The document is a research paper that examines whether the United States should continue its role as the global police force. It discusses the large economic costs of U.S. military spending abroad and questions whether wars are truly fought for humanitarian reasons or strategic/economic interests. The paper also analyzes the military failures and negative international perceptions that have resulted from U.S. interventions. Overall, the document argues that policing the world is too expensive, ineffective, and damaging to the U.S. image to be sustainable long-term.

1. Research Paper
Dave Wright
“Protector of the World: Making Sense out of America’s Military Policing of the World”
If one country alone has the ability to control the actions of the world, is it the sole
responsibility of that country to monitor every potential threat to the free-world? At the
conclusion of World War Two, the United States rose from the ashes of war-torn Europe and
Asia to become the world’s strongest country. In addition to victory, there were no battles fought
on American soil, leaving the land and people free from harm. While all of the European and
Asian countries rebuilt, America got a head start in becoming the world’s next superpower. As
soon as two years after the end of World War Two, President Harry Truman issued the Truman
Doctrine, effectively commencing the era of American interference we still see today. Truman
said that “totalitarian regimes imposed on free peoples, by direct or indirect aggression,
undermine the foundations of international peace and hence the security of the United States,”
therefore putting all of the responsibility of protecting the world on the United States. Over
seventy years later, Americans still preserve the “We are #1” attitude. Since the end of World
War Two, America has grown stronger and stronger while also being at the center of every
global conflict. Whether Americans like it or not, the United States has become the police, or
bully depending how you look at it, of the world.
During the Cold War, America fought hard and often to prevent the spread of
Communism. Now, the only strong communist country remaining in the world is China, yet we
still insist on tangling ourselves in with the complex conflicts of several countries. Most people
in the world want to live in peace, so doesn’t it make sense to have America guard peace from

2. antagonistic foes by policing every square inch of the earth? Unfortunately it starts to make less
and less sense every time I look at a news headline or a history textbook. The truth is that
Americans are increasingly finding the role of global cop unappealing. Our outrageous military
spending has been one of the root causes for recession which is just unreasonable when you look
and see that many of the expenses go to soldiers in first-world countries that are less likely to
need military help than we will. Another unfortunate set-back to America’s global policing is the
consistency of military failures since the United States became a world power. We failed to
complete or maintain our objectives in Cuba, Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, and
Afghanistan again. These military failures have created resentment towards the United States and
even Americans in general. Policing the world is just not worth it if it’s costing a fortune and
doesn’t even work most of the time. To make matters worse, politicians seem to make decisions
in foreign military aid based on personal gain, which is evident with our obsession with the
Middle East and our lack of care for many countries that truly need help such as Sudan and
Syria. America and its people have to realize that we are not able to sustain the military we have
now based on our economic state and that interfering with other countries end up giving us a
negative image.
By researching the cost of military foreign aid, the long term effects of it on our
international image, and the reasons we choose to wage war in the places do, I hope to see
answer the question of whether or not America should police the world. It’s an important
question to me since I want to live in a more peaceful world where our military intervention is
unnecessary. Instead of being in a constant state of war, we should use our power to intervene in
the form of food and medical donations which presents domestic attacks such as 9/11 as a result
of American resentment.

3. Economic Toll
With 1.6 million soldiers at America’s disposal, there is no shortage of monitors in every
corner of the globe. Spread out through one hundred and fifty countries are 512,273 American
troops (upi.com). At a state of war, that should not be too surprising, but when you dissect the
number of soldiers in each individual country, you see the mindless waste of American money
and manpower. Since war wages in the Middle East, a third of all of our deployed troops are
stationed there. The other two thirds of the troops are stationed in places that do not need any
military intervention such as Germany and Japan. We still occupy bases in those countries
despite their primary use as initial deployment for a potential WWIII during the Cold War.
Armed combat hasn’t been seen in either country since WWII, so Americans are paying extra
taxes for soldiers to fight for peace in an already peaceful country where the chances of a soldier
dying in training is higher than a soldier dying in battle.
Most people have no objections to maintaining world peace through the boasting of the
world’s strongest military, but what is the cost to the economy? If you take all of the money
spent on military expenditures in the world, the U.S. would hold forty-one percent of it. To put
things into perspective, the next highest percentage of global military expenditures is only eight
percent, belonging to China. Forty percent of the world’s military expenditures translates to 700
billion dollars a year. All of this military spending can obviously contribute to the massive debt
crisis the U.S. faces. Despite increases in debt, the price for our military increased as well. We
may think that we are protecting the world, but in the long run, our country can’t sustain the
economic toll of paying 700 billion dollars every year. One could argue that cutting military
spending would result in a mass loss of jobs, but as a politician stated on globalissues.org, “It is

