My problem, your problem?

    This past week while watching Black Hawk Down, one of my classmates posed a very interesting question. Why is it that the United States insists on intervening in other country's problems? In his farewell address in 1796, George Washington said, "The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible." So why is it that America continues to refuse to heed the warning of one of our all-time greatest presidents? 

    On Wednesday, November 28, 1984, the Honorable Caspar W. Weinberger (pictured below), Secretary of Defense, addressed the public, saying, "In today's world, the line between peace and war is less clearly drawn than at any time in our history. When George Washington, in his farewell address, warned us, as a new democracy, to avoid foreign entanglements, Europe then lay 2-3 months by sea over the horizon. The United States was protected by the width of the oceans. Now in this nuclear age, we measure time in minutes rather than months." I don't know about you, but this goes a long way in answering my questions. When George Washington spoke of staying out of Foreign Affairs, we really had no reason to even begin to get involved in them to begin with. In those days, the United States was completely isolated, there was no United Nations, and the actions of other countries could not and would not directly affect the United States. Today, things are very different. We now live in a world where communication with another country can happen in mere seconds. 

    
    I'm not an expert, but I believe that the United States continues to have a strong military presence in the world because we are protective of those that, in our eyes, cannot protect themselves. 

    The picture above shows all of the military bases around the world in 2002. It shows how strong of a military presence we have around the world, but I believe that it also shows the strength of our actual military. For years, the United States has prided themselves in being a strong military force and protecting those whose rights are being infringed on, we fight to protect our home, but we also fight to protect the home of others. This is something that works for us, so why should we change that?

       When enlisting in the military, each person is required to take an oath. This oath reads, "I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." What exactly does this mean? How far does "defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies" go? I don't have these answers, and I don't think anyone does. When I began this blog post, I was determined to prove a point to all of you. I was determined to prove to you that it is important for the United States to have a strong military presence. However, now I'm not so sure that that is something that can be proven, by me or anyone else for that matter. Do I believe that it is a good thing? Yes, but that's my personal opinion and I can't prove anything on that basis.

       I don't think that this ended up being a topic that could be argued, take it as food for thought. Take what I've said, and form your own opinions, because if we can not learn from our past, we are doomed to repeat it. 


Forever & Always,
Me