There will be a more peaceful world if America actively maintains it's hegemony

hello, alvinthegreat. Thank you for starting this debate. _________ I negate. The affirmative gives me a nice an easy summary of his position at the end of his R1: "Thus, America must maintain it's hegemony and actively assert it's policies in order to ensure future wars do not happen." 1) TURN - Let others take over. SINCE America is basically the last barrier for so many wars happening, we ought to withdraw now and not later. Conflicts such as the one he provides between China and Taiwan are not being solved, and the flames on both sides are just being fueled more every day. As we can see from the empirical example of Britain from its dominance in 1896 to 1916, a superpower can decline pretty rapidly. If we try to continue this hegemony and such an event occrus, then all those conflicts the PRO mentions will have extremely horrifying outcomes. It's better to step out now, because today, many other countries are already attempting to balance out the US's power, and THOSE countries can take over in watching the safety of the world. As they've always said, 'the more the merrier'. 2) TURN - Multipolarity good. IF WE DO NOT, then the balancing will continue and results for US will be disastrous - "unipolarity appears as the least stable of international configurations."TM The two prior unipolar moments in international history—France under Louis XIV and mid-Victorian Britain— suggest that hegemony prompts the near-simultaneous emergence of several new great powers and the consequent transformation of the international system from unipolarity to multipolarity" (Layne, Christopher - "The Peace Of Illusions") And we know how THOSE two governments fared in the international community. Unlike how the PRO has put it, the new rising superpowers in America's place will NOT be hostile. Again from Layne - "The major powers in Eurasia have a much more immediate interest in stopping a rising hegemon in their midst than does the United Sates, and it's money in the bank that some of them will step up to the plate and balance against a powerful, expansionist state in their own neighborhood." I think in terms of who, either the PRO or CON, is getting more benefits in "keeping other countries in check politically and militarily", the CON already wins based on the intuitive notion that more people attempting to solve a problem is better than one person trying to do it alone. As the PRO says, "world police". I believe a team of police can take care of more problems, more efficiently, and better than just a single policeman. 3) TURN AGAIN - Iraq war is solved if we withdraw. Look. Terrorism directed against the United States only happens BECAUSE of hegemony. 9/11 happened BECAUSE we were screwing around in the Middle East. It's all happening BECAUSE of our imperialistic regime. And uhh. I don't think it'll be a "pale reflection" at all, as what's happening in Iraq is this: WE'RE KILLING IRAQI CIVILIANS; SETTING UP BOMBS, AND SNIPING OFF ANYONE THAT COMES NEAR IT AND THEN SAYING THAT THE IRAQI THAT WALKED NEAR THE BOMB WAS SETTING IT INTO PLACE. I WOULD THINK THAT IF WE WITHDREW FROM IRAQ, F***ING IMMORAL SH*T LIKE THIS WOULDN'T BE HAPPENING. Reflection? Who's fighting in iraq? Us. Versus anyone that looks suspicious. What will happen if you leave then, you ask? I'll tell you what'll happen. Like Layne says, the eurasian community will step in if we step down from our self-proclaimed dominance and solve Syria and whoever else wanted a piece of iraq. Nothing other than diplomacy will arise. Terrorism itself outside of that can never be solved. The US Government keeps telling us about this "war on terror" like "terror" is some sort of country, or an organized crime syndicate. It's this whole godd*** misconception. Let me tell you folks, the "war on terror" makes just as much as a "war on stealing". Stealing is never going to be solved, unless you put every last person on earth into their own locked steel cubicle. If you give people freedom, there IS going to be some people that abuse that freedom. It's like catching a teenager shoplifting and then saying he's linked to some stealing organization. It just doesn't work that way. And even then, with groups such as al-qaeda, Catching the leader won't do anything. The next person will just come to the top position. And then the next one. And then the next one. And then the next one........ That's how ORGANIZED terrorism works. How about UNORGANIZED terrorism? How the hell do you solve that????? You don't. What you do though, is take America out of its hegemonic imperialistic position in the world, so terrorists have no reason to direct their attacks towards us. There is going to be no "reflection" as Eurasian powers aren't trying to control the Middle East and they AREN'T in Iraq just for oil, and terrorists won't have a reason do direct attacks against THEM either. Terrorism will always exist. But withdrawing from the international arena as the "leader" will not result in organized terrorism attacking our or other governments. __________________ In short, There will be a more peaceful world if America STOPS ENTIRELY its hegemonic and imperialistic regime.