4. true that discontinuing weapons systems will cause job loss in the short term, but unnecessary
weapons manufacturing should not be considered a jobs program (that would be like spending
billions of dollars digging holes), and research shows that these jobs can be successfully
transferred to other sectors.”
Some people might find it alarming that we can spend billions of dollars to help other
countries while some of our own people suffer just as bad as some of the victims outside of
America’s borders. As Ian Bremmer, founder of the Eurasia Group, said on an NPR article,
people of the Ninth Ward in New Orleans may not appreciate that we spend money to aid foreign
people who have no money or shelter instead of American citizens who have been affected from
natural disasters for almost seven years. Helping other countries may be morally correct, but
when American citizens have to pay for it with their livelihood, it’s not the correct thing to do.
We should assess our domestic needs before spreading our wealth to the world.
War for the Good of Mankind or Profit?
People who support war will always justify it by saying that it’s essential for the security
of America or that millions of lives depend on American intervention. When you look at all of
the wars fought by America since WWII, none of them helped us or hurt the enemy. During the
Cold War, America was obsessed with putting down any sparks of Communism. Since we were
the newly self-appointed police of the world, we had to save any Democratic governments in
peril. Thus, Korea and Vietnam became battlefields where almost 100,000 American lives were
lost. Though support for both of those wars was very low at the time, the U.S. government
justified the wars by saying they were fighting for Democracy and freedom. Those wars were
believed by many to be fought for the good of mankind. On the other hand, wars in the Middle

5. East become a little confusing when people think about why we’re fighting there. Many wonder
whether America can protect the world without going after the needs of the powerful members of
the country. If the policeman of the world makes improper decisions about who to go after, how
can they be relied upon?
The most controversial war in history just saw a reduction in troops after eleven years of
fighting in Iraq. Controversy clouded this war from the beginning after blaming them for
possessing weapons of mass destruction and 9/11. The strange part about 9/11 was that the
backgrounds of the hijackers were known to the public. They were members of Al-Qaeda from
mostly Saudi Arabia under the leadership of Osama Bin Laden, who was believed to be in
Afghanistan. Iraq had little to do with the attacks yet we focused much of our military attention
on it with the accusations of WMDs. George Bush’s justification of the invasion was “that the
war was a war centered on defeating evil and that all countries harboring or supporting terrorists
were members of "an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world."” (abc-clio.com)
Many radical opinions have risen as a result of this shady invasion, including capturing Saddam
Hussein, the leader of Iraq who George Bush Sr. chose to leave in power by not capturing him
during a previous invasion of Iraq. This theory sees the capture of Saddam as redemption or even
taking a step-ahead on the presidency of Bush Sr.
Another reason many believe we are so involved in the Middle East is its vast oil supply.
It would be the only logical reason for America’s obsession with the Middle East and its
Democracy-less countries. There appears to be no gain from having our military presence there
except for control of major oil fields. It would be disheartening if there was the sacrificing of life
just for a natural resource, especially since the Middle East does not provide a majority of the oil
America consumes. Conflicts in the Middle East contribute the lack of appeal towards being the

