The U.S should not get involved in other countries’ policies because the costs outweigh the benefits. One of the benefits is the we can get resources but if all the citizens are starving and poor they will not be able to make resources. When the U.S put a different leader poverty spread. He had his lunches flown in from France and his wife bathed milk while the the people didn’t have any money. In getting involved the U.S can lose a lot of men and money. We spent 4 million dollars on the war in Afghanistan. We also lost 20,083 men when went to Afghanistan. Even though there are some benefits there are more costs.
I do not think that we should get involved in other country’s governments. An example is we used to be friends with Iran, but until we overthrew their previous leader and put in the Shah, we became enemies. The new leader was bad to the people, and they started rioting and they were fighting a lot. Iranians think that the US is the reason that they are weak. Also, Iran took Americans and held them hostage because they wanted their previous leader back. According to Argo, the Shah had lunches flown in from Paris and it said that his wife bathed in milk. All of that money could have gone to the people because they were poor and starving, but instead he used it to have his wife bath in milk and have his lunches flown in from Paris. Basically, if the US didn’t interfere with Iran’s government, they wouldn’t have been in poverty and starving. Also according to Argo, the US’s embassy in Iran was destroyed and has never been rebuilt.
I agree with you. I also think that the U.S has to be careful so that they don't make a mistake in helping a country so that it doesn't go the wrong way.
The U.S. should not get involved with other countries for many reasons. One reason is that when we helped the Shau, the Shau took all of the money the U.S. gave them and used it on himself. According to Argo the movie The Shau had his lunches flown in from Paris everyday. It is also a theory that his wife bathed in white milk which was very expensive. While the royal family was using all the money, the citizens were poor and starving. The citizens started riots because they were very angry. While they were doing these riots they decided to go to the U.S. area. While they were rioting at the U.S. gates some of the people went over the gate and into the U.S. territory. While they were in their they took many hostages. This is only two reasons why we should not get involved in other countries policies.
I agree that that we shouldn't get involved in other countries. I really like all the background information you gave and evidence you gave. I'm a little confused because you said there were two reasons but there was only one, try to make that more clear next time. Nice job otherwise.
No they should not. Took what happened in Iran for an example. The US tried to do something to Iran and now Iran hates the US. The US put somebody in power that helped the US and hurt the people of Iran by starving them. Now Iran hates us. Also, more bad than good can come out of messing with other countries policies. The good it works out and everything is fine. But, the bad is that they blame the US for everything and try to hurt the US and the people of the US. So obviously we should not be getting involved in other countries policies.
I agree with what you said because what you said about Iran was true, and I think what you said about the U.S invading other countries policies was true as well.
I think that it is important that the U.S. be involved in other countries policies especially when the policy effects the U.S. Though many times people refer to the failure in Iran many people do not remember the extremely successfully reconstruction of West Germany as well as Japan. Had we not interfered the results may have been catastrophic. Though sometimes interferry fails sometimes it works great. Some benefits are that the U.S. can civilize an area, make trade deals and also the U.S. can create an allie. It is very important that the U.S. be involved by in other countries policies.
the problem with this idea is that although Japan and West Germany were extremely successful that only worked because there was nothing left in those countries after world war 2. We believe that our way of doing things is the best with little consideration for the culture, history and people living in these countries. The Vietnamese were sick of the supposed Western civilization after being controlled by french for a 100 years and america's war in Vietnam seem to be nothing more than invasion from another foreign. We need to step back and let nations run themselves.
The US should not get involved in other countries policies. According to Argo, the shah of Iran had his lunch flown in from France and his wife bathed in milk. The US helped put in the shah after the last leader was overthrown. The shah spoiled himself and his family, but left the rest of the country starving and in poverty. Argo and the Real Argo showed that the American Embassy in Iran was invaded because they wanted the shah back. They took hostages. This all happened because America got involved in another country's problem.
