Tuesday, February 21, 2012

The World's Policeman

I have often heard it said, most recently by congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul, that the US should not be the policeman of the world.  That is just conventional nonsense.  It is a platitude people say because they've heard it and not heard it contradicted. A moment's thought shows how preposterously wrong it is. Our cities are often plenty dangerous with policemen.  Imagine urban life without them.

That is what the life of nations would be like were it not for a world policeman.

Except for Antarctica and the oceans, the whole surface of the earth is under some government or other.  And every one of those governments at least in theory attempts to suppress crime and other anti-social behavior.  But among the governments themselves there is no government, no one to suppress crime and anti-social behavior of governments.  History has shown that governments have been the worst malefactors, committing crimes and monstrosities that reduce the worst efforts of the Tony Sopranos and street corner muggers of the world to insignificance by comparison.

To deal with this lack of a world order there are only the US and the UN.  The UN is more than just useless - it is part of the problem.  That leaves the US.  Without the US there would be even more anarchy and violence than there is now.

And please don't reply by claiming that the US is responsible for most of the violence.  That is just fatuous and not worth your saying or my replying.



  1. Simonini5:06 PM

    Of course the Jews want one world government, they have always desired one world government, first they concentrate capital in their hands, then the press, academia, and slowly control public opinion. When they have one world government they control us all!

    (Before you instinctively delete this, google the name. Its an unamerican thing called humour, I don't really expect you to get it you dried up old dullard)

  2. Take a look at Syria Jack,

    Ask yourself how do the Syrian atrocities, differ from Washington’s atrocities in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, Somalia, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo prison, and secret CIA prison sites? Why is our Nobel Prize Winning President silent about these massive, unprecedented, violations of human rights?"

    Of course, all of this depends upon your world view and whether you believe that America has the right/might to impose it's moral, ethical, religious, political, and financial standards upon a sovereign nation. If you believe in America Right or Wrong, then obviously the hypocrasy of our actions won't resonate with any of your brain cells.

    Unfortunately, those in control of the President - as we know from Grover Norquist's quote about Romney, that the party in power wants someone who will do what they're told - they have no need for rational thought. All they want is a puppet installed in Syria, or Iran, and a way to stop the Russians and Chinese from increasing their influence in the Middle East. Iran sells China 20% of its oil. Closing Iran down cuts the Chinese economy by 20% and reduces their economic threat to the US.

    The US is not acting as the world's policeman, its acting its in own interests at the costs of innocent lives. How you can support this evil is beyond me.

  3. Simonini is a mediocre contemporary artist who paints livestock. Christie imagines that by being anti-Semitic and anti-American in the same comment that he is being somehow witty. Sadly he remains the same juvenile troll as always and about as funny as a toothache.

  4. 'Tony Greenstein' imagines that because he calls something an atrocity, that that makes it so. Alas the world is not made to be what we call it, but stubbornly remains what it is.

    The violence that 'Tony Greenstein' deplores by amazing coincidence happens to be against Al-Qaeda and its allies. Curiously after 9/11 we became less interested in Al-Qaeda's safety and well-being and more in our own

    I am sure that it will come as a great shock to 'Tony Greenstein' that no one has a right to conspire against the lives of Americans. Those who do have the very human right to sudden death from the skies or any other way it can be arranged.

    Contrary to 'Tony Greenstein's' world-view, sovereignty does not excuse mass murder nor attacks on American citizens. The very worst thing the United States has done in the last twenty years was our failure to trample the sovereignty of Rwanda during the genocide there. The African countries, including South Africa and Kenya, did not act. Neither France nor Belgium sent a single soldier. Because the United States is the greatest military power and by default the conscience of an otherwise conscience-less world, it was our responsibility to act. Clinton said in his memoirs that he regrets his inaction on Rwanda more than any other event of his presidency.

    I would advise 'Tony Greenstein' to take his own advice. Look at Syria. While the Alawite-officered army has the upper hand the massacres will continue. When the balance shifts in favor of the Sunni rebels, the entire Alawite minority will be killed. Without American leadership the choice in Syria will be massacre or genocide.

    I admit that I do not respect Syria's sovereignty enough to let that happen if it can be avoided. The monster 'Tony Greenstein' on the other hand has no problem with it and calls those who want to do something about it evil. Fortunately, informed people know enough to ignore such unthinking clamorings.

  5. Simonini12:03 PM

    Actually Captain Simonini is someone else entirely. Try again Jack.

    1. Sorry troll, I don't actually care.