouldn’t get involved with state conflicts. My first reason is because people shouldn’t be able to use chemical weapons on their own people. So,if others had the decision what would you want them to say? My second reason is that people can get hurt like syria it’s just unnecessary. Just think, you wouldn’t want the United States involved in your conflicts if you were foreign unless it involved war or health.

    [read less]

    The United States shouldn’t get involved with state conflicts. My first reason is because people shouldn’t be able to use chemical weapons on their ow…

    [read more]
    0
    • Brogan from Oregon

      You say the United States shouldnt get involved, yet your reasoning helps the other side of the argument more so then your own. If no one got involved with the chemical weapons airstrike in Syria, what is going to stop Assad from doing the same thing again? Syrian citizens do not have the means to protect themselves from their tyrannical leaders. Now, I can see where you are coming from by saying no, the U.S. should not get involved, however, i think your reasoning should change, and there are instances where the U.S. should get involved. Honestly it just depends on the circumstances.

      [read less]

      You say the United States shouldnt get involved, yet your reasoning helps the other side of the argument more so then your own. If no one got involved…

      [read more]
      0
    • Tanysa from Florida

      I agree that people getting hurt in Syria is unnecessary!!!!!

      0
  • Daenon from Georgia

    In George Washington’s farewell address he talked about not interfering with any foreign problems. Donald Trump bombing the Syrian airfield completely disobeyed his wise words. He isn’t only putting himself in danger, he is putting the whole United States in danger. Trump Represents the whole nation even though we don’t always agree with his actions. Our nation shouldn’t be responsible for acts of violence in other countries unless citizens of the United States are being harmed.

    [read less]

    In George Washington’s farewell address he talked about not interfering with any foreign problems. Donald Trump bombing the Syrian airfield completely…

    [read more]
    0
  • Lesly from Georgia

    Foreign Conflict is a topic that is currently making us ask ourselves multiple questions. “Do we get involved?” “What does this have to do with us?” “How will this affect us after all if we do get involved” and etc. The United States has a heavily funded military that if we use our men for these circumstances that doesn’t have anything to us and our allies then I don’t think we should intervene with Foreign Conflict. Our new president isn’t all familiar with foreign conflict we can end up endangering our men in the armed forces, our allies, and over all our country.

    [read less]

    Foreign Conflict is a topic that is currently making us ask ourselves multiple questions. “Do we get involved?” “What does this have to do with us?” “…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jessica from Georgia

    No united States shouldn’t get involved in foreign conflicts .Why get involved?If it’s just causing more conflicts among other countries instead of creating a perfect union like the constitution said were destroying it by causing Us to live threatened thinking they might hurt us just because we got involved in conflict that wasn’t even ours. That’s why i strongly believe that we should just mind our own business when it comes to getting involved in other wars.

    [read less]

    No united States shouldn’t get involved in foreign conflicts .Why get involved?If it’s just causing more conflicts among other countries instead of cr…

    [read more]
    0
  • Julia from Georgia

    No, I don’t believe that the United States should get involved in force in conflicts. The constitution begins with the Preamble. Since he Preamble is part of the U.S Constitution, the supreme Law of Land, which is the highest form of law. The laws are created from our unalienable rights that embody our most basic values: social, moral, economics and political.
    Our President Trump has authorized an air strike to an airfield in Syria. Doing so he is creating problems across the world that later we cannot go back and fix. “to form a more perfect union… insure domestic tranquility..” The highest form of law states in order to be the great country everyone believes we are, and it started with domestic tranquility. Meaning having the state of being calm, basically having peace. There is no peace in our country. Everyone is arguing with everyone, physically attacking one another. Yet he has the audacity to attack a country across the world, who has nothing to do with us. They’re not causing and harm or fear to us, it’d be one thing if we had problems it could be justified. He’d be trying to protect us. Our president cannot enforce the highest form of law of our country to the citizens of this country. Therefore I strongly believe the U.S has no right getting involved with forfeit conflicts that don’t cause a threat to us.

    [read less]

    No, I don’t believe that the United States should get involved in force in conflicts. The constitution begins with the Preamble. Since he Preamble is …

    [read more]
    0
  • Erika from Georgia

    I believe the United States should not get involved in foreign conflict. By interfering in foreign conflicts, the United States places all of its citizens in a state of danger. The Preamble states that we must “insure domestic Tranquility” meaning we shouldn’t intervene with decisions that may affect the well being and safety of our citizens. Getting involved into these conflicts will put us in danger of terrorist acts which affects the social, economic, political, and moral aspects of our lives. Politically, we would gain political enemies if we interfere and ally with another country. Socially, the involvement of the U.S. in foreign conflict would create stereotypes for people who look similar to the country we “villainize”. Economically, the U.S. would have to spend more of its resources in order to be ready for an attack. Morally, we would be in the wrong because we would be going against what our constitutions states about protecting our citizens. Additionally, if the U.S. acts on the plan to interfere by creating chaos overseas, our acts are considered acts of terrorism. Therefore, not only would we put ourselves in danger, but also the innocent people of the country we would attack and we would be doing it without the necessity to interfere.

    [read less]

    I believe the United States should not get involved in foreign conflict. By interfering in foreign conflicts, the United States places all of its citi…

    [read more]
    0
  • Yesha from Georgia

    In 1776, the United States of America became an official country. A country which even now seems to forget that it was founded up on violence, rape, and prejudice all while exploiting slaves and the natives, who were viewed to be below the rich, white men that continually dominate and often monopolize in every industry, position, and political platform. It seems ironic that a country founded upon such atrocious acts, so horrible that the information is often left out of textbooks and history lessons, would bomb another country because they are poisoning their people, all while doing the same to the people of Flint, Michigan. The act of getting involved in foreign conflicts is something that this country is infamous for, but often times we get involved for merely political means. The crisis in Syria is something we should definitely aim to assist, but it should be for the rights means, aiding the Syrian people in a fight for justice, liberty, and the respect of basic human rights, all of the fundamental elements included in the Preamble. The Preamble of the United States Constitution clearly states the importance of “We the People,” and our right to choose, as well as emphasizing the significance of the promoting the “general Welfare,” something we simply cannot do while risking a potential war for political means and continuing to poison our own people. The question simply comes down to whether “We the People” decide to assist the innocent people of Syria in fighting for their civil liberties because of our humanity, not for business, enterprise, and political means, which is why we should follow George Washington’s advice and keep out of foreign affairs, at least until everyone included in “We the People” have the same rights.

    [read less]

    In 1776, the United States of America became an official country. A country which even now seems to forget that it was founded up on violence, rape, a…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jessie from Kansas

    We shouldn’t help fix anything if we can’t even help our self’s in the U.S and get our problems straight.