I agree with you because everything was completely fine with Iran until the U.S. got involved. The U.S. just made things worse for their country and now Iran has something against us and we now have a bad relationship with them.
he United States should only solve the bigger problems. For instance, the ISIS problem and the Iran nuclear problem, not stuff that will not impact our country in any way. They sometimes get in the way of other countries, and are defined as “nosy” by other countries countless times. What I think we should do is the United States gets mildly less involved with other policies, but if other countries want us to get involved, then we can. For instance, we used Iran’s shah in order to get oil supply and be friends with the country. That caused riots and poverty everywhere in Iran. In conclusion, the United States shouldn’t get in the way of countries’ governments, but at least can try to help every once in awhile.
So you think its OK that we stay out of the nuclear project in Iran because they don't want us be involved. The only reason we are "nosy" is for national security.
I believe that the U.S should only get involved in other country’s policies if it will affect America, involves them, or is a matter in which human lives are being threatened. For example, when the U.S helped Iran by overthrowing the leader and then putting in the Shah and helped them, the Shah used much of Iran’s money for the Iranian military leaving the people of Iran suffering from poverty. In the documentary “Iran the Next Iraq” and at the beginning of the movie, “Argo,” it tells that while the U.S was helping them build their army, the Shah used billions of dollar toward Iran’s force instead of using it to help his people. This lead to the people rioting and the Ayatollah leading a revolution. Later, when the Shah had cancer, he travelled to the U.S and was granted asylum. While out of the country, citizens of Iran protested that the Shah come back so they could kill him for what he had done to them. In that time, The Ayatollah had taken over the country. An example of a riot was when Iranians stormed the United States embassy in Iran. The films “Argo” and “The Real Argo” and the article “‘Argo’: What Really Happened In Tehran? A CIA Agent Remembers” all tell of how six people escaped the embassy while many others were held hostage. The Iranians told the U.S that they would kill the hostages if they didn’t send the Shah back. This all happened because America helped Iran support their nation. It wasn’t the U.S’s fault that the Shah didn’t pay attention to his people, but the Iranians now blame us for their weakness. This shows that the U.S needs to chose who they want to help wisely, or else it could lead to bad things. The article from Upfront magazine, “What’s the Deal With the Iran Deal?” talks about how we sold Iran nuclear technology when Iran and America were allies, and now that Iran is an enemy of the United States, they have the ability to use this technology against the United States. Although getting involved in other countries policies could benefit the U.S and the country the U.S is helping, it could be dangerous if even a small thing goes wrong.
I agree with you because the U.S. shouldn't be getting into other countries policies if they have nothing to do with them. If it has some impact on the U.S. than they could help but they should be careful with who they chose to help.
Yes we should interfere with other countries policy. The U.S must do this because if there is a policy that can mess the U.S up and cause danger than we should try to stop it. According to Upfront Magazine “Critics, including some members of congress and U.S allies in the middle east say Iran's leaders can not be trusted.” This shows that some countries are not trustable and can hurt us if we don't interfere with future policies that can hurt us. However there are negatives. In past when we messed with other countries and tried to control them. Badly, like when we made a cue with Iran's shaw this backfired when the stormed the embassy and started a huge problem.
I do agree with you because the U.S. is one of the world most powerful countries. If we have connections in countries around the world we would be able to help support other countries in need if they need the help.
No I don’t think that the U.S should get involved in any more countries’ policies because according to Marketwatch.com “This is only a list of 10 countries that hat the U.S, but the list is growing as fast as ever.” This shows that a lot of countries already hate the U.S, and if we invaded another country, even more countries would hate us which could lead to war.
The U.S should not get involved in other countries’ policies because there are more costs than benefits. One of the benefits is that we can get resources but if all the citizens are starving and poor like in “Argo,” they will not be able to create useful resources for the U.S.. When the U.S took the Shah, poverty spread, and there was many people on the streets. He had his lunches flown in from France and his wife bathed milk while the the people were suffering without food, and shelter. In getting involved with the U.S can lose a lot of men and money. The U.S. spent four million dollars on the war in Afghanistan. 20,083 men died when they went to Afghanistan. Although there are some benefits, there are many costs as well.
I agree that the U.S. shouldn't get involved in other counties. I feel like none of the benefits are worth the risk. You had very good points and lots of facts from different resources.
