ARGUMENTS 1

Use of Force

Name

Institution Affiliation(s)
ARGUMENTS 2

Use of Force

The making of decisions on when, how, and where to intercede or to intervene with

military equipment, and force usually presents confounding set of questions. During the cold

wars, world wars, and past pandemic outbreaks, there needs to be a strategy that overrides the

occurrence of any humanitarian crisis. It is challenging to come with the exact guidelines and set

objectives that will govern on use of force. The questions of how to, when, how, and when to use

the United States of America military resources are entirely on the hands of the American

government. In this uncertain and dynamic world, it is imperative that the American government

set up guidelines and responsibilities to come up with exact instructions on when to use military

intervention. The following will be the circumstances, the manner, and the reasons for when the

United States of America should make a military intervention in other countries.

Under some specific circumstances, the military of the United States of America will

intervene when various nations are under attack or in crisis. Some of the multiple possibilities are

in case of genocide, nuclear threat and bombings, civil and political war, pandemic outbreaks,

economic sabotage, and natural calamities, only to mention a few. There are other interventions

made, but the earlier mentioned cut on when military intervention is required. The American

government will take a form of military intervention in other countries to adhere to certain

counterinsurgency strategies that yield the desired outcomes (Choi & James, 2016). The use of

these strategies is usually in cases of genocide. Other forms of military interventions, such as the

airstrikes and drone attack, are known to be more inhuman. They tend to have collateral damages

in the form of increased mortality rates in human beings. This has not been accepted anywhere in

the world. These are some of the potential risks associated with the direct use of force on human

beings.
ARGUMENTS 3

Due to the lack of a democratically-nominated nation, to handle policing of the entire

world, the United States of America serves as the country of refuge to many countries. The

manner at which the American government works with the use of force and military intervention

is usually guided by principles such as self-determination and national sovereignty. According to

Scharf (2016), the use of international law is relevant when averting a crisis such as the ISIS

wars in the Middle East. It is likely to appear a violation of the international law that relates to

neutrality in the event of a neutral nation permits any attack by organized gangs from within its

jurisdiction. Allowing the passage of any gang unit via a country's territory or even training and

handling military equipment is termed to be more of a military threat. For example, the United

States of America has previously used force when taking warlike zones. In 1991 there was the

Gulf War, Afghanistan has been hit twice, with the famous one being after 9/11. Others include

the non-intervention policy used in Rwanda in 1994, Libya intervention due to the urge to end

the regime of the tyrant leader Muammar Gadhafi. The potential risk associated with the

mentioned attacks was a loss of innocent human lives and the collapse of the economies.

The reasons as to why the United States of America seeks justice to military intervention

is due to preemptive self-defense and the national interest of the intervening nation. According to

Klose (2016), the motivations that guide the American government is the aspect of democracy

and humanitarian assistance. The core values that govern the United States include unity,

diversity, equality, and liberty. These values form the basis of operations that give the mandate to

intervene in the matters of a particular country. Airpower, cyber power, or artificial intelligence

and boots on the ground improve the quality and nature of how effective the military intervention

will result. All forms of interventions should always be human friendly and reduce the number of

casualties or mortality rates. Military intervention motives are aimed at reversing or stoppage any
ARGUMENTS 4

crisis that interferes with human rights and freedom. The United States of America has both the

democratic explanation and the proactive fixation of direct democracy to nations that exhibit

potential risks to other countries. The main considerations made when handling missions of

interventions include the soldiers' safety and the need to maximize efficacy in achieving the

mission's set objectives and goals. The United States of America's interventions are justified and

are always the difference between life and death. As a superpower, the American government

has an obligation to intervene in potential risks that seem to disturb global peace initiatives. The

use of force in any country should always be limited to the amount of pressure exerted from the

opposing end of another country.

ARGUMENTS 5

References

Choi, S. W., & James, P. (2016). Why does the United States intervene abroad? Democracy,

human rights violations, and terrorism. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 60(5), 899-926.

Klose, F. (Ed.). (2016). The Emergence of Humanitarian Intervention: Ideas and Practice from

the Nineteenth Century to the Present. Cambridge University Press.

Scharf, M. P. (2016). How the war against ISIS changed international law. Case W. Res. J. Int'l

L., 48, 15.