    0
  • Osvaldo from Georgia

    I believe the United States should not get involved in foreign conflicts. Because, we the people don’t know what’s behind the trap door, meaning, we don’t know how other countries might react to this. The preamble states, in order to form a more perfect union, we must establish justice and insure domestic tranquility. Te be involved in foreign conflicts is to violate that statement. We the people have a voice and fear that isn’t being listened to. We have fear in our hearts of the possibility that something could happen to ourselves, our families, and the other citizens of the United States.

    [read less]

    I believe the United States should not get involved in foreign conflicts. Because, we the people don’t know what’s behind the trap door, meaning, we d…

    [read more]
    0
  • Armani from Florida

    Based on Article 3 the Judicial Branch section 1 Federal courts according to the Articles of Confederation the U.S.A should not be involved in this silliness . This will make us lose lives , money , we could even end up losing our country . I disagree with these conflicts . ( The people in Syria may be really bad people . By doing this you’re hurting America lives. You’re doing this by making others want to come for war.

    [read less]

    Based on Article 3 the Judicial Branch section 1 Federal courts according to the Articles of Confederation the U.S.A should not be involved in this si…

    [read more]
    0
    • Rashiya from Florida

      I like this and I agree with you a lot.

      0
  • Akio from Florida

    I said No because those are the foreign country’s fights not ours. We can’t start something we can’t finish. What i’m trying to say is all those foreign countries can fight their fight while we fight are fights. Also in section 1 number 6 the president can be removed by Congress and the vice president can step up, so if Donald Trump does fight a foreign country he can be removed.

    [read less]

    I said No because those are the foreign country’s fights not ours. We can’t start something we can’t finish. What i’m trying to say is all those forei…

    [read more]
    0
    • Lindsay from Oregon

      So if other countries are bombing their own civilians we should stand back and watch? I agree with you part way, I also do not think we should get involved in a war between two foreign countries, however when a country is fighting against its own civilians there has to be some support.

      [read less]

      So if other countries are bombing their own civilians we should stand back and watch? I agree with you part way, I also do not think we should get inv…

      [read more]
      0
  • Adrian from Florida

    The Executive Power shall be vested in A President of the United States of America according to Article 2, section 1. I think the US shouldn’t get involved in foreign conflicts because it will start a war. People will start to die. Things will be on fire, bombs will blow stuff up. That’s probably how the world will end. That’s what comes to mind. There will be fighting. So that means we should all come as a nation and all work together and be free and happy.

    [read less]

    The Executive Power shall be vested in A President of the United States of America according to Article 2, section 1. I think the US shouldn’t get inv…

    [read more]
    0
  • Alia from Kansas

    I feel like if we’re not in direct line of threat, we shouldn’t get involved. I agree its better to strike them before they strike us but only if there was a threat in the first place. We have plenty of our issues with our own country first.

    [read less]

    I feel like if we’re not in direct line of threat, we shouldn’t get involved. I agree its better to strike them before they strike us but only if ther…

    [read more]
    0
    • isabel from Texas

      i agree

      0
  • Heidern from Georgia

    No, I believe the US should not get involved in foreign conflicts because we have enough issues of our own to worry about, so we shouldn’t stick our noses in others’ business if it does not affect or concern us. Getting involved may not resolve the conflicts but instead can make situations arise and have a negative effect in the long run. For example: if we were to end up in another war. more money would be spent on the military, expenses for injured soldiers, damage done to the country, etc. We would be in more debt and the economy will inevitably go down. If we can easily get involved, so can other countries; only worsening the situation at hand. Unless we have an ideal and peaceful resolution that can benefit all sides, we should not get involved.

    [read less]

    No, I believe the US should not get involved in foreign conflicts because we have enough issues of our own to worry about, so we shouldn’t stick our n…

    [read more]
    0
  • Paola from Georgia

    I think it should not get involved because the oil prices would go up . Affect the economy and the population . Also there going to want to do another war and alot of families are going to want to do another war and alot of families are going to get separated and not be together . Prices in alot of stuff are going to go up . The president signed the paper of not letting people or residents come in . We need permission to get involved in conflict . In increase in taxes and needs and wants .

    [read less]

    I think it should not get involved because the oil prices would go up . Affect the economy and the population . Also there going to want to do another…

    [read more]
    0
  • Teresa from Georgia

    Unite states shouldn’t get involved because it would affect the world and the economy would go down .Taxes would increase due to the goods military is going to use . Billions of dollars would spend on war . Violence in united states would increase and citizens wouldn’t feel safe. allies could become another enemy against the united states . Serbia needs help of united states but they should do it in a peaceful way and not start WWIII. Billions of innocent people would lode their lives

    [read less]

    Unite states shouldn’t get involved because it would affect the world and the economy would go down .Taxes would increase due to the goods military is…

    [read more]
    0
  • elizabeth from Georgia

    we should be against the war. we should not be involve or being in conflict of any country. by the reasoning, we wont be neutral and something small we protect can get in bigger problems. it can make bigger war by the conflicts of the small war. by this war we have many advantage technology that have big destruction. since the last war this years we have bigger better technology and others country bigger and advantage weapon. when trump bomb Syria. he did it with his own reasoning and didn’t made voting of our country. people say it was right to do but ethier so it wasn’t. united states has debt with many country like china. we have many debt with them and doing stuff with war is more bigger problem reasoning we don’t many matirials and oil and machine can finish rapidly in the war. if we get in to war it would be the deadist, the bloodist, and the toxic war we can ever have. nobody will can survive by this war. if we go in to battle..

    [read less]

    we should be against the war. we should not be involve or being in conflict of any country. by the reasoning, we wont be neutral and something small w…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jerek from Georgia

    No the United Sates should not get involved in foreign conflict, because the people that live in this country will all be at risk. We already have a Dystopian society, foreign conflict would start a war. We sell, trade, and sell with foreign contries, what would happen if our supply w/ those contries were cut off. So why not stay neutral and just buy, trade, and sell valuable items.

    [read less]

    No the United Sates should not get involved in foreign conflict, because the people that live in this country will all be at risk. We already have a D…

    [read more]
    0
  • Cat from Michigan

    The Constitution does not state that we should get involved in foreign affairs. We shouldn’t get involved in foreign affairs because other countries like Japan have their own Constitution. Their own ways of life. Their own culture. Their own ways of doing things. If they WANT help, they would ask. We should mind our own business. We should fix our problems and debt first, then worry about getting involved in foreign affairs.

    [read less]

    The Constitution does not state that we should get involved in foreign affairs. We shouldn’t get involved in foreign affairs because other countries l…

    [read more]
    0
  • Michaella from Florida

    I personally do not think the United States should get involved in foreign conflicts because the U.S itself has many issues going on and most of them are unsolved, so why focus on another country when your country is not so stable itself? I understand the U.S has many reasons to help other countries; especially the poor ones, but why not solve your issues first, then focus on other countries? I honestly think “Yes” and “No” to this question, but I had to choose one, so I went with “No.” I am not saying if a country is about to die of hunger, the U.S should not help, I am saying if a country bomb its own people, for example as Syria did, that country should resolve it itself and the U.S should not get involve.