The United States should not get involved in other countries’ policies because there are too many risks when doing that. For example, when the U.S. took Iran's Shah, that led to Iranians holding the Americans hostage. There was a slight possibility that all of that conflict could have led to a war between the two countries. There are very little benefits to getting involved with other countries’ policies. One being that the U.S. will get all the glory and seem like the good people.
I agree with you that we should not get involved in other people's government because of what happened in Iran. The ONLY reason that we should be involved in their government is if we are helping them, giving them money, food, or even replacing the leader for a better one. Only if the people of that country agree with it, then they can change it. Otherwise, we should not change some other country's government.
the risk of engineering a regime change are many. For one america has a hard time understanding other people's cultures and in many cases the best example being vietnam it could cause war or lead to alienation by the united states for not follow our path. not because there a freedom hating people but because the resent being influenced or controlled by western countries. Possibly some of these countries will become democratic free market capitalist nations like us
I agree with you, because the United States has a very different culture than other countries and should let them. Like vietnam and other countries that were hurt by america. I agree with your statement.
No because something else could happen like those six americans that got stuck in Tehran and had to be saved which they were but almost could have got killed. That could happen again and could cause a war or revolution between two or more countries. There could be nuclear weapons made which is harder here and easier in the middle east because they have tons and tons of oil.
I agree with the things that you said. I also think that it could cause issues if we get involved in other countries. I think that since we got involved, that put Americans in danger.
No the United States should not get involved in other countries because there are many risks. One of the risks of engineering a regime in another country is you could make their citizens angry. The United States and Britain overthrew Iran’s leader and the Shaw was appointed, the Shaw had caused poverty in Iran by using all the money, it was even said that his wife bathed in milk and he had his meals flown in from Paris, and because of that the citizens of Iran started a revolution. The Shaw had gotten sick and was granted asylum in the US and the Iranians began protesting to get the Shaw back and when that didn’t happen, they took hostages and Argo happened. Because the US tried to change Iran, the country was sent into poverty and hostages. The US can also put their own country in danger of losing money and troops to affect change in the other country. When the United States went into Afghanistan in the 50’s to stop them from becoming a communist state, they had spent millions of dollars to keep them from changing and lost a lot of troops. These are some of the reasons the United States should not get involved in other countries policies.
I agree, I like your reasoning and you supported your opinion very well. It could persuade many people and you have persuaded me. You used a lot of sources which made it sound very professional.
I don’t think that it’s a good idea for the United States to get involved in other countries’ policies. I think that if we get involved, then people in the other countries might get upset with what we are doing, and it’s just going to cause riots. For example, when the United States took the Shah into the embassy, the Iranians got upset and they started to storm the embassy, which just caused problems for the United States. We should have just not have gotten involved with their policies.
I agree with your answer. I also said that people in Iran will get upset. Also, it is right that the U.S. should have just not gotten involved with their policies.
The United States should not get involved in other countries policies because there are more risks than benefits. For example, one risk is that the people will try to overthrow the new government if they don’t . This could lead to riots and protests which could end up with casualties. Another risk could be if they don’t like the new government, and blame the U.S. for the bad new leader, and stop having a relationship with the U.S. If it’s a good relationship it will most likely become bad. If it’s a bad one, then it will become worse. Even though there could be some risks, there could also be benefits. If they like the change, you could gain a better relationship with them and they could help the country out with something if we need it.
I agree with you because the risks are much more likely to happen than the benefits. Also the benefits can only be so good. It won't make us rich. It's just a new alie that probably doesn't have that great of a war tactic considering we just put in a new leader there.
I think that it is important that the U.S. be involved in other countries policies especially when the policy effects the U.S. Though many times people refer to the failure in Iran many people do not remember the extremely successfully reconstruction of West Germany as well as Japan. Had we not interfered the results may have been catastrophic. Though sometimes interferry fails sometimes it works great. Some benefits are that the U.S. can civilize an area, make trade deals and also the U.S. can create an allie. It is very important that the U.S. be involved by in other countries policies.
We should not get involved in other countries policies. A great example is Iran, by deciding to interfere we turned it into chaos. Because of us our own people were threatened. The job of interfering with other countries affairs should be left in the hands of the UN.
