Date of week: April 20, 2015
The focus of the class has shifted to discussing numerous conflicts that the United States became involved with as it rose to be considered a world power. We studied WWI, WWII, and the Cold War. Throughout this topic I have constantly been pondering the reasons that justify starting or entering a war. I have come to a conclusion that the means that justify war for the U.S. was and is when freedom and liberty are in jeopardy and oppression arises. We see the United States enter the Cold War with the intentions to assist the places destroyed by the post-WWII and, to more importantly, stop the spread of communism in Europe. The U.S. fears that the Soviet Union could gain enough power to potentially threaten the place of the only other world power, the U.S., and impede a communist government/system on other countries. In WWI and WWII the United States was less concerned about oppression but more focused on self-defense and obligation from allies; however there was still a factor of trying to bring the nations of the world together and lessen the amounts of conflict. Do you think that the United States has a right or an obligation to keep peace between the nations and get involved when freedom is compromised?
I think that the trend of the US always seemingly getting involved in wars in order to aid a group of oppressed peoples that Annaliese addresses in her blog post is important to notice, however, I think it is also important to question whether the desire to aid the less-powerful was really the central concern and that there weren't ulterior motives. For example, in the case of the cold war, America may have been attempting to aid those living in the countries of eastern Europe by trying to turn them from communism to capitalism, but they also may have been trying to expand their global market and trade opportunities by creating countries free-market and more trade-oriented.
ReplyDelete