I don't think I have ever heard anyone, ever on any forum support the United State's intervention around the world and the huge costs for military installments in hundreds of countries.

I was just wondering why has the United States been following that policy after the cold war through a democrat, Clinton and a republican, Bush.

I don't know if there any economic or security reason for this, and I currently can't think of anything, so if anyone has a real reason to support this I would like to hear it.


I am sure everyone will just say that it is a waste from the government, and we all agree with you so you don't really need to respond to this if you feel that way. :P

its quite simple nerv. if we weren't there, someone else would be...

I would much rather have the US in Germany, Iraq, Afghanistan, South Korea, Colombia, Bosnia, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Poland, Georgia...

than the Chinese or Russians

__________________

Join Bush Country - PoliticalForum.com's Largest Member Community

"Because he's the hero America deserves,
but not the one it needs right now...
and so we'll hunt him, because he can take it.
Because he's not a hero. He's a silent guardian,
a watchful protector...A DARK KNIGHT."

We have it so we can apply power where we need to when we need to.

For example remember the war in Afganistan? The initial invasion part went pretty well and pretty fast right? And this was in a country all the way on the other side of the planet.

The reason we were able to do this was in part because of our carriers but also because we've got airforce bases in countries you probably haven't even heard of, like Kyrgyzstan, and we were able to launch from there and hit targets in Afganistan.

Same deal for all the recent conflicts we've had over on that side of the globe.

The also provide a closer place with really good medical facilities. Unless I'm mistaken we still send a lot of wounded to our facilities in Germany.

Another benifit of "being there" is in regional politics. That's why we were able to make Kosovo soverign, and why Russia is mostly calling the shots in Georgia.

I should also note that having an airbase near a target can be better than a carrier. Carriers are very nice at bringing our forces to a regional conflict. But there are a fair number of aircraft that simply cannot launch off of one of their decks such as F22s and Thunderbolts.


Finally they are seeing increasing importance in the area of missile defence. The best, possibly only, way to effectively stop a ballistic missile is to get it while it's on the way up. So if we want to have a chance to take down a missile from North Korea, Iran or anyone in the area we need to have a properly equipped base/ship nearby.

To add to the birth of American interventionism, we decided to sit through the beginnings of two World Wars and remained isolated after the first one. Maybe a quarter-century of global warfare didn't convince some people that America has a place in policing the world, but seeing as 60 years of interventionism has produced no wars between major industrial nations, I'd say it's working pretty well.

__________________
Educating the world, one blogger at a time.