I don’t think they should because like in Argo there can be many casualties and hostages taken that were Americans and can cause a peace treaty to be lost or a war to be started. For example when we sent troops into Iran to rescue the hostages, a bunch of soldiers died because of our mistake that the U.S Made.
I don’t think they should because like in Argo there can be many casualties and hostages taken that were Americans and can cause a peace treaty to be lost or a war to be started. For example when we sent troops into Iran to rescue the hostages, a bunch of soldiers died because of our mistake that the U.S Made.
I think yes because even though there are risks the benefits out weight the risks. One reason is that we could have better accessibility between countries as seen at the beginning of Argo when there was a voice over, the US wanted to go there so they could get oil supply form an “Allie”. Also a common reason is that we would have more allies that could help us and be a loyal country. If we were to go into war, those countries that we are close to may help use win the war. If we also are also in there country we can have them under control.
Yes the deal with he Shaw was good for us but it backfired and we are not making allies if we get involved with other country's policies. I do agree with you but not for those reasons.
The United states should not be involved in other countries policies because it will start poverty. Even if the U.S. can get resources we could lose manpower and money. The benefits aren't worth the risks. Argo showed how different life was in Iran then in the U.S and we don’t want that to spread to our country. The Shah had so much power his wife bathed in milk and that milk could have gone to the people that needed it instead.
I agree with you that even if we get resources sending the whole country into poverty. I also think it's crazy that his wife bathed in milk. Over all you did great!
I think we should be selective of the countries that we influence. For example when we overthrew Saddam Hussein in Iraq. That caused a regime to leave more room change for some terrorist organizations LIKE Al Qaeda and later after we killed Bin laden it let room for ISIS to take over. I think that the us should be careful at which countries we interfere with, we should not completely Isolate ourselves.
The U.S should not get involved in other countries’ policies because the costs outweigh the benefits. One of the benefits is the we can get resources but if all the citizens are starving and poor they will not be able to make resources. When the U.S put a different leader poverty spread. He had his lunches flown in from France and his wife bathed milk while the the people didn’t have any money. In getting involved the U.S can lose a lot of men and money. We spent 4 million dollars on the war in Afghanistan. We also lost 20,083 men when went to Afghanistan. Even though there are some benefits there are more costs.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you because you used different facts to help explain your claim. I liked how you used evidence from a different source s well. Great Job!
DeleteI do not think that we should get involved in other country’s governments. An example is we used to be friends with Iran, but until we overthrew their previous leader and put in the Shah, we became enemies. The new leader was bad to the people, and they started rioting and they were fighting a lot. Iranians think that the US is the reason that they are weak. Also, Iran took Americans and held them hostage because they wanted their previous leader back. According to Argo, the Shah had lunches flown in from Paris and it said that his wife bathed in milk. All of that money could have gone to the people because they were poor and starving, but instead he used it to have his wife bath in milk and have his lunches flown in from Paris. Basically, if the US didn’t interfere with Iran’s government, they wouldn’t have been in poverty and starving. Also according to Argo, the US’s embassy in Iran was destroyed and has never been rebuilt.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. I also think that the U.S has to be careful so that they don't make a mistake in helping a country so that it doesn't go the wrong way.
DeleteI also like that you added that the U.S embassy was never rebuilt. It makes your point even clearer.
DeleteThe U.S. should not get involved with other countries for many reasons. One reason is that when we helped the Shau, the Shau took all of the money the U.S. gave them and used it on himself. According to Argo the movie The Shau had his lunches flown in from Paris everyday. It is also a theory that his wife bathed in white milk which was very expensive. While the royal family was using all the money, the citizens were poor and starving. The citizens started riots because they were very angry. While they were doing these riots they decided to go to the U.S. area. While they were rioting at the U.S. gates some of the people went over the gate and into the U.S. territory. While they were in their they took many hostages. This is only two reasons why we should not get involved in other countries policies.
