Make Up Your Minds...
Once again, this is inspired by a news article I found. Apparently, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan is planning to appeal to President Bush to provide rapid-deployment troops as part of the U.N. Peacekeeping Force in Darfur, Sudan. I find this troubling.
I don't mind the world coming to the U.S. for assistance. It's actually fairly logical. We've got the largest economy, the largest military, and some of the best-trained forces in the world. The range of resources we can throw into a mission like that, theoretically, is outside the scope of any other nation in the world.
The thing that troubles me is the double-standard of the international community. They have spent years, if not decades, decrying the U.S. tendency to play 'policeman' to the rest of the world. But when the need arises, we are the first ones they come to. It puts us in a lose-lose scenario. If we send in help, we're meddling where we shouldn't be (it doesn't matter that the U.N. invited us, five years down the road, when people are citing U.S. involvement in global affairs, they aren't going to distinguish which were at the behest of the U.N. versus direct U.S. intervention...it will all be U.S. troops on foreign soil.) If we DON'T send help, we are turning a callous shoulder to the plight of the Sudanese refugees suffering in the Darfur region.
Personally, I don't mind extending a helping hand. But I get a little tentative about it when people keep trying to bite it. If the world wants the U.S. to mind it's own business, they need to stop dragging us back into the hotspots. If they're going to use us to put out their fires, then they better have a little more understanding when we try to put out our own. (No, I'm not using this to justify Iraq...but that's not the only place where U.S. forces are operating in the world.)
If the world doesn't like us playing policeman, they need to stop handing us the badge.
Once again, this is inspired by a news article I found. Apparently, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan is planning to appeal to President Bush to provide rapid-deployment troops as part of the U.N. Peacekeeping Force in Darfur, Sudan. I find this troubling.
I don't mind the world coming to the U.S. for assistance. It's actually fairly logical. We've got the largest economy, the largest military, and some of the best-trained forces in the world. The range of resources we can throw into a mission like that, theoretically, is outside the scope of any other nation in the world.
The thing that troubles me is the double-standard of the international community. They have spent years, if not decades, decrying the U.S. tendency to play 'policeman' to the rest of the world. But when the need arises, we are the first ones they come to. It puts us in a lose-lose scenario. If we send in help, we're meddling where we shouldn't be (it doesn't matter that the U.N. invited us, five years down the road, when people are citing U.S. involvement in global affairs, they aren't going to distinguish which were at the behest of the U.N. versus direct U.S. intervention...it will all be U.S. troops on foreign soil.) If we DON'T send help, we are turning a callous shoulder to the plight of the Sudanese refugees suffering in the Darfur region.
Personally, I don't mind extending a helping hand. But I get a little tentative about it when people keep trying to bite it. If the world wants the U.S. to mind it's own business, they need to stop dragging us back into the hotspots. If they're going to use us to put out their fires, then they better have a little more understanding when we try to put out our own. (No, I'm not using this to justify Iraq...but that's not the only place where U.S. forces are operating in the world.)
If the world doesn't like us playing policeman, they need to stop handing us the badge.
posted by Curtis at 8:25 PM
2 Comments:
Dude, I like that last quote!
Curtis:
As far as PICASSO goes, there is one more weekend - this weekend, Wednesday thru Saturday (15 - 18). Performance time is 7:30 and it's at the Lyric.
As far as that $300 from the 'union' theater - is the shop union? Do they only hire a handful of equity people? That's the problem. You need a fully union company, not a cherry-picking one. You'd be guaranteed your paycheck at the end of each week. You better believe that the equity actors are getting paid. I'm guessing it's the Egyptian. I like what they're doing so far but they need to get their entire act together, not just here and there.
As far as the UN goes (and this shouldn't surprise you), I disagree. Darfur is the only place on the earth at the moment where we SHOULD be. Let's not forget that the U.N. was fixing the problems in Iraq (as it has in many other places) before Bush ignored their work and went in with guns blazing, attacking a country which hadn't done a damn thing to us.
The U.S. has made enemies of past international friends by ignoring not only U.N. work but also World Court and international treaties with regard to attacking Iraq, imprisoning soldiers illegally (and not allowing them a trial, guaranteed by the Geneva Convention which is also being ignored by the Bush Administration), torturing prisoners, selling weapons to governments against U.N. and World wishes and LAWS (the US is the #1 supplier of weapons in the world - weapons, not troops). The list goes on and on.
You got your quote wrong. BUSH thinks we're the police. The rest of the world wants us to keep our noses out of their affairs.
The U.N. was right about Bosnia and the atrocities and genocide that was happening there. Bush the First sent our troops in there and Clinton was in office when the war ended. It was fought well and finished right. Darfur is the same. When we go in as a true coalition with the rest of the world, it is appropriate. When we are the rogue nation, we inevitably stand to lose - big time.
Post a Comment
<< Home