On May 25, North Korea conducted another nuclear test, provoking the condemnation of the U.S. and many other nations. Click here to read an article about this increasingly tense international dilemma, and then respond to one or more of the following questions:
How should the United States respond to the aggressive behavior of North Korea? Consider one of the following options, or come up with your own:
1) The U.S. should take whatever UNILATERAL (look it up) action it deems necessary to protect its national interests, including the option of military response. As the world's policeman, it is up to us to shoulder the burden in order to solve this problem.
2) The U.S. should consult with the nations of the world to formulate a MULTILATERAL (look it up) plan of action in which the nations of the world make a decision and contribute financially, militarily, etc., to the solution, which might involve economic sanctions, military action or other options.
3) The U.S. should focus on our own problems and security needs and stop trying to solve the problems of the rest of the world. This may mean abandoning some of our alliances with other nations.
4) The U.S. should provide foreign aid to North Korea in the form of food for its people and economic assistance to draw it out of its isolation and encourage it to join with the peace-loving countries of the world.
8 comments:
Multilateral, for sure. It would avoid other multi-national American-despise spurring actions. We've been placed on a global stage and need to realize that means we're going to have to answer to other nations. I realize it might come between answering to the leader of another country or an American widower, but in terms of our position in the world we need to go into a multi-national stance.
However, most multilateral discussions (UN) aren't going to brilliantly, Russia is being a tad insubbordinate, and I think this might be because they don't feel as threatened. I think the UN (Russia) needs to recognize the threat thats been imposed upon their neighbors (Western Europe) as well as the USA. We're already in high alert (ever since yesterday- 30 May- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8074937.stm).
US leaders in the past have often taken the view that protecting Americans as fully and quickly as possible is MOST important.... I think Obama realizes the major importance of international repsect of power and how to avoid upsetting the world and turning them against America.
We don't want to do something to protect us from one nation and in doing so turn several others against us!
The U.S. should focus on our own problems and security needs and stop trying to solve the problems of the rest of the world. I mean, honestly, we our in a bit of a mess right now and all we will do by worrying about other countries is make it worse. I know that our country is the big dog in Society and thats cool, but the other nations need to realize that we have priorites that we need to tend to first.
After our economy starts to climb out of the hole its in, then I think that we should have a meeting with others world leaders about the best way to take care of North Korea. We don't want to start World War III with them, but we also don't want them doing something stupid to endanger us and our families.
And lastly, Emily said that Obama is well aware of the Worldwide respect that other nations have for us and I agree 100%, but with that respect, they need to realize that we have priorites that come before fixing thir problems. I honestly think they'd understand. It isn't like we'd leave them hanging if they told us they had things they needed to tend to before helping us. We'd say "Sure! Do what you gotta do"
I just feel that we spend to much time worrying about what everyone else thinks and needs. For once, I think its time for the Government to take control of the United States and turn our economy around.
While I agree with focusing on our nations own problems we still need to put up some kind of precaution against possible war against Northern Korea.
In my opinion, the United States is not at its prime. In the past, we have acted as caregivers to other nations and countries. I do not mean to imply that was a bad thing but for now the United States is the one in trouble. The future is bleak and if President Obama (emphasis on PRESIDENT) does not stop worrying solely about problems outside the United States, then I fear we are going to go down the drain completely. We are going to have to shape up, the United States is a big consumer and we help support the rest of the world through buying their products. When our economy crashes so does theirs so now I must ask you this, how are we going to support other countries if we cannot first support ourselves? How are we going to protect Japan, South Korea, or even ourselves, if we do not have the means to? How are we going to make good on our promises of punishment and enforcement of sanctions towards North Korea if we simply cannot?
There are more important things than what is happening overseas in the long-run. Once upon a time, other countries learned to rely on the United States to back them up, in time of natural disaster, and war declarations but now they need to learn to handle things on their own. There is nothing wrong with allying ourselves but for now we cannot carry the United States and other countries at once.
I would ask no one, not the United States or Japan or South Korea to make a promise they cannot keep and the U.S. will soon not be able to make good on its treaties and help its allies the way things are going. A dwindling economy, foreign invasion by neighbors close to home and regular problems that arise everyday need the full attention of our leader and if he is too busy mucking up other countries how is he going to provide for this one?
The U.S. should focus on our own problems and safety measures. All security could use an improvement, this is a recession and other countries have recognized that. Foreigners realize this is the time to strike, invade the United States. With the world in a mess, security for your own borders is going to be most important. Perhaps that is why North Korea is being so rebellious, it sees the United States is losing power. We can’t jump the gun at every little incident that comes up, and (believe it or not) there are other superpowers that are capable of handling the situation just as well as the United States, maybe even better. There is a United Nations for a reason, you know. There are two superpowers right there next to North Korea as well, Japan and China.