ReplyDeleteI agree that that we shouldn't get involved in other countries. I really like all the background information you gave and evidence you gave. I'm a little confused because you said there were two reasons but there was only one, try to make that more clear next time. Nice job otherwise.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNo they should not. Took what happened in Iran for an example. The US tried to do something to Iran and now Iran hates the US. The US put somebody in power that helped the US and hurt the people of Iran by starving them. Now Iran hates us. Also, more bad than good can come out of messing with other countries policies. The good it works out and everything is fine. But, the bad is that they blame the US for everything and try to hurt the US and the people of the US. So obviously we should not be getting involved in other countries policies.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you said because what you said about Iran was true, and I think what you said about the U.S invading other countries policies was true as well.
DeleteI think that it is important that the U.S. be involved in other countries policies especially when the policy effects the U.S. Though many times people refer to the failure in Iran many people do not remember the extremely successfully reconstruction of West Germany as well as Japan. Had we not interfered the results may have been catastrophic. Though sometimes interferry fails sometimes it works great. Some benefits are that the U.S. can civilize an area, make trade deals and also the U.S. can create an allie. It is very important that the U.S. be involved by in other countries policies.
ReplyDeletethe problem with this idea is that although Japan and West Germany were extremely successful that only worked because there was nothing left in those countries after world war 2. We believe that our way of doing things is the best with little consideration for the culture, history and people living in these countries. The Vietnamese were sick of the supposed Western civilization after being controlled by french for a 100 years and america's war in Vietnam seem to be nothing more than invasion from another foreign. We need to step back and let nations run themselves.
DeleteThe US should not get involved in other countries policies. According to Argo, the shah of Iran had his lunch flown in from France and his wife bathed in milk. The US helped put in the shah after the last leader was overthrown. The shah spoiled himself and his family, but left the rest of the country starving and in poverty. Argo and the Real Argo showed that the American Embassy in Iran was invaded because they wanted the shah back. They took hostages. This all happened because America got involved in another country's problem.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you because everything was completely fine with Iran until the U.S. got involved. The U.S. just made things worse for their country and now Iran has something against us and we now have a bad relationship with them.
Deletehe United States should only solve the bigger problems. For instance, the ISIS problem and the Iran nuclear problem, not stuff that will not impact our country in any way. They sometimes get in the way of other countries, and are defined as “nosy” by other countries countless times. What I think we should do is the United States gets mildly less involved with other policies, but if other countries want us to get involved, then we can. For instance, we used Iran’s shah in order to get oil supply and be friends with the country. That caused riots and poverty everywhere in Iran. In conclusion, the United States shouldn’t get in the way of countries’ governments, but at least can try to help every once in awhile.
ReplyDeleteSo you think its OK that we stay out of the nuclear project in Iran because they don't want us be involved. The only reason we are "nosy" is for national security.
DeleteI believe that the U.S should only get involved in other country’s policies if it will affect America, involves them, or is a matter in which human lives are being threatened. For example, when the U.S helped Iran by overthrowing the leader and then putting in the Shah and helped them, the Shah used much of Iran’s money for the Iranian military leaving the people of Iran suffering from poverty. In the documentary “Iran the Next Iraq” and at the beginning of the movie, “Argo,” it tells that while the U.S was helping them build their army, the Shah used billions of dollar toward Iran’s force instead of using it to help his people. This lead to the people rioting and the Ayatollah leading a revolution. Later, when the Shah had cancer, he travelled to the U.S and was granted asylum. While out of the country, citizens of Iran protested that the Shah come back so they could kill him for what he had done to them. In that time, The Ayatollah had taken over the country. An example of a riot was when Iranians stormed the United States embassy in Iran. The films “Argo” and “The Real Argo” and the article “‘Argo’: What Really Happened In Tehran? A CIA Agent Remembers” all tell of how six people escaped the embassy while many others were held hostage. The Iranians told the U.S that they would kill the hostages if they didn’t send the Shah back. This all happened because America helped Iran support their nation. It wasn’t the U.S’s fault that the Shah didn’t pay attention to his people, but the Iranians now blame us for their weakness. This shows that the U.S needs to chose who they want to help wisely, or else it could lead to bad things. The article from Upfront magazine, “What’s the Deal With the Iran Deal?” talks about how we sold Iran nuclear technology when Iran and America were allies, and now that Iran is an enemy of the United States, they have the ability to use this technology against the United States. Although getting involved in other countries policies could benefit the U.S and the country the U.S is helping, it could be dangerous if even a small thing goes wrong.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you because the U.S. shouldn't be getting into other countries policies if they have nothing to do with them. If it has some impact on the U.S. than they could help but they should be careful with who they chose to help.