6. policeman of the world since more bad comes from it than good, yet we keep sacrificing life and
money for it. Companies that make huge profits as a result of these wars in the Middle East are
war manufacturers such as Lockheed Martin and Boeing. They make billions of dollars in profit
because of the massive increase in demand for war manufacturing during military conflicts.
While they make profits, we now run the risk of experiencing terror attacks similar to 9/11 as a
result of resentment towards American interference.
After researching regions of the world where we are policing for the wrong reason, one
should also reference the areas that need help, but aren’t getting because the only people gaining
anything are the people we would help. Areas where a horrid amount of civilians die daily such
as Darfur and Syria are ignored by our military power since no one in America would profit from
these wars. Ellie Wiesel warned Barrack Obama during a speech the Holocaust Museum that
what is occurring in Syria and Darfur is similar to the events of the Holocaust and that they
should be stopped (newyorker.com). America, who has not been afraid to show off its military in
the rest of the Middle East, has not given much thought to Syria. The story in Syria has been
developing over the last couple of months while the genocide in Darfur started as early as 2003.
How can the strongest nation in the world let a conflict like Darfur progress for nine years and
allow millions of people to be displace and hundreds of thousands killed?
With the irresponsibility of whoever chooses the locations of our wars, it’s hard to show
confidence in any choices we make with our military anymore. We either pick horrible places to
wage war just for the control of oil fields and then neglect countries in peril. It does not make
sense to police the world half the time and then leave the rest of the world to fend for itself.
Image of America Due to Military Action

7. So far, policing the world has caused the U.S. its economy, wasted American soldiers’
time, and allowed millions of people to suffer at the hands of their own country. It turns out that
many people see America differently as a result of each war it fights. The U.S. military has seen
its ups and many downs since WWII; key ones that changed the international view of America,
including Vietnam, the Middle East, and Somalia. Vietnam forever changed the domestic views
of our military while the Middle East and Somalia show the weaknesses and flaws of our foreign
intervening.
After Americans found out that the situation in Vietnam was a lot worse than how it was
portrayed by the government, it quickly became an unpopular war. Organized anti-war groups
began to sprout up, celebrities were vocally fighting against the war, and many other anti-war
supporters burned their draft cards in protest. Even popular politicians like Senator Robert F.
Kennedy at the time believed that Vietnam was an "illusion that we can win a war which the
South Vietnamese cannot win for themselves. . . . People will not fight to line the pockets of
generals. . . ." The senator also worried that the widespread use of firepower to defeat the enemy
was killing too many civilians (abc-clio.com). The U.S. would end up pulling the troops out of
Vietnam just to watch the South get overrun by the Communist North. Since then Americans
have always questioned the integrity of the government and whether the government is being
truthful when talking about war. It’s evident by all of the conspiracy theories surrounding the
Middle East today.
America’s fate was solidified in the Middle East when we supported the birth of Israel in
1948. It was mostly a United Nations effort, but America exclaimed its everlasting support for
Israel and would find itself being at the center of all of the conflicts in the Middle East up to
today. By supporting Israel and the removal of Palestinians from their homes, we became

8. disliked by the other Muslim Middle Eastern countries. Their hatred for America grows even
stronger daily with our constant presence in not only their home, but in the Muslim holy cities of
Mecca and Medina located in Saudi Arabia. Congressman Dennis Kucinich, who opposed the
invasion Iraq, asked in an interview how Americans would feel if any other country’s military
flew planes into our airspace. There would be retaliation, but we don’t think about any foreign
forces in our borders; we just think about putting soldiers in other lands. The many people who
used to see America as the leader of fighting for morals now see us as oppressors who constantly
dehumanize the locals we are supposed to be helping. There have been many stories about how
frustrated U.S. soldiers have killed local civilians as a sport in addition to humiliating and
torturing Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison. Sometimes it feels like we are intentionally
baiting our enemies just to get a reaction. Now, terror groups in the Middle East have taken their
resentment of America and consistently threaten the safety of thousands of Americans with
potential terrorist attacks.
Another stagnant military situation was the attempted overthrow of the Somalian
government in 1993 as a result of the head of Somalia using starvation as a weapon against his
opposition in the country. The U.S. brought in the Special Forces who were eventually defeated
by local militias. The U.S. wanted to use its power and any military momentum from a victory in
the Persian Gulf in 1991 to save the millions of people suffering from starvation under the hands
of their ruler. A defeat of the strongest nation’s most elite soldiers brought much ridicule and
criticism from people who began to question America’s responsibility as policeman of the world.
The inability to defeat the opposition forces that were deemed weaker than us resulted in
the questioning of whether or not America can even handle policing the world. Not only is
America creating some these wars for the wrong reasons, they are losing them. If America

