So, let my put forth a hypothetical. Lets assume this was done by an
administration that had shown a real sucess rebuilding Afganistan, and had a very good team ready to work in reconstructing Iraq, and had laid out the real costs to the American people and gotten buy in. Lets suppose that
Bush had not exaggerated the level of certainty for WMD from "there are
very strong indications...even French intelligence thinks so" to total
certainty. In this case, with proper preparation for sucess, would
completing the Gulf War have been wrong?...especially since it faded into a often violated cease fire agreement instead of ending in '91.
I'm a bit confused. You seem to be talking about the current struggle at the beginning of the paragraph and the first Gulf war at the end of it. But if the question is would I have supported the present war had the administration been better prepared and told the truth about its intentions and motivations, the answer is a definate maybe. I think that's the kind of thing you can't really speculate on unless you know all the details of the situation. I'll be honest with you though, Bush's interest in Iraq is too much like a bear's interest in a honey tree for me to feel comfortable with his judgement in this situation.
And the fact that the UN repeatedly insisted on not acting. As Gautam
said, stopping the slaughter violated international law. This brings up
the obvious question: what is the value in international law when it
requires us to, when asked, stand aside so genocide can occure? Are we
required to follow the wishes of the UN and allow genocide to take place,
or are we morally compelled to stop genocide. (I will argue strongly that the third option, getting the UN to stop genocide is often not a real
option.)
Some laws are just wrong. The U.N. is a flawed institution, but the idea of an impartial world governing body that can solve these kinds of problems is, IMO, a good one. We need to either fix the U.N. or create something that works. I just don't think we can expect the rest of the world to be saddled and ridden by the U.S. That said, I agree with the criticism of European nations in matters such as the Yugoslavia debacle.
I agree that the US should have intervened. Do you agree, if it would have done so, it would have been dissed by a great deal of the world for
imperealism? Should we have been willing to violate international law to
save half a million human lives?
What did the U.S. have to gain by intervening in Rwanda? If we were successful in preventing a genocide and that was our clear motive in interveneing, the success of our mission would speak for itself. If, instead of asking for another $25 B for Iraq, we put that kind of money and effort towards ending the AIDS epidemic, who could doubt our motive was pure? Only those who have dishonest motives themselves.
One thing I think a lot of people don't understand. Terrorism and the war against it are not about convincing the terrorists that they are right or convincing those that fight terrorism that they are right - its about convincing those people that aren't sure who to believe who is right. Terrorists can behead a hundred Americans and it won't be as damaging to their reputation as the prison guard scandal is to us. We're the ones waving the flag of freedom and democracy and human dignity, and the scandal calls our sincerity into question. That the terrorists are murdering, gutless scumbags is not breaking news, but the prison scandal reinforces the idea that they _have_ to be murdering, gutless scumbags in order to combat this mega-power that humiliates their people.
Please don't construe the above as justifying anything the terrorists do. Terrorism needs to be eliminated, but we're going about it all wrong. Win the hearts and minds of the undecided. Prove your sincerity in a manner it's difficult to question. Intervening in Rwanda with nothing to gain other than knowing we we're doing the right thing, is the kind of thing that convinces the undecided that we are sincere. Invading Iraq where our motives are more easily questioned, no matter how sincere we might be, is a much more difficult proposition.
I've got to cut this off and get some sleep. Hopefully I can finish tomorrow.
-- Doug
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