DeleteYes we should interfere with other countries policy. The U.S must do this because if there is a policy that can mess the U.S up and cause danger than we should try to stop it. According to Upfront Magazine “Critics, including some members of congress and U.S allies in the middle east say Iran's leaders can not be trusted.” This shows that some countries are not trustable and can hurt us if we don't interfere with future policies that can hurt us. However there are negatives. In past when we messed with other countries and tried to control them. Badly, like when we made a cue with Iran's shaw this backfired when the stormed the embassy and started a huge problem.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with you because the U.S. is one of the world most powerful countries. If we have connections in countries around the world we would be able to help support other countries in need if they need the help.
DeleteNo I don’t think that the U.S should get involved in any more countries’ policies because according to Marketwatch.com “This is only a list of 10 countries that hat the U.S, but the list is growing as fast as ever.” This shows that a lot of countries already hate the U.S, and if we invaded another country, even more countries would hate us which could lead to war.
ReplyDeleteI agree. A lot of countries blame the US for their weakness. Also the US is very strong so that is a reason for them to hate the US.
DeleteThe U.S should not get involved in other countries’ policies because there are more costs than benefits. One of the benefits is that we can get resources but if all the citizens are starving and poor like in “Argo,” they will not be able to create useful resources for the U.S.. When the U.S took the Shah, poverty spread, and there was many people on the streets. He had his lunches flown in from France and his wife bathed milk while the the people were suffering without food, and shelter. In getting involved with the U.S can lose a lot of men and money. The U.S. spent four million dollars on the war in Afghanistan. 20,083 men died when they went to Afghanistan. Although there are some benefits, there are many costs as well.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the U.S. shouldn't get involved in other counties. I feel like none of the benefits are worth the risk. You had very good points and lots of facts from different resources.
DeleteThe United States should not get involved in other countries’ policies because there are too many risks when doing that. For example, when the U.S. took Iran's Shah, that led to Iranians holding the Americans hostage. There was a slight possibility that all of that conflict could have led to a war between the two countries. There are very little benefits to getting involved with other countries’ policies. One being that the U.S. will get all the glory and seem like the good people.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that we should not get involved in other people's government because of what happened in Iran. The ONLY reason that we should be involved in their government is if we are helping them, giving them money, food, or even replacing the leader for a better one. Only if the people of that country agree with it, then they can change it. Otherwise, we should not change some other country's government.
Deletethe risk of engineering a regime change are many. For one america has a hard time understanding other people's cultures and in many cases the best example being vietnam it could cause war or lead to alienation by the united states for not follow our path. not because there a freedom hating people but because the resent being influenced or controlled by western countries. Possibly some of these countries will become democratic free market capitalist nations like us
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, because the United States has a very different culture than other countries and should let them. Like vietnam and other countries that were hurt by america. I agree with your statement.
DeleteNo because something else could happen like those six americans that got stuck in Tehran and had to be saved which they were but almost could have got killed. That could happen again and could cause a war or revolution between two or more countries. There could be nuclear weapons made which is harder here and easier in the middle east because they have tons and tons of oil.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the things that you said. I also think that it could cause issues if we get involved in other countries. I think that since we got involved, that put Americans in danger.
DeleteNo the United States should not get involved in other countries because there are many risks. One of the risks of engineering a regime in another country is you could make their citizens angry. The United States and Britain overthrew Iran’s leader and the Shaw was appointed, the Shaw had caused poverty in Iran by using all the money, it was even said that his wife bathed in milk and he had his meals flown in from Paris, and because of that the citizens of Iran started a revolution. The Shaw had gotten sick and was granted asylum in the US and the Iranians began protesting to get the Shaw back and when that didn’t happen, they took hostages and Argo happened. Because the US tried to change Iran, the country was sent into poverty and hostages. The US can also put their own country in danger of losing money and troops to affect change in the other country. When the United States went into Afghanistan in the 50’s to stop them from becoming a communist state, they had spent millions of dollars to keep them from changing and lost a lot of troops. These are some of the reasons the United States should not get involved in other countries policies.
