This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

International relations Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. Politics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

The clause "world to follow their actions or respond to their wishes." doesn't seem to conform to the neutral point of view to me, in that "wishes" is a word typically used to describe dictators and other capricious rulers.

Examples are good, but this was not:

One of the best examples of hard power is the 2003 United States invasion of Iraq and its mutual control over much of the world. Nations like the United States can use their known military potential to force other nations in the world to adhere to their demands.

This is a poor example, because the facts aren't in. The US does not exert "mutual control over much of the world" in any reasonable sense I can think of -- I can't even tell what that means! And the invasion was an example of the US not gettmutual control over much of the worlding its demands, in that many friendly nations opposed the invasion, and Iraq (whom the US was threatening military) did not give in to any demands. Twinxor t 12:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC) reply

This article has extreme bias. In one paragraph, they attack the US policy with Iraq by attacking George Bush specifically, but in the next paragraph, they attack the US policy with Iran and they make no mention of the fact that Barrack Obama pushed for this strategy. November 5, 2014

so no one going to say about the current sanctions against russia ? 182.3.103.126 ( talk) 22:04, 6 July 2023 (UTC) reply

In a persons understanding 41.13.129.94 ( talk) 17:52, 7 April 2024 (UTC) reply