    [read less]

    I personally do not think the United States should get involved in foreign conflicts because the U.S itself has many issues going on and most of them …

    [read more]
    0
  • Armin from Nebraska

    I believe that the United States should not get involved in foreign conflicts because it might lead to war. If it doesn’t lead to war, the U.S. will still be held responsible for making a mess of things.

    [read less]

    I believe that the United States should not get involved in foreign conflicts because it might lead to war. If it doesn’t lead to war, the U.S. will s…

    [read more]
    0
  • Samantha from Wisconsin

    The United States should not get involved in other countries issues unless the U.S. in danger. By involving ourselves in other countries problems, we could be putting ourselves in danger. The War Revolutions says the president should not declare war on another country unless the U.S. is being put in danger. The U.S. cannot continue to get involved in every other countries issues. We do not have the money to protect every country. Although it would be nice to protect every other country, it just is not possible and could even put our country in danger.

    [read less]

    The United States should not get involved in other countries issues unless the U.S. in danger. By involving ourselves in other countries problems, we …

    [read more]
    0
  • Austin from Wisconsin

    The United States should not get involved in foreign affairs because we have our own problems that need to be solved within our country. We have homeless people and homeless veterans that need to be taken care of and we can’t do that if we keep getting involved in foreign affairs that don’t concern us.

    [read less]

    The United States should not get involved in foreign affairs because we have our own problems that need to be solved within our country. We have homel…

    [read more]
    0
  • Conrad from Wisconsin

    The United States is in debt as it is and cannot afford to get involved in a war. The cost of a war is out of the U.S. price range. Why get involved and take make other countries angry at us? If we have nothing to do with it lets not get involved.

    [read less]

    The United States is in debt as it is and cannot afford to get involved in a war. The cost of a war is out of the U.S. price range. Why get involved a…

    [read more]
    0
  • Joshua from Iowa

    The airstrike on Assad’s airbase accomplished nothing in the long-run. Simply launching 50-60 tomahawk cruise missiles does not remove chemical weapons from Syria. Trump used a petty show of force to gain a hold of the media narrative in the U.S. I support U.S intervention when it is appropriate.

    [read less]

    The airstrike on Assad’s airbase accomplished nothing in the long-run. Simply launching 50-60 tomahawk cruise missiles does not remove chemical weapon…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jaden from Oklahoma

    I vote no because if the treat is not toward the United States we shouldn’t get involved . In my opinion bombing Syria just put us in something we had no business getting into

    0
    • alejandro from Texas

      we should get involved in other countries because they are the threat,we will deal with our stuff later, we need to set an example, you should not attack your own people with gas and weapons you should be supporting your citizens and not attacking them. We our soldiers are risking their lifes to protect people that are innocent and are not involved in the war

      [read less]

      we should get involved in other countries because they are the threat,we will deal with our stuff later, we need to set an example, you should not at…

      [read more]
      0
  • Cailin from Minnesota

    No we should not. Our President is an idiot, and it will not result well. Take a look at what happened with the Vietnam war. We lost miserably when we got involved in foreign conflicts. Our President is very oblivious to things like global warming, which is indeed happening. I believe for the safety of our own people, we should keep our noses of out of other countries’ business, just as we’d appreciate if thy butted out of our issues. I believe that if we were to get involved, we’d be in a disaster, and it would be similar to the public actions of the Vietnam war.

    [read less]

    No we should not. Our President is an idiot, and it will not result well. Take a look at what happened with the Vietnam war. We lost miserably when we…

    [read more]
    0
    • Colin from Ohio

      Though i agree on the issue that the United States should not become involved in the affairs of other countries that do not affect us directly you are off on a few key points. Though I do not agree with Trump on may things your argument for lack of involvement in foreign affairs is in complete alignment with the policies of President Trump. His policy of “American First” is extremely isolationist and this is exactly what you are arguing. Evidence of unwarranted foreign conflict in the past is solid but the president completely agrees with your ideas of staying out of the affairs of other countries.

      [read less]

      Though i agree on the issue that the United States should not become involved in the affairs of other countries that do not affect us directly you are…

      [read more]
      0
    • Robert from Texas

      Coming from someone who shares your opinion on this issue and likley hold similar political views: calling the president an idiot only makes the problems this country faces worse. It only makes it harder for us all to work together and have a discussion revolving around the issues. Name calling is not strong a tool for someone who thinks through the issues

      [read less]

      Coming from someone who shares your opinion on this issue and likley hold similar political views: calling the president an idiot only makes the probl…

      [read more]
      0
  • Zach from Indiana

    When the united states was founded, we freed ourselves from a tyrannical foreign power that was out of tune with our values and meddled in our affairs. And it only makes sense for the framers of our constitution to instill this sentiment into our own constitution. Since then we have lost touch with this part of our history and began involving ourselves in other countries business and meddle in their affairs. And how has this turned out? We put corrupt puppet leaders in charge of countries like Vietnam, destabilized the middle east, and heightened conflicts to the point of nuclear war based on our ill conceived notion to be “the world police.” No outside countries got involved in our civil war so why should we involve ourselves in this Syrian civil war? In the constitution it implies that the primary role of the government is to protect the citizens of the united states. So though I may believe in having a strong military, this does not mean we should be entering into conflicts we know little about with guns blazing. Unless the foreign threat is an established threat against the United States we should not get involved because all we ever do is make it even worse. To sum up my argument in a quote I think of the hobbit ‘Sandyman’ from Lord of the Rings when he stated, “keep your nose out of trouble and no trouble will come to you.” We have pressing domestic issues we need to focus on and need not concern ourselves with the businesses of other countries. It is time to give the reigns of the world police to the U.N.

    [read less]

    When the united states was founded, we freed ourselves from a tyrannical foreign power that was out of tune with our values and meddled in our affairs…

    [read more]
    0
  • Mason from Indiana

    The US should only take part in dangerous foreign affairs if it affects our country directly. If we try to fight ever battle in the world, when do we stop, where do we draw the line?

