General Question

Blonderaven's avatar

I need help quick! why are stable nations a bigger threat to the United States than failed nations?

Asked by Blonderaven (387points) November 12th, 2009

I wish I didn’t have to ask this, but I debate tomorrow and need a third point! sorry. Any flutherites have an answer to above question?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

12 Answers

The_Compassionate_Heretic's avatar

What do you think about the topic? Surely you must have a starting point to this debate.

Jeruba's avatar

Who’s in a better position to take action?

Judi's avatar

We don’t like to do your homework for you.

Blonderaven's avatar

@The Compassionate Herectic yes, my first two points are that stable nations are a 1. greater military threat and 2. a greater economical threat. military because a failed nation doesn’t have the recources to appose us militarily and I haven’t yet expanded much on economical.

Blonderaven's avatar

@Judi yes I know, which is why I didn’t really want to ask the question. I was mostly wondering if anyone had any ideas.

augustlan's avatar

Maybe because an action taken by a stable nation is more likely to attract support from other nations around the world, thus turning more of the world against the US?

jaketheripper's avatar

Stable nations aren’t as vulnerable to be convinced economically to our side

The_Compassionate_Heretic's avatar

I would argue that stable nations are more organized and have greater capacity to produce resources which could pose a threat versus unstable nations whose greatest threat is an act of terrorism.

Sarcasm's avatar

Failed nations are too busy wasting resources on internal struggles?

LKidKyle1985's avatar

Well you could argue that because a failed nation only requires a simple military solution to correct, then that is easy for the United States to fix. But if the Nation is stable, then it is not as simple as sending some troops over. There are sovereignty issues, U.N. issues, opposing armies, etc etc. Also, any nation that is well organized poses a greater threat to the united states because it cannot be influenced as easily by us. Where as a failed state doesn’t even really effect us unless it involves our oil supply, in which case military solution is simple.

But personally I think failed states pose a bigger risk because they are more likely to get the united states tangled up in a mess we don’t want to be in militarily. Difficult to say for sure because the risks and situations are always different.

OutOfTheBlue's avatar

When i read this last night, i was going to say the key word here should be “stable” but there is a hole in the theory of a stable nation being a bigger threat, i try and stay out of stuff like this but my mind won’t let me sometimes lol

mattbrowne's avatar

Cheney and his goons were afraid of a too strong and stable European Union. They tried everything to create friction and dissent.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther