Posted on Oct 2, 2016
CPT Infantry Officer
9.1K
13
7
2
2
0
This question is not meant to solicit an opinion of any of the presidential candidates. Rather, how do you see America's role in global affairs?
Edited >1 y ago
Avatar feed
Responses: 3
Sgt Wayne Wood
3
3
0
Three items. 1) strong economy that can withstand world-wide market fluctuations. 2) influence. The support of other state-entities. 3) force projection anywhere, anytime... for when the carrot doesn't work
(3)
Comment
(0)
CPT Infantry Officer
CPT (Join to see)
>1 y
Of course! That's a great summary.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Sgt Wayne Wood
Sgt Wayne Wood
>1 y
Terse... laconic? :-)
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SFC George Smith
2
2
0
Project a presence of Honesty and Truth...
A willing to Protect and defend Allies and Neighbors Lend assistance when and where the Strength to fend off and destroy any an all assaults from outside and with in... The ability to stand up to and defeat any aggressor seeking to destroy the Nation and have the Military might and weaponry to do so...
Something we have Lost since january 2009...
(2)
Comment
(0)
LTC Self Employed
LTC (Join to see)
>1 y
I agree. Now we are acting like a weakening UK after 1956 Suez crisis.
(2)
Reply
(0)
LTC Self Employed
LTC (Join to see)
>1 y
I first called it the showboat tour but his showboat keeps getting strafed by one crisis and screw-up after another now his showboat reminds me of the U.S.S. Nevada underway,torpedoed and sinking and possibly blocking the channel for the CSS Clinton allowing The BB New York (Donald Trump) to victory. LOL
(2)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
CPT Jack Durish
1
1
0
Edited >1 y ago
Great Britain had long led global diplomacy, however following WWII, they were economically destitute, their military might drained. They had obligations to maintain international access to the Suez Canal as well as a couple other far flung outposts. They couldn't afford to keep even one division at home to defend the island. It was then that a British diplomat approached the Americans and pleaded with them to assume global leadership. It was felt that only America had the resources to contain Communism and prevent another rogue nation like Germany from rising again. America accepted the challenge. Is it time to let it go? Is global leadership still needed? Isn't that the job of the U.N.? Sadly, no to all. The U.N. is a committee and we know how ineffective those are. The veto power of the permanent members of the Security Council insures that no effective action will ever be taken to stop any conflict. The assignment of committee chairmanships to nations where civilized behavior is an anathema insures that those committees will never be effective (such as having an chairman of a council concerned with women's right from a nation where women's rights are non-existent). So if not the U.S., then whom?
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close