    [read less]

    The US should only take part in dangerous foreign affairs if it affects our country directly. If we try to fight ever battle in the world, when do we…

    [read more]
    0
  • Richard from Virginia

    As I see it, the United States should not be involved in other countries’ conflicts and I’d like to tell you why. Our country spends almost as much on our military as the 9 leading nations behind us and for what reason? The United States has only been attacked twice on our soil (three times if you include the Revolutionary War) and there is little evidence that it will happen again anytime in the near future due to our extensive nuclear missile programs and global fame for our military might. The United States’ military had a budget of about 595 billion dollars in 2015, the second leading nation being China at about 146 billion. The total US budget is only about 3.8 trillion, in which the government spent over a quarter of on the military and pentagon budget. I had to do a project not too long ago where I had to evaluate the U.S. 2015 tax dollar and in my research and calculations I figured that if the U.S. spent not only as much as China, but even a little more, then we would no longer be going further into debt to other nations and would still have a military stronger than any other country. According to our founding fathers, such as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, little to no meddling in foreign affairs should be the United States’ policy and we should only need a military large enough to defend ourselves, which a lower budget would still enable. Instead of sending our nation farther into debt we should be minding our own business and deal with the problems at home before spending money in another country. I do, however, believe that maybe the United States should get involved in affairs that go against the rules set by the Geneva Convention, such as the gas attacks in Syria, but only in doing our part to aid the United Nations if they get involved, we should not be the main country trying to solve the world’s problems. In conclusion, the United States should only be involved in their own business and their duties to the United Nations in order to keep our country afloat and try to help get us out of debt.

    [read less]

    As I see it, the United States should not be involved in other countries’ conflicts and I’d like to tell you why. Our country spends almost as much on…

    [read more]
    0
  • Crystal from Arkansas

    The U.S. should respect their allies and worry about what’s going on over in the U.S. first. How are you going to try and fix another country when your busy tearing down the one you have. Sorry, I just feel like there is a time and place and this was not that time or place.

    [read less]

    The U.S. should respect their allies and worry about what’s going on over in the U.S. first. How are you going to try and fix another country when you…

    [read more]
    0
  • Kacey from Missouri

    I believe that we should get involved in foreign conflicts. However, I think there is a much better way to handle this.

    0
  • Osiri from Georgia

    The United States has no involvement in the conflict occurring in Syria, so why get invloved? The involvement in Syria will only cause the United States to waste money which will then result in the us, the people, and our posterity to suffer of any future upbringings . Even though it’s inevitable for us to get involved, (taking account of what happened in World War II) we still have a responsibility to try and fight for the safety of our country. In World War II, the United States only began with aiding the British, but ultimately joined in the war with the allied powers because of the bombing of Pearl Harbor. We can’t repeat history, but the United States went ahead and got a head start. “In order to form a more perfect union”, all of our country needs to be aligned with the that happens. Especially with suspicion of Russian involvement with the Syrians, its dangerous for the United States to be in that type of land.

    [read less]

    The United States has no involvement in the conflict occurring in Syria, so why get invloved? The involvement in Syria will only cause the United Stat…

    [read more]
    0
  • Brian from Ohio

    The United States should not feel the obligation to get involved with foreign countries business because it could cause America to go to war with more foreign countries; for example The United States is already at war with Iraq and Afghanistan, and now were going to war with North Korea because Donald Trump Nuked there country because they were killing innocent civilians. The effect from all of this is that America is going more into debt because they have to pay for the weapons and ammunition, and equipment that the military uses.

    [read less]

    The United States should not feel the obligation to get involved with foreign countries business because it could cause America to go to war with more…

    [read more]
    0
  • Miles from Arkansas

    The United States should not take part in foreign affairs in regards to warfare because as of right now the United States is too preoccupied internally with the Trump and Russia scandal much less unable to be a world power that solves world problems. Air striking Syria did not make The United States situation better because now Russia has favored Syria’s side and, not The United States’. Over 200 years ago George Washington warned the American people of the dangers that are to come from affairs with foreign relations, but the American people regardless of their past leaders passing words refused to listen. With a new president, Donald Trump is uneducated of the way to run a nation due to his choices of appointing an attorney general that had to recuse himself due to his relations with Russia, as well as making decisions that can potentially hurt the American economy. So as of right now, no the United States should stay out foreign affairs.

    [read less]

    The United States should not take part in foreign affairs in regards to warfare because as of right now the United States is too preoccupied internall…

    [read more]
    0
    • Joshua from Pennsylvania

      Miles, you say ‘as of right now’… do you mean that there is a time when we should be involved in foreign affairs? If so, you’re contradicting George Washington’s quote from his farewell address. He said that our goal is “to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a People always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence…In the execution of such a plan nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular Nations and passionate attachments for others should be excluded; and that in place of them just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated.” (http://oll.libertyfund.org/quotes/246) In other words, we should not develop enmity or favorability with other nations, and as he says later, “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 connection as possible.” (Ibid) Our goal should be to have a free trade with all nations and no permanent political alliance or hostility. This was agreed to by Thomas Jefferson, who was quoted as saying that our government should cultivate “peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none”.
      Our country should not become involved in foreign affairs at all… at least, not according to the thoughts of our founding fathers, who had much experience in such matters. If we are to base ourselves in the Constitution, we would be wise to also base ourselves in the thoughts and actions of the men who framed it.

      [read less]

      Miles, you say ‘as of right now’… do you mean that there is a time when we should be involved in foreign affairs? If so, you’re contradicting George…

      [read more]
      0
  • Hannah from Arkansas

    While it is very important for the U.S. to remain up to par with the world issues and maintain their alliances with foreign countries, why should the U.S. be expected to solve everyone’s issues? Sure, the United States is a powerful nation with the ability to influence other countries but surprisingly enough, the answer is not always violence. Alternatively, we shouldn’t stand by and watch the world shatter to pieces, but we need to be much more careful and strategic with our actions, especially on issues as fragile and sensitive as the Middle Eastern conflicts. The bombing on Syria was not an example of a strategic and careful action carried out by the U.S. It is not our duty to protect everyone, but the U.S gladly attempts to do so in many of their actions in the past and the present. Bombing Syria sets off a spark, a reason to start high conflict between the Middle East and the U.S., as if we don’t have enough of that already. Additionally, the U.S. knowingly and unacceptably launched this airstrike with the possibility of killing thousands of innocents. The United States cannot and should not continue to always be the first country to act; if they are, then the duty will always fall on the U.S.’s shoulders to make the first move. We shouldn’t take on more than we can handle, but always being looked at to act first will place stress upon the nations leaders and the nation itself. While being a leader is important, it is likely that swallowing our own pride and becoming a follower every once and awhile will help us learn more. Bombing Syria created opened up a possibility of the tables being turned. They now have a reason they can voice if they decide to bomb the U.S. The airstrike not only risked the lives of the innocents in Syria, but also of the citizens of our own nation. The U.S. does have a responsibility to protect weaker countries, but they need to do so by putting our own nation first, and acting intelligently and swiftly.

    [read less]

    While it is very important for the U.S. to remain up to par with the world issues and maintain their alliances with foreign countries, why should the …

    [read more]
    0
  • Andre from Michigan

    I believe that America shouldn’t involve ourselves in foreign conflict. It does not concern us so we should have no reason to interfere with other foreign politics. Yes at some points we do resolve other countries problems that they cant do theirselves, but thats what the United Nations are for. Every time we involve ourselves in foreign politics we kill innocent people. We aren’t keeping the peace by going over to another country and sticking our nose in their business. Let them handle it theirselves. We’re creating more issues by going over to another country. When we go over to another country and create more conflict we’re creating a new generation to hate America. When we go over to another country we’re killing kids, childrens fathers, therefore that generation of kids will grow up to hate America. In my opinion that will create more problems for America. We should just worry about our own country. We have our own issues that we should be solving. This is whyni strongly think we should stay out of other foreign politics.