9. actually fights for the correct moral reasons, it should be held responsible to defeating the
enemy.
Narrative Conclusion
After researching the history of America’s foreign relations, I found that the cost of
policing the world far outweighs any good it does. When the military gets involved, lives are
lost, the economy takes a heavy toll, and long term relationships with other countries become
strained. The U.S. should just stay out of the business of hostile countries and provide aid in the
form of food and medicine to prevent the deaths of innocent people. Either they do that or take
responsibility in the military mistakes the U.S. has committed and pull out of all of the countries
that don’t need military intervention. Then America can focus on toppling the evil governments
of countries like Sudan and Syria. Whether or not America polices the world or not affects every
American because the wrong decisions of our military could result in retaliation in the form of
killing Americans.
The research for this paper came from many databases on the lib guides site. They were
very helpful compared to just googling everything. While setting up all of the many different
websites may have been time consuming, the end result probably ended up being better because
of it. The most helpful method of obtaining information was relying on myself to find different
sources in databases. Sites like Scoop.It and RSS Feeds did not help me as much as they were
supposed to. It could be due to my unfamiliarity with the more complex methods of data
retrieval. Once I got into the pattern of doing a daily blog and finishing the set-ups of the
different web sources, it was easy getting into the actual paper. It turned out being simpler than I
originally thought.

10. Unfortunately, I had a very cynical view towards America’s foreign policy, but that was
dictated by the research I did. It’s always interesting to take other people’s views and incorporate
them a little in your on writing. What this paper does for my writing and thinking is forcing me
to think outside of the normal boundaries that I usually write papers in. Because of the length, I
have to get background information on several subtopics and question. In other words, it gets me
to think out of the box. I’ve only done a couple of papers of this magnitude grade-wise or length-
wise, so they are a challenge every time I write one. I can tell that it impacts my writing and
thinking process positively, so it makes the time consumption worth while every time.

11. Works Cited Page
Commager, Henry Steele, ed. Documents of American History. 4th ed. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, INC.,
1948. Print.
Kucinich, Dennis. Interview. Dennis Kucinich: CIA Drones, Iran, US World Police. 11 Dec. 2011. Youtube. Web.
Transcript. 7 June 2012. <http:///www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yuvz6Sl-5qY>.
Shah, Anup. “World Military Spending.” Global Issues. N.p., 6 May 2012. Web. 7 June 2012.
<http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spending>.
Weiner, Eric. “Should America Be the World’s Policeman?” Editorial. NPR. N.p., 20 Feb. 2008. Web. 7 June 2012.
<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=19180589>.
Weisbrot, Mark. Editorial. Common Dreams. N.p., 12 Apr. 2001. Web. 7 June 2012.
<http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0412-09.htm>.
"Opposition to the War: Key Question." Issues: Understanding Controversy and Society. ABC-CLIO, 2012. Web. 7
June 2012.
"Crisis in Darfur: Key Question." Issues: Understanding Controversy and Society. ABC-CLIO, 2012. Web. 7 June
2012.
Hastedt, Glenn Peter. "U.S. as World Power: Overview." Issues: Understanding Controversy and Society. ABC-
CLIO,2012. Web. 7 June 2012.
"War on Terror: Key Question." Issues: Understanding Controversy and Society. ABC-CLIO, 2012. Web. 7 June
2012.
"Foreign Intervention in the Middle East: Key Question." Issues: Understanding Controversy and Society. ABC-
CLIO,2012. Web. 7 June 2012.
Gourevitch, Philip. “The Syria Dilemna.” The New Yorker. N.p., 4 June 2012. Web. 7 June 2012.
<http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2012/06/04/120604taco_talk_gourevitch>.