Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasSP
It's the fact that the UN and countries involved continually demand US involvement (specifically our money). It's not a stereotype but a reality.
I am fine with the US staying out of other peoples business when it does not directly affect us, I just want others to stop asking for aid and support as well.
I also have family in Australia and do not gather from them that the entire consensus is so anti US and how we operate as suggested. This is from native Australians and others who moved there from here.
People like to make remarks against the US with wide brush strokes in regards to opinions about us and so forth with out evidence to back this up. Same thing in regards to China where I have business contacts, friends, and relatives. The way the Chinese government operates in regards to it's relationship with the US does not reflect the populous by large.
I just can't help but find it ironic how some of the most vocal anti US rhetoric comes from countries who a) have gained much from us and b) have some pretty major issues of their own to reconcile.
The old line in the Middle East referencing our relationship with Israel as the issue causing us so much grief is rather dishonest at best. The Middle East as I stated earlier has been having issues with the world long before Israel was made a new state in the last century and certainly long before the US even existed.
The fact is the can't even get along with themselves at the smallest level.
It's fine with me to move out of these areas completely. We will protect our interests and borders and when we have a perceived threat we deal with it and move on. After all, we don't need to set up governments for other nations, they can figure it out on there own.
Of course mark my words what will happen when we move our military out of foreign countries completely, because only then will the real rhetoric begin.
|
Chances are we'll never agree on much of this & I don't mind if we don't, it's good to have varied opinions
Let me make a few points though;
The single biggest 'peace keeping' expense the US has had to deal with recently is the Iraq War. The US ignored the UN & assembled the "coalition of the willing" & pushed on regardless...nobody was demanding this in the way you are implying. Yes the coalition was 'willing' but it's reasonable to assume smaller countries were both supporting an ally (US) + following the US as a strategic move for future protection from the US should they need it. Additionally, if you consider many of the grumblings listed here relate to the cost of 'peace keeping' then that can't be attributed solely to the US trying to support the UN
The UN does engage peace keeping forces (generally speaking) to support UN efforts. This is done at a largely sustainable level by the US like many other UN countries. If costs attributed to the UN are 'means tested' I suspect the US may not always be as hardly done by as many might think. The US is a very, very wealthy country