    [read less]

    I believe that America shouldn’t involve ourselves in foreign conflict. It does not concern us so we should have no reason to interfere with other fo…

    [read more]
    0
  • Qua from Mississippi

    It’s nun of our business what goes on in other foreign countries…

    0
  • Jayden from Michigan

    The United States government has a history of fighting unnecessary wars for personal gain under the guise of humanitarian aid when we create humanitarian crises more. For example, when we took out Saddam Hussein, it created a vacuum that ISIS was able to thrive in. Not to mention a lot of these countries are in no position to attack the United States in any way. We are known to fight countries just for their oil or because their leaders don’t agree with us. We are hypocritical when it comes to foreign policy. We rule the world like a mob boss essentially doing what we want and threatening anyone who does what we do or calls us out for doing what we do. If a lot of our leaders were tried under international law they would be put to death because of all the atrocities we have committed from taking over leaders in South America to killing civilians in the Middle East. Unless we stop being hypocrites we should stay out of foreign conflicts

    [read less]

    The United States government has a history of fighting unnecessary wars for personal gain under the guise of humanitarian aid when we create humanitar…

    [read more]
    0
  • Tamarcus from Georgia

    The United states should not obligate itself unless the other countries try to interfere with the U.S. We should leave other countries in a position to solve there own problems and we should not fight or try to change their fate unless it affects us or our allies, and the lives of our people .Sending our people over or launching air strikes becomes a risky proposition. Especially; in a place that has nothing to do with the U.S; it simply puts too many U.S. lives in danger .

    [read less]

    The United states should not obligate itself unless the other countries try to interfere with the U.S. We should leave other countries in a position t…

    [read more]
    0
  • Cheyenne from Kansas

    I don’t agree with what Trump did because honestly i think that he caused more drama that we didn’t need and made it hard for people to believe anything he has been saying now. Who would be okay with people killing their own people.

    [read less]

    I don’t agree with what Trump did because honestly i think that he caused more drama that we didn’t need and made it hard for people to believe anythi…

    [read more]
    0
  • destiny from Kansas

    I think Trump is a nosy little boi. He does not understand that this was not a United States problem. He caused us more drama that we can’t really afford and don’t need right now. I don’t think he needed to authorize an air strike.

    [read less]

    I think Trump is a nosy little boi. He does not understand that this was not a United States problem. He caused us more drama that we can’t really aff…

    [read more]
    0
    • alejandro from Texas

      first of all we come here to debate with responsible people not with kids who dont understand why he did. he did it because the Syrian government was gassing and threatening there own people

      [read less]

      first of all we come here to debate with responsible people not with kids who dont understand why he did. he did it because the Syrian government was …

      [read more]
      0
    • Makala from Kansas

      interesting.

      0
  • Lillian from Ohio

    The united states is not obligated to get in foreign affairs simply because they are not wanted too. foreign countries did not want us to get involved before and it is just the same as today, and messing with other countries could put the united states in war which is the last thing this country needs.

    [read less]

    The united states is not obligated to get in foreign affairs simply because they are not wanted too. foreign countries did not want us to get involved…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ryan from Indiana

    While globalization is growing at an exponential rate and urbanization has secured its prominent appearance in the global community, its vital for a sustainable society to avoid foreign affairs when not directly tied in or correlated to them. Yes, it is very important to keep ties with foreign nations for trade partnerships, research and development networking, as well as cultural education on tolerance and acceptance. However, the United States should not be heavily involved in foreign conflicts in general because it can cause strained relationships that would have remained healthy in a neutral standpoint, as well as the US Economy does not have the economic stability currently to focus our resources on such matters. With the social security system being strained and current conservative cutbacks on money to try and decrease the national deficit, the tax dollars pouring in that will be used should in theory be utilized in ways that most directly impact those who provide the taxes. Yet since so much tax revenue is being shifted to focus on foreign conflicts, repercussions are able to be seen throughout the United States Communities. For example, a 75 million dollar small starts grant was rewarded to the city of Indianapolis in order to finally establish a grid-based mass transit system in the metropolis, yet because of this shift in the national budget, its very plausible this grant will not move forward under the Trump administration and the project will be delayed over 3 years. So many domestic cases such as this, withdrawing benefits from Americans, will occur when focusing taxpayer money on foreign conflicts where most citizens will not reap a direct benefit. It is vital to keep the sustainability of our nation’s cohesion to focus the small expenditure of money our government has on domestic projects, organizations, and services, not foreign conflicts.

    [read less]

    While globalization is growing at an exponential rate and urbanization has secured its prominent appearance in the global community, its vital for a …

    [read more]
    0
  • Emma from Mississippi

    While there are certain conflicts that call for U.S. intervention, Syria is not a place that the United States should be involved in…..yet. If the United States continues to be the first country to intervene when foreign conflict arises, it puts us in an endless cycle of asking the question “What is the standard for getting involved in foreign conflicts?” Since the U.S. has a long history of using military force to combat global issues, it gives other countries no reason to intercede; the smartest thing to do is to join together with other concerned countries and tackle this issue internationally. Assad’s killing of innocent citizens using gas was terrible; roughly 80 innocent people were killed….but we have to ask the question “Why intervene in a foreign country and possibly jumpstart a nuclear war, when we have the same number of people getting killed in our own country every month?” In Chicago, gang warfare is the cause of daily innocent deaths–why aren’t we seizing their guns? Concentrating our forces to fight terrorism within our own country? Because the weapons being used are not nuclear? It is very obvious that the corruptness in Syria has got to be stopped, but the U.S. has no right to launch airstrikes without heavy consideration and consultation with other countries. This is a global issue that has the potential to turn into war. I believe that instead of sending airstrikes that will inevitably end up harming innocent people, we should take the advice of Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, who proposed putting Syria’s chemical weapons under international control and then destroying them. I agree that the U.S. has a humanitarian duty to protect innocent lives around the world, but the methods we choose to do so with and the time we take carefully planning our course of action is very, very important.

    [read less]

    While there are certain conflicts that call for U.S. intervention, Syria is not a place that the United States should be involved in…..yet. If the …

    [read more]
    0
  • Elizabeth from Texas

    Yes, the United States is as some people put it the police of the world. However, there are many civilians that are innocent and have no protection and no protocol to attacks.There is already an estimate of 400,000 death including from infants to elderly on the attacks already. Furthermore, it is clear that they do not need to be attacked ,but helped. What America should do is give medical help and help them be establish in a safe place.

