Yes, I know what you mean. Some people blindly argue - in vain because they don't provide a basis for their theories and resort to namecalling.

Pretty much everyone by now will probably have realized that the UN is being inefficient in many affairs. And as far as humanitarian efforts are concerned, they should be sending people to poorer areas and do something about it. I know Ron Paul wants us out of the UN, and to be honest, it's not a bad idea but still it's a tricky one. Anyway, even so it is a way to keep international order but some Middle Eastern countries have violated this. That doesn't make it okay for us to follow suit.

My problem with Iraq is the grounds Bush gave for "declaring" a war against them. If he had said it was purely for humanitarian reasons, then it may be justified and I believe we may even be getting some outside support. However, that was not what he said. He needlessly used the fear factor to lead us into it. And that is not justified.

With North Korea, diplomacy has worked to keep peace between her and others. Diplomacy has NOT worked to solve its internal problems. Only the people in the capital live in relative prosperity - the rest of the country is utterly in ruins. The leader, Kim Jong Il, knows this perfectly well but continues to spend God knows how much money on extravagant parades and propaganda schemes. I know that diplomacy does not work 100% of the time, especially when it involves people like Hitler. Still, one must exercise caution before using military action. It is a delicate issue with no clear answer. In any case, I do believe that the U.S. is overspending due to its current aggressive foreign policy and something should be done about it because we have problems of our own. I will vote for a candidate who will cut spending and focus on our own country and her staggering national debt before meddling in other people's business.