Thread: US involvement in foreign affairs

I was browsing though Gallup and discovered this poll and wondered how the members of PF would vote.

Growing Minority Wants Minimal U.S. Role in World Affairs

PRINCETON, NJ -- By a 2-to-1 margin, 66% to 32%, Americans would prefer that the United States be a major rather than a minor player on the world stage in trying to solve international problems. Support for the United States' having a leading or major role in this has diminished over the past two years, falling from 75% in 2009, while the percentage favoring a more isolationist stance has increased from 23%

The results are from Gallup's annual World Affairs survey, conducted Feb. 2-5. The 66% favoring an active role for the United States consists of 16% saying the country should take the leading role in world affairs and 50% saying it should play a major role. Just 7% say the U.S. should not be involved, while 25% would prefer a minor role for it.

So, would you prefer the US take a leading, major, minor or no role in foreign affairs?

I'd say minor. We have enough problems of our own to solve. It's much easier to bitch about your neighbor's yard than rake your own...

Originally Posted by Dark Lion

Little to no role at all. We should only be involved in international affairs that effect us and our prosperity

True, but the argument could be made that the free flow of oil in the ME does affect us and our prosperity, justifying our military presence. I don't feel that way, but many do.

I voted for "Major role"

Little a role as possible. We can still operate in issues that demand the attention of the international community, but on the whole, we should stick to our own neck of the woods. That means closing down our bases abroad, and cutting our military budget by over 50%.

Originally Posted by Dark Lion

Becoming energy independent, preferably with a renewable source, would solve that dilemma.

yup. Imagine if all the time and resources Americans have spent keeping the Middle-eastern oil flowing was instead invested into nation building the USA..

As the Japanese tsunami disaster exemplifies, it's a global economy. We can't expect to pull completely back to our own shores and expect to maintain the same standard of living. It's impossible. What we should do is abhor the concept of "unilateralism", work well with our trade and military partners to maintain world peace and, generally, act as a good, albeit rich, neighbor when dealing with foreign affairs. Of course this cuts both ways and it does.

Summary Box: Fear of Japan slowdown rattles market - BusinessWeek

Concerns about the economic impact of the massive earthquake and tsunami in Japan, the world's third-largest economy, led to a broad sell-off in the stock market on Monday. Nine of the ten sectors in the S&P index fell.

UTILITIES FALL: Utilities companies fell 1.4 percent, the most of any group in the S&P index, as explosions at Japanese nuclear reactors in the wake of the disaster dimmed prospects for the nuclear energy industry.

THE INDEXES: The Dow lost 51.24 to close at 11,993.16. The S&P 500 fell 7.89 to close at 1,296.39. The Nasdaq composite dipped 14.64 to 2,700.97.