    [read less]

    Yes, the United States is as some people put it the police of the world. However, there are many civilians that are innocent and have no protection an…

    [read more]
    0
  • Haley from Ohio

    No we shouldn’t, we should stay out of foreign affairs until we solve our own problems such as debt and other things.

    0
  • Lindsey from Illinois

    The United States should not involve themselves in wars they have nothing to do with. We are under no legal or moral obligation to provide aid to these countries, especially those who aren’t allied with us. The Constitution does not declare that the United States needs to play the role of a hero. The Preamble states that we should provide for the common defense and general Welfare of our citizens, not the citizens of other countries. Not only that, but the United States is $19 Trillion in debt and cannot afford to fight other countries’ wars.

    [read less]

    The United States should not involve themselves in wars they have nothing to do with. We are under no legal or moral obligation to provide aid to the…

    [read more]
    0
  • Anthony Ethan from Illinois

    I feel like we should focus more on our own country. We’re in national debt and should focus on that rather than spending money on other countries problems.

    0
  • Nolan from Michigan

    No. The US should not get involved in foreign conflicts. The US has many other issues on our land that we need to take care of before we try and solve everyone else’s. Some of the many problems we need to solve are infrastructure, unemployment, and crime rates. Donald trump when he was campaigning for president, ran as a isolationist. He has been in office less than 100 days and has already been involved with North Korea, Russia, China, and Syria. What happened to all the “promises” that Trump made when he was campaigning. Trump said he was going to, get rid of 11 million immigrants, get rid of Obamacare and replace it with something great, rebuild the old infrastructure, strengthen the military, and grow the nations economy. These are just a few of the many promises that Trump made while running for president. They all have one thing in common. They all take place in the US. So far he has done nothing to solve any of these problems. Trump is in the new almost every day if not every day. But how many times has he been in the news for foreign conflicts as oppose to making progress on these promises that he made. The US needs to stop trying to be the worlds Superman and focus on our problems before trying to fix others.

    [read less]

    No. The US should not get involved in foreign conflicts. The US has many other issues on our land that we need to take care of before we try and solve…

    [read more]
    0
  • Chloe from Michigan

    I feel like instead of getting involved with other countries problems and worrying about countries that oppose little to no threat to us, we should worry about ourselves and stick to our own matters. The United States has many issues within already and getting involved with foreign conflicts will only add to the list. I feel as though we shouldn’t get involved unless we absolutely have to.

    [read less]

    I feel like instead of getting involved with other countries problems and worrying about countries that oppose little to no threat to us, we should wo…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jalen from Michigan

    No, The United States has problems they should be fixing, but no they are still bothering other countries and getting involved in their issues. I don’t think we should be involved with any countries that don’t do anything but cause trouble or conflict. I don’t understand the point, all that this will do is outbreak into a war

    [read less]

    No, The United States has problems they should be fixing, but no they are still bothering other countries and getting involved in their issues. I don’…

    [read more]
    0
  • hunter from Michigan

    No, because its pointless to fight wars we dont need to fight and lose soldiers.

    0
  • Zackary from Florida

    No, the United States should not have launched an airstrike in Syria. These airstrikes have the possibility to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people. The chemical warfare being used inside of Syria is not righteous in itself, but because it emotionally moves the president does not mean it is a viable option to launch missile strikes in the country. Not only this, but the United States has many other military priorities at hand right now. Between North Korea and the fight against terror in the middle east, our country is spreading it’s resources too thin for a fight. Our troops are too spread out to stop an at home attack from a foreign country. Not only this, but by giving the possibility of killing those we are trying to save, we are making it clear this is less about foreign aid, and more about emotional response. We run the ever real risk of starting a war with not only Syria, but many places in Asia such as North Korea, Japan, and China. Not only this, but the airstrikes we already launched killed nine Russian soldiers, making our already thin relationship with Russia even thinner. These foreign aid attempts are not only harming the people we are trying to help, but putting our own people at risk as well. This lack of actual aid causes the constitution to disagree with the emotional actions of the President, and the risk being posed to Americans causes me to disagree with the President.

    [read less]

    No, the United States should not have launched an airstrike in Syria. These airstrikes have the possibility to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent …

    [read more]
    0
    • Melanie from Illinois

      Hundreds of thousands of innocent people were not killed in airstrike launched on Syria. Th United States contacted Russia and told them they were going to launch a strike on a Syrian military base. We did this because the President’s intent was not to kill innocent citizens but send a message to the government of Syria and the world that we now have a President that is not going to play games. Once Russia heard we were planning on attacking Syria they had time to get out. They were warned and didn’t listen to our warnings. We damaged planes and Syria’s artillery but not enough to cause permanent damage. It was enough to send a message that the United States i still strong and our military is ready for whatever the world throws at us.

      [read less]

      Hundreds of thousands of innocent people were not killed in airstrike launched on Syria. Th United States contacted Russia and told them they were goi…

      [read more]
      0
  • Rachel from Texas

    The United States should not be involved in foreign conflicts because it simply is getting worse with more involvement. It’s kind of like a fight with added drama that is unnecessary. The US should stay out of it and help ourselves first and so that we also do not create any conflict with other countries.

    [read less]

    The United States should not be involved in foreign conflicts because it simply is getting worse with more involvement. It’s kind of like a fight with…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ansh from Tennessee

    For all my yes commentators I have to ask you as Americans to look in the mirror and tell me how is it just for us to tell everyone how to live their life.We were at our best when American was an isolationist. To the world, we stand on a high ground and make fun of them while as a society while ignoring our own faults. We create matters worst whenever we intervene, and I am not saying we should everything pass by. I believe in my opinion we together need to make sure if it is worth the risk.

    [read less]

    For all my yes commentators I have to ask you as Americans to look in the mirror and tell me how is it just for us to tell everyone how to live their…

    [read more]
    0
    • Denis from North Carolina

      Honestly, I really like the argument that you pose against foreign intervention (Coming from someone who voted yes). But, I wouldn’t necessarily say that we, or other countries, create matters worse whenever we/they intervene. To bring up an example, French intervention in the Revolutionary War was a key aspect as to why we defeated the tyrannical British Empire and became an established, independent nation. If it weren’t for the French to send soldiers and equipment our way, we could well have been fighting a losing battle. However, thanks to intervention from abroad, we ended up succeeding and defeating Britain in the war.

      [read less]

      Honestly, I really like the argument that you pose against foreign intervention (Coming from someone who voted yes). But, I wouldn’t necessarily say t…

      [read more]
      0
  • Nicole from Kansas

    No, because we never know if it would truly help foreign countries. In many instances past and present, America’s “help” has hurt more foreign countries than aid. We truly do not know the circumstances and welfare of other countries. However, we cannot completely be secluded from the world. If a situation involves the health, safety, and welfare of the American people, it is necessary to interfere and become involved in foreign affairs. It is the duty of the American government to protect its citizens, and becoming involved in foreign affairs can be dangerous, because it can essentially harm the American people. If we approach an issue, and it is not the appropriate or welcomed decision, the result could be fatal and ultimately lead to war. While foreign countries have problems, there are numerous problems in America itself. Issues such as family relations, racism, education, employment, debt, ect. It is our responsibility to be a prosperous nation and to continue to be one. We need to help ourselves be successful, before we help and lead other countries towards prosperity.

    [read less]

    No, because we never know if it would truly help foreign countries. In many instances past and present, America’s “help” has hurt more foreign countri…

    [read more]
    0
  • Thendral from New Jersey

    I say no because Trump’s decision to launch those missiles was not thought through. Now that he has done this, what happens next? Attacking Syria was like attacking Russia, and we’re quite lucky that Assad hasn’t sent out his next wave of chemical weapons and that Russia hasn’t done more than take down our air safety zones. If the United States continues headlong into its fights this way, not learning from its mistakes, then history is doomed to repeat itself because Afghanistan and Iraq showed the Western world that the Middle East operated differently and it wasn’t up to the United States to charge in and thrust democracy on these people.

    [read less]

    I say no because Trump’s decision to launch those missiles was not thought through. Now that he has done this, what happens next? Attacking Syria was …

    [read more]
    0
    • emmanuel from Texas

      yes I agree it wasn’t thought through we do not know what can happen, Russia are allies with Syria and that means we have more in our hands than we can take, all we can do now is wait and see what happens

      [read less]

      yes I agree it wasn’t thought through we do not know what can happen, Russia are allies with Syria and that means we have more in our hands than we ca…

      [read more]
      0
  • Brandon from California

    Should the United States be involved in foreign conflicts? Absolutely not. However, the context and framing of this question must first be analyzed and it is extremely important to understand the context of this question to provide a complete answer. Donald Trump had just attacked Syria because of a chemical attack by Assad on his own citizens. However, there is zero hard evidence that Assad actually committed such a crime. There has been zero evidence provided to the UN or the public. Thinking about this logically, Assad has been winning the civil war against the rebels (also known as ISIS, which is financially backed by Saudi Arabia, the United States’ allies). Why would he gas his own people? Why would he commit such a crime that would encourage other foreign nations to potentially take action against him? It makes absolutely zero sense for Assad to gas his own civilians, when in reality, ISIS could very much had be the ones who committed the attack. Were we not to believe that Assad committed this attack, this very question would likely not have been proposed for us to answer.
    Moving on, this is important information to dwell on because this has not been the first time that the United States has taken a similar approach. The United States lied about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, which would later result in the war and a death of over a million people and at least 200,000 civilians. We know that by eliminating Saddam Hussein, we had destabilized the region, plummeted the country into utter complete chaos, and opening up a power vacuum that enabled Islamic extremists to gain a foothold and establish authority. Even though Saddam Hussein was a horrible dictator, he was a powerful figure that killed terrorists and Islamic extremists. With him gone, we have ended up in a worse situation with more terrorists, more slain civilians, a waste in trillions of dollars, slain Americans, and a much more anti-American attitude by the natives of the region. From this very onset, we need to realize that the American government and foreign policy does not, in fact, do things with the best intentions in mind, as many of these decisions are motivated by fabricated reasons and evidence that is swallowed up by mainstream, corporate media. These interventions have lead to an overall worse state of affairs, and Trump is threatening to repeat history again in Syria.
    Moving onto the original question, what if Assad actually did commit that attack on his civilians, should the United States intervene? Actually, let us rephrase that question appropriately. Does the United States have the RIGHT to invade a SOVEREIGN nation over an internal conflict? And that answer is no. It is not the duty of the United States, or any country, to intervene in internal conflicts of other countries. The reason that is is that the United States would have the ability to have certain interests dominate the politics of that region without the best interests of the people in mind and potentially exploiting them once authority has been usurped. The United States has done this multiple times removing democratically elected leaders and propping up a dictator to best serve American trade interests, like Venezuela. This imperialistic regime change is a violation of international law, but clearly there is nothing in the world that has stopped or is going to stop the United States military from doing whatever it wants in terms of foreign policy.
    There is a reason we have the United Nations. Should such a crime like a genocide or a crime happen, it is up to the United Nations to take a collective approach to prevent this from happening, not the United States alone. The United States should only use the military for defense and national security. In no way does interventions and attacking Syria serve those functions at all.
    Knowing this, we should also know more context because the actual facts are crucial in determining how American foreign policy should really be modified. As it stands right now, the United States spends $600 billion per year on the military, which is set to increase. Military spending takes up over 50% of federal discretionary spending. To keep in mind, welfare, education, and science and technology total 9%. The United States military is larger than the next 7 nations’ militaries, combined, and that is just a conservative figure. The United States military is over-bloated, and there is no force in the world, save nuclear weapons, that poses any threat at all to American national security, not ISIS, not Al Qaeda, not Syria, not even Russia, meaning that the United States military has been committing illegal, immoral, unethical interventions for the sake of financial gain with no gain for the American people for decades.
    In it’s entirety, any more regime change, interventions, and resulting increased and wasteful military spending will almost always destabilize the regions that are affected and also happen to be illegal under international law. Given appropriate historical context as well as a philosophical point of view, United States’ regime changes and interventions should not be done except for the case of defense and the defense of allies. Rather, the United States government needs to focus on our own internal issues, such as a disappearing middle class, income inequality, crumbling infrastructure, climate change, healthcare reform, and tax reform, as all of these issues are much more impactful on the average American than foreign wars, which only serve to benefit defense contractors and feed the military industrial context.

    [read less]

    Should the United States be involved in foreign conflicts? Absolutely not. However, the context and framing of this question must first be analyzed an…

    [read more]
    0
  • Rebecca from Texas

    I am of the opinion that America should not get involved in every conflict, but there are some where I can see us feeling the need to get involved. We just have to pick our battles based on how worth it the enterprise is. For example, if we want to side with one country in a conflict that has nothing to do with anything related to America, trade or otherwise, we should not get involved. We might get a new trading partner, but 1) that’s not 100% guaranteed and 2) it is a waste of resources we might not be able to part with easily and a waste of lives. On the other hand, if a country was threatening to do something as extreme as nuke a rival nation, then yes, get involved and at least disarm the first country because the results of doing otherwise would probably affect several countries.

    [read less]

    I am of the opinion that America should not get involved in every conflict, but there are some where I can see us feeling the need to get involved. W…

    [read more]
    0
  • Fredrickia from Texas

    I say No because although we are providing aid to countries who needed, especially innocent civilians, we are putting the people in the U.S at risk as well. What if Syria tries to retaliate and use an air missile to attack us, and kill 20% of the American armed forces or innocent civilians. This can lead to World War 3, no one wants that!