ReplyDeleteI agree, I like your reasoning and you supported your opinion very well. It could persuade many people and you have persuaded me. You used a lot of sources which made it sound very professional.
DeleteI don’t think that it’s a good idea for the United States to get involved in other countries’ policies. I think that if we get involved, then people in the other countries might get upset with what we are doing, and it’s just going to cause riots. For example, when the United States took the Shah into the embassy, the Iranians got upset and they started to storm the embassy, which just caused problems for the United States. We should have just not have gotten involved with their policies.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your answer. I also said that people in Iran will get upset. Also, it is right that the U.S. should have just not gotten involved with their policies.
DeleteThe United States should not get involved in other countries policies because there are more risks than benefits. For example, one risk is that the people will try to overthrow the new government if they don’t . This could lead to riots and protests which could end up with casualties. Another risk could be if they don’t like the new government, and blame the U.S. for the bad new leader, and stop having a relationship with the U.S. If it’s a good relationship it will most likely become bad. If it’s a bad one, then it will become worse. Even though there could be some risks, there could also be benefits. If they like the change, you could gain a better relationship with them and they could help the country out with something if we need it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you because the risks are much more likely to happen than the benefits. Also the benefits can only be so good. It won't make us rich. It's just a new alie that probably doesn't have that great of a war tactic considering we just put in a new leader there.
DeleteI think that it is important that the U.S. be involved in other countries policies especially when the policy effects the U.S. Though many times people refer to the failure in Iran many people do not remember the extremely successfully reconstruction of West Germany as well as Japan. Had we not interfered the results may have been catastrophic. Though sometimes interferry fails sometimes it works great. Some benefits are that the U.S. can civilize an area, make trade deals and also the U.S. can create an allie. It is very important that the U.S. be involved by in other countries policies.
ReplyDeleteWe should not get involved in other countries policies. A great example is Iran, by deciding to interfere we turned it into chaos. Because of us our own people were threatened. The job of interfering with other countries affairs should be left in the hands of the UN.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Nathan. When the U.S invaded Iraq it was a bad idea as well
DeleteI don’t think they should because like in Argo there can be many casualties and hostages taken that were Americans and can cause a peace treaty to be lost or a war to be started. For example when we sent troops into Iran to rescue the hostages, a bunch of soldiers died because of our mistake that the U.S Made.
ReplyDeleteI don’t think they should because like in Argo there can be many casualties and hostages taken that were Americans and can cause a peace treaty to be lost or a war to be started. For example when we sent troops into Iran to rescue the hostages, a bunch of soldiers died because of our mistake that the U.S Made.
ReplyDeleteI think yes because even though there are risks the benefits out weight the risks. One reason is that we could have better accessibility between countries as seen at the beginning of Argo when there was a voice over, the US wanted to go there so they could get oil supply form an “Allie”. Also a common reason is that we would have more allies that could help us and be a loyal country. If we were to go into war, those countries that we are close to may help use win the war. If we also are also in there country we can have them under control.
ReplyDeleteYes the deal with he Shaw was good for us but it backfired and we are not making allies if we get involved with other country's policies. I do agree with you but not for those reasons.
DeleteThe United states should not be involved in other countries policies because it will start poverty. Even if the U.S. can get resources we could lose manpower and money. The benefits aren't worth the risks. Argo showed how different life was in Iran then in the U.S and we don’t want that to spread to our country. The Shah had so much power his wife bathed in milk and that milk could have gone to the people that needed it instead.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that even if we get resources sending the whole country into poverty. I also think it's crazy that his wife bathed in milk. Over all you did great!
DeleteI think we should be selective of the countries that we influence. For example when we overthrew Saddam Hussein in Iraq. That caused a regime to leave more room change for some terrorist organizations LIKE Al Qaeda and later after we killed Bin laden it let room for ISIS to take over. I think that the us should be careful at which countries we interfere with, we should not completely Isolate ourselves.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree, it was a bad idea to influence them because look how we turned them into a terrorist country
Delete