Military intervention abroad by the United States
The most recent international incidences in which the United States used military action abroad are the 2009 cruise missile attack in Yemen and the 2011 coordination of missile attacks and air strikes against the Gadhafi regime in Libya. The 2011 NATO led attacks in Libya in the year 2011 are part of the recent direct interventions that have been taken by the United States government.
We will write a custom Essay on First Draft of Policeman of the World Paper specifically for you
301 certified writers online
The attacks were coordinated by the United States military, under the banner of NATO. The United States led attacks resulted in the death of Gadhafi and the ousting of his regime that had been in power for several decades. However, several concerns were raised about the motive of the United States and its direct involvement in Libya.
Whether the Gadhafi regime was a real threat to international security and the national security of the United States largely remains to be a rhetorical question. Also, questions are raised about the genesis of the revolt against the Gadhafi government considering the fact that Gadhafi had led the country into economic prosperity. Even after the ousting of Gadhafi, the country largely remains politically unstable with no peace (Dunne & Gifkins, 2011).
The US missile attack in Yemen is part of the series of United States intervention in a bid to track down the Al-Qaeda terrorist group. With the 2009 military attack in Yemen killing 49 people, several concerns were raised about the considerations that are made by the United States when conducting its war on terror as more innocent lives are lost in the war (Roggion, 2009).
The United States as a dominant military and Diplomatic force after WWII
The end of the Second World War is an important part of the history of the modern United States. After the participation of the United States in the war, especially the support of Western Europe, the United States government embarked on a course that now determines the position of the United States in the world today.
Different political commentators bring out different reasons to explain the dominance of the United States, military wise and diplomatic wise, in the global stage after the Second World War (Yongping, 2006). According to Mosser (2010), the two world wars were significant to the later dominance of the United States on the global stage.
Having flexed its power in the world wars, the United States concentrated on the development of military technology and the subsequent deployment of the military technology in warfare, with fewer casualties on the United States citizens. Patterned with other technological developments in other fields, it was evident that the United States was a major force in influencing the course of events on the world stage.
It is also important to note that the other states that were directly involved in the war, among them the Great Britain that was the then most powerful force in the world, had been weakened. Thus, they could not match the pace at which the United States was advancing at, especially in economic and military developments.
Approaching the issue of dominance from a theoretical perspective, it can be argued that the position of a country on the global stage and its ability to influence the course of events through diplomacy is determined by the power of the state. The fact that the United States had advanced in most fields meant that it was a strong force in global affairs, thus its diplomatic dominance (Yongping, 2006).
Foreign policies of the US before and after WWII
The United States concentrated on the policy of demobilization after the immediate closure of WWII. This was a contradiction to the intense activities of mobilization by the United States as it sought to gather military support for the WWII battle. The motive behind the policy of demobilization can be best explained by the concentration of the US army later in history (Garcia, 2010).
Research denotes that the United States government largely pursues the policy of protectionism in the contemporary times rather than it did during the Second World War. In every form of interaction that is enhanced by the United States on the global stage lies the issue of economic interests and national security.
Therefore, it can be argued that the policy of the United States in the post-cold war period largely revolves around the economic and political interests of the US. It is critical to mention that the advancements in the post WWII period resulted in the advancement of US influence over other countries, thereby resulting in the creation of the US not only as the most powerful State in the world, but also as an enemy to most states.
Therefore, the issues of terrorism and competition have come into the picture, thereby necessitating the pursuance of economic and political protectionism (Crawford, 2004). However, one thing that features in the foreign policy of the United States in the WWII and the post WWII period is the piecemeal search for dominance and control.
Yongping (2006) observes that the establishment of the United States as the world’s greatest power poses a lot of pressure on the US government. The pressure revolves around the sustainability of the unipolar states. This is why the contemporary policy of the United States focuses on the weakening of any locus of power away from the US.
Get your first paper with 15% OFF
Justifications used for the U. S. overseas involvement during WWII and the U.S. military action abroad in the post WWII period
The post World War II period saw the intense military involvement of the United States across the world. It is argued that the United States has for a long time used the military interventions as a propaganda tactic to meet its goals. During the Second World War, the deployment of the military by the United States was justified based on the grounds of pacification through the neutralization of the aggressors.
The issue of patriotism and national unity, as well as the protection of the rights of people largely featured in the involvement of the United States military in the Second World War. In the end, there were massive damages that were caused by the US military, which do not actually reflect the justifications (Rubenstein, 2009). An example is the use military intervention of the United States in Japan where atomic bombs were used by the military, thereby causing massive damage to property and lives.
When this is pictured from the context of the post World War II period, it becomes evident that the United States still uses similar justifications in enhancing military intervention.
Beginning with the American military intervention in Vietnam and the US military assistance in El Salvador to the 21st century interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq, it is evident that the justification of the US military intervention largely revolves around the question of protecting the rights of innocent citizens and the neutralization of harsh or lethal political regimes, in addition to the issue of self defense.
The main reason why the justifications are pegged on these issues is to attract the public interest and gain public support for such a political course (Rubenstein, 2009).
The superpower state of the us and its influence on Domestic spending -Fourth Amendment protections and the choice of political leaders
The Fourth Amendment is a piece of legislation enshrined in the US Constitution. The Amendment deals with the protection of the rights of privacy of individuals. With the emergence of the United States as a world superpower, there are critical developments, especially in the realms of security, which have resulted in a lot of changes in the manner in which this piece of legislation is enforced.
In a bid to secure the United States, the state, under the organs that are responsible for enhancing security like the Department of Homeland Security, conducts a lot of search and seizure without paying much respect to the Fourth Amendment. This is done in a bid to ensure that the United Stated is free from the security threats challenges of the 21st century like terrorism, as well as the continued positioning of the US a safe haven (Nye 2004).
The domestic expenditure of the United States is also an area that has undergone a lot of changes. In a nutshell, it is important to note that the expenditure of the United States keeps growing as the country seeks to maintain the military power and dominance across the globe. Also, the expenditure in other realms like health care keeps rising as the country seeks to position all its sectors to maintain the superpower state.
There are also immense changes in the political landscape where the choice of leaders is largely based on the choices of the people, their opinions, and the manifesto about the issues of priority like national security and economic policies. These are critical issues in the sustainability of the powerful state status (Nye, 2004).
Crawford, N. C. (2004). Fear Itself: US foreign and military policy since 9/11. Conference Papers — International Studies Association, 1-34.
Dunne, T., & Gifkins, J. (2011). Libya and the state of intervention. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 65(5), 515-529.
Garcia, D. (2010). Class and brass: Demobilization, working class politics, and American foreign policy between World War and Cold War. Diplomatic History, 34(4), 681-698.
Mosser, M. W. (2010). The promise and the peril: The social construction of American military technology. Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy & International Relations, 11(2), 91-104.
Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. New York, NY: Public Affairs.
Roggion, B. (2009). US launches cruise missile strikes against al Qaeda in Yemen. The Long War Journal. Retrieved from https://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2009/12/us_launches_cruise_m.php#ixzz2kW28wgvt
Rubenstein, R. E. (2009). Why Americans fight: Justifications for asymmetric warfare. Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict, 2(1), 51-68.
Yongping, F. (2006). The peaceful transition of power from the UK to the US. Chinese Journal of International Politics, 1(1), 83-108.