Well the hesitation seems inconsistent next to the way we were raring to go into Iraq. If we are going to intervene on the side of right Liberia would seem to be a case for it. Whether in fact this should be our policy is something I have doubts about. Some of these disputes have roots that go back for centuries. How do we even sort out who is right? But on the other hand should we allow massacres...
Dana Daryl Walsh writes: > sorry for jumpin' in like this. couple > comments about Liberia. the U.S.'s obligation/role > w/r/t Liberia seems different than the US and Somalia. > whether the history that ties Liberia to the U.S. and us to them > is sufficient to obligate the u.s. to intervene on some moral > basis, who knows? > > in any case, the U.S. is really farkin late > to the party: the Liberian civil war started in 1989. > Had--as many in Liberia hoped--the U.S. Marines floating off the > coast of Liberia at that time gone in to keep the peace instead > of just evacuate Americans, how many lives might've been saved? > how much infrastructure preserved? the U.S. going in now is like > the police standing outside a bar while a brawl unfolds and > waiting until the most brutal have prevailed and then going and > keeping peace among the final few....sad. > > also, Liberia has nicer beaches than Somalia... > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
