The U.S. military has long played a role in conflicts around the world, often intervening in regions far from home. These interventions have been aimed at promoting global stability, protecting human rights, or supporting allies. Some believe that continued U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts strengthens global leadership and deters threats before they reach American soil while perpetuating the spread of democratic values. However, opponents argue that intervening in conflicts that don’t directly affect the security of the American people only drains resources, costs lives, and draw the country into conflicts whose negatives outweigh the benefits while crippling nation’s ability to grow independently.

Opponents of military intervention in foreign conflicts argue that the U.S. should prioritize its own security and invest in domestic needs. They claim that involvement in overseas conflicts often results in prolonged wars, loss of American lives, and significant financial costs. Others believe that addressing issues domestically outweighs addressing human rights violations and threats to democracy abroad. Some also argue that interventions can lead to unintended consequences, including instability, resentment toward the U.S., or escalation of regional tensions. By avoiding entanglement in foreign wars, they believe the U.S. can maintain a more focused and effective national defense.

Supporters of military interventions argue that U.S. involvement abroad is essential for maintaining global order and protecting human rights. They claim that early intervention can prevent larger conflicts and deter aggression by hostile powers. Additionally, they argue that supporting allies and spreading democratic values abroad ultimately benefits U.S. interests in the form of global economic stability and improved national security. Some also believe that withdrawing from global conflicts could create power vacuums that will allow our adversaries to step in and exert influence.

So, what do you think? Should the U.S. military stop intervening in foreign conflicts that don’t directly affect our national security? Students can answer, “Yes, they should;” “No, they should not;” or a nuanced answer in between! Be sure to submit your responses by May 22 to be considered for this week’s contest.

 

---

Note: Ideal Think the Vote responses include the following:      

• Address the question asked in a thoughtful and meaningful manner     
• Use cited facts and constitutional arguments when appropriate to support their answers      
• Are expressed in cohesive sentences and are free of distracting spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors      
• They address counterarguments and opposing concerns in a respectful manner      
• They organize their answer in a manner that flows logically and reads clearly   

---

JOIN THE DEBATE BELOW FOR A CHANCE TO WIN A $1,000 CASH SCHOLARSHIP! 

For this question, BRI will be giving away two $25 gift cards, one to each person providing the best defense of each side of the debate. Both students will also win BRI swag. Each student winner will also be entered for a chance to win a grand prize of a $1,000 cash scholarship. Additionally, the referring teachers for both students will each win a $25 gift card and BRI swag. 

This question will run from 5/8/25 to 5/22/25, so be sure to submit your answers in time to be considered for our prizes!