    [read less]

    I say No because although we are providing aid to countries who needed, especially innocent civilians, we are putting the people in the U.S at risk as…

    [read more]
    0
  • Andy from California

    We have utilized the excuse of getting involved in foreign wars to in reality further our imperialistic goals, while lying to the local people that we’re there to “help”. Our economy cannot sustain the unregulated burden of military spending, and we do not owe any country the blood of our own soldiers. Also, when has “helping” actually worked? Vietnam is now communist, Afghanistan is a total mess, with ISIS on the loose, Iraq is a quagmire, Libya is an anarchist state, and Syria is a humanitarian disaster. Clearly, we aren’t even very good at what we claim we are trying to do. Stop investing so much in foreign aid and military spending, and instead focus the money towards us, the American citizens, and improve the schools, roads, infrastructure, healthcare, and the government.

    [read less]

    We have utilized the excuse of getting involved in foreign wars to in reality further our imperialistic goals, while lying to the local people that we…

    [read more]
    0
  • Allison from Vermont

    The Unites States has a military presence in every corner of the planet, and although I don’t believe the US is morally or ethically superior to other governing bodies,it’s very mobile and powerful army which is highly effective in intimidation and destruction. I think that governing through fear and intimidation is inevitably going to create more violence and hatred. If our goal is peace we need to act peacefully.

    [read less]

    The Unites States has a military presence in every corner of the planet, and although I don’t believe the US is morally or ethically superior to other…

    [read more]
    0
    • Michael from Ohio

      What will America do when the foreign conflicts take a negative turn and that foreign country needs our help, act peacefully and get more people killed because America wants to play Mr.Nice Guy?

      [read less]

      What will America do when the foreign conflicts take a negative turn and that foreign country needs our help, act peacefully and get more people kille…

      [read more]
      0
    • Andrew from Ohio

      I do not believe that the goal of these conflicts is to “govern through fear and intimidation” entirely, but instead is a way of preventing further conflicts that can arise if threats become too out of hand. We do not want to wait for a Pearl Harbor incident to happen again in order for us to join a conflict. The goal is saving American lives (and then lives of other people) through early action. While it may be violent, it results in less losses of lives if you attempt to stop attacks than if you sit back waiting for one to happen so that you can begin a conflict.

      [read less]

      I do not believe that the goal of these conflicts is to “govern through fear and intimidation” entirely, but instead is a way of preventing furthe…

      [read more]
      0
  • Kenneth from Indiana

    The United States is not the World Police. Our job is not to be the mothers and fathers of the entire world. Every time that we get involved in other countries’ business and foreign affairs, we cause more problems than there were to begin with. We fund terror in order to stop terror which only creates more terror.

    [read less]

    The United States is not the World Police. Our job is not to be the mothers and fathers of the entire world. Every time that we get involved in other …

    [read more]
    -1
  • Ourmani from Pennsylvania

    I do not think they should. Yes they help them and aid them with many things. It helps to know that people around the world are helping others but in a way that is not necessary we should have freedom of speech and we don’t. It is hard to know that people are not in a safe place in the “united” states of America. We have ruined trust with many different countries.

    [read less]

    I do not think they should. Yes they help them and aid them with many things. It helps to know that people around the world are helping others but in …

    [read more]
    -1
  • Rachel from Maryland

    No we shouldn’t, as a country we should stay out of foreign affairs until the country solves its own problems such as debt and other things, America has its own problems how can we fix our problems when we are too worried about other countries problems.

    [read less]

    No we shouldn’t, as a country we should stay out of foreign affairs until the country solves its own problems such as debt and other things, America h…

    [read more]
    -1
    • Andrew from Ohio

      While I agree with our position that we should attempt to solve our own problems, I would argue that in some aspects it is necessary to become involved in conflicts in order to protect our people. Excessive combat does not allow us to grow and prosper at all, but in order to make sure that some foreign conflicts do not come to our front door, we must work against threats and aid where we can. This promotes not only the protection of our people, but also the protection of others and the rise of allies which can allow for military and trade agreements, stimulating progress in the United States.

      [read less]

      While I agree with our position that we should attempt to solve our own problems, I would argue that in some aspects it is necessary to become involve…

      [read more]
      0
  • Dylan from Nebraska

    I feel that we need to be very careful when we get involved in the business of other countries. We need to focus on the matters in our own country. We would not let others come to our country and force their policies on us. I think that it is important to be aware of what other countries are doing, and to provide assistance when we can only after our kids our feed, our veterans have proper care, and everyone can afford medical treatment.

    [read less]

    I feel that we need to be very careful when we get involved in the business of other countries. We need to focus on the matters in our own country. We…

    [read more]
    -1
  • Nicolas from Kentucky

    The United States in the beginning was a strong country that tried to stay away from getting involved in other countries that don’t involve us like a war between France in Britain. So if there is a war in the Middle East where the government is ignoring the UN declaration of Human Rights, then we are obligated to become involve, but if it is a foreign conflict like try to combat communism in Vietnam where the United States had no business because no United State citizens were in Vietnam, we had no intelligible reason for being in Vietnam. We need to pick our battles. There are certain things you can not fight and we need to learn where to draw that line.

    [read less]

    The United States in the beginning was a strong country that tried to stay away from getting involved in other countries that don’t involve us like a …

    [read more]
    -1
    • Nicolas from Kentucky

      Denis you seem to be missing the point of what I was trying to say. When you bring up World War II that was I time when I believe that the United States should have gotten involved sooner, like I said above, “…if there is a war…where the government is ignoring the UN declaration of Human Rights then we are obligated to become involved.” Nazi Germany is a perfect example of the government i am telling you about, so is the current Syrian government. We still need to learn where to draw a line like at Vietnam as i previously explained above.

      [read less]

      Denis you seem to be missing the point of what I was trying to say. When you bring up World War II that was I time when I believe that the United Stat…

      [read more]
      0
    • Ansh from Tennessee

      Denis, US didn’t go to Europe to liberate them. The only reason US got involved was the attack on Pearl Harbor. US wanted to avoid going into the war and tried its best to stay out of the battles till Pearl Harbor. Once Japanese attacked us we retaliated against the Axis power. To the fact, we hold FDR as one of the great presidents had signed Executive Order 9066 ordering all Japanese-Americans to evacuate the West Coast. This resulted in the relocation of approximately 120,000 people, many of whom were American citizens, to one of 10 internment camps located across the country.

      [read less]

      Denis, US didn’t go to Europe to liberate them. The only reason US got involved was the attack on Pearl Harbor. US wanted to avoid going into the war …

      [read more]
      0
    • Denis from North Carolina

      Using that philosophy though, in a sense that would mean that “The U.S. shouldn’t have been involved in WW2 and liberated concentration camps since no U.S. citizens were in the camps and it was none of our business”

      [read less]

      Using that philosophy though, in a sense that would mean that “The U.S. shouldn’t have been involved in WW2 and liberated concentration camps since no…

      [read more]
      0
  • Hannah from Texas

    The US should not meddle in foreign politics simply because it does not concern them.

    -12