The U.S. is going to have to stop playing “Super Hero” for other countries for a bit, put away the cape and stop trying to rescue the rest of the world. What good is a powerless Superman? While this may mean ‘abandoning some of our alliances with other nations’ it also means strengthening the United States so we can rise when it’s time to make a stand like we’re so famous for. We’re going to have to compromise and in this dog-eat-dog world it will sure be worth it in the end.
So I ask you as a citizen of the United States, how are we going to respond to these threats and aggressive behavior without solving our very own problems first? How are we going to fund a retaliation and possible war, with our economy dwindling as it is, and send wave after wave of troops to protect another and our own fading nation? Where’s the money coming from to supply the war’s ammunition? Certainly not from our allies.
Focus on ourselves first, then run and play savior for the people later.
I agree with brady. There are plenty of problems in the united states already. We should work on rebuilding our economy and get the people's jobs and lives back before we go mess up some other country. We've done that plenty of times already. The fact that other countrys are testing nuclear weapons dosn't bother me too much. Why should we care? We already have the biggest nuclear arsenal in the world. I think our taxes going into the military budget could be spent in a much more constructive way, like getting rid of poverty in the U.S.
Wow! You guys have some strong opinions on this topic. That's good! I am enjoying reading your comments.
I do want to provide a few suggestions for this discussion, however. First, make sure you substantiate your position! For example, Emily stated that "Russia is being a tad insubordinate" but didn't really provide an explanation or evidence for HOW Russia is being insubordinate. Then the question becomes, insubordinate to whom? The U.S.? The United Nations? Does that imply that Russia is supposed to be subordinate to somebody?
Another suggestion is to be careful of using highly charged words like "stupid" (Brady's reference to what the North Koreans might do) or the phrase "mucking up" in reference to what President Obama is doing to other countries. When you use these terms, your argument loses its objectivity and makes people suspicious of the legitimate merits of your case.
Also, be clear and precise in your wording. I'm not at all sure who the "American widower" is or what "multi-national American-despise spurring actions" are in Emily's first paragraph, for example.
Finally, try to avoid sweeping generalizations that diminish the effectiveness of your argument. When Jessica writes that President Obama needs to "stop worrying solely about problems outside the United States", the word solely jumps out at me as inaccurate, given the president's immediate focus upon his inauguration on passing the economic stimulus package, reforming American healthcare, and other domestic issues.
Having said all that, I'm delighted that you guys are so interested in your country's foreign policy. Carry on!
I agree with Emily. As North Korea starts making threats, the other nations of the world need to sit down and formulate a plan on how to either “please” them in some way or to take military response to stop them from for going these deadly threats.
From what I know about this issue, (Dad), North Korea won’t attack us because we will stop sending over aid (food, water, etc..) They need the supplies to survive. Also many countries have already banned together saying that they will try to shoot down any missiles that are fired toward the U.S. or any other country. Japan, Russia, and numerous others have agreed to help shoot down these missiles.
Japan-
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Japan_Ready_To_Shoot_Down_North_Korea_Missile_If_Required_999.html
Russia –
http://www.defencetalk.com/russia-able-to-shoot-down-north-korean-missiles-air-force-17577/
Overall, I think for now the world is safe from these nuclear missiles as long as the nations work together to form plans to stop these missiles from being launched, and as long as we stop giving them supplies.
I'm going to side with Emily here. Yeah we are in a bit of a stitch with our own problems but we can't disregard our responsibility. Not only are we known to be the police of the world but we cannot ditch our allies (aka japan, south Korea) who rely on our support to keep WWIII from taking place. Nuke testing is very serious business, so turn our backs and pretend it's not happening...juvinile. A mulitlateral plan is much needed. United we stand, divided we fall. With pressure from the UN and even N. Koreas allies...cough cough Russia... we can avoid disaster and further complications. Hopefully it would turn for the best and change the isolationist N. Korea into a more open society.
-Cory YArrington
Sorry for the confusion, at the time of the post, Russia was refusing talks with N. Korea and, later on (4 days after my post), Russia was persuaded to make an open condemnation; which prior to my post, they were hesitating to give.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8066861.stm
The term "American widower" can be used and interpreted as symbolism, for all those who will be lost in foreign service; which is the price a country has to pay for keeping up international facade.
Post a Comment