I think they should contribute, at least proportionally to their ability. I mean they don't have the standing army we do or the same position as a superpower, but I would be dissapointed if there wasn't a European contingent.
Not to mention, just for the sake of our country and for my own sake as an American, the more countries that join this effort and help out, the less people that have an Anti-american agenda will be able to twist this intervention into a discussion about "American Imperialism".
Not to mention, just for the sake of our country and for my own sake as an American, the more countries that join this effort and help out, the less people that have an Anti-american agenda will be able to twist this intervention into a discussion about "American Imperialism".
What is the point? I mean I am not a staunch conservative and I do think there is a place for humanitarian deployments, but I am just convinced there are too many damn "crises" around the world to pick out one or two. It will be just like Iraq right now, everyone will be taking potshots at our troops and it won't accomplish much beyond keeping peace for a little while. I don't even know what the answer is, all I know is in all these places the power vacuum gets filled quickly, almost invariably by the guy that is either the most ruthless or the most corrupt. Sad but true, that is the way most of Africa is and a little mission isn't about to change that.
Absolutely not. Like Iraq, Liberia poses no compelling threat to America or it's interets. As far as I am aware no mutual defence treaty exists between Liberia and the US. And there is frankly no evidence that the US would not botch it as badly as they have so many other countries' "liberations."
Just because you can kick someone's ass does not mean you can solve his problems. Just because you have more money than someone does mean you can solve his problems. If the people of Liberia cannot or (more likely) will not help themselves, there is no reason on earth why the US or anyone else should.
If the UN is so hell-bent on helping Liberia, they should consider lifting the assorted embargos that they have enforced on the nation (diamonds, travel, and -- ironically -- military support.)
Liberia is a country literally dying from neglect -- the infant mortality rate is in the double digits and the average life expectancy is just over 50. The migration rate is consistenly negative, with approximately 1% of the population leaving the country annually.
This is a country which has slid so ar backwards that even what precious little progress they have made is destroyed in a futile attempt to reverse the downward spiral: out of three rail lines in the country, none are running as the state has long snce sold off the trains and even part of the tracks as scrap. Yet like most backwards, shitwater nations, Liberia abounds with resources that are either untouched, or exploited by the corrupt political and military classes.
Given the above, which are facts seperate form any philosophic or political argument, simple facts and statistics -- would you live like that? Would you sit back and watch your country just disintegrate over a period of decades, watching your condition worsen to medeival levels while most of the rest of the world prospered? If you would -- and that's pretty much all that's left in Liberia, people who would -- then you deserve exactly what is happening in Liberia, as it is the logical conclusion to a sorry history.
Phaedrus
Just because you can kick someone's ass does not mean you can solve his problems. Just because you have more money than someone does mean you can solve his problems. If the people of Liberia cannot or (more likely) will not help themselves, there is no reason on earth why the US or anyone else should.
If the UN is so hell-bent on helping Liberia, they should consider lifting the assorted embargos that they have enforced on the nation (diamonds, travel, and -- ironically -- military support.)
Liberia is a country literally dying from neglect -- the infant mortality rate is in the double digits and the average life expectancy is just over 50. The migration rate is consistenly negative, with approximately 1% of the population leaving the country annually.
This is a country which has slid so ar backwards that even what precious little progress they have made is destroyed in a futile attempt to reverse the downward spiral: out of three rail lines in the country, none are running as the state has long snce sold off the trains and even part of the tracks as scrap. Yet like most backwards, shitwater nations, Liberia abounds with resources that are either untouched, or exploited by the corrupt political and military classes.
Given the above, which are facts seperate form any philosophic or political argument, simple facts and statistics -- would you live like that? Would you sit back and watch your country just disintegrate over a period of decades, watching your condition worsen to medeival levels while most of the rest of the world prospered? If you would -- and that's pretty much all that's left in Liberia, people who would -- then you deserve exactly what is happening in Liberia, as it is the logical conclusion to a sorry history.
Phaedrus
Here, you want to liberate somebody, liberate the American children being held in Tranquility Bay. Send them here; they'll have a blast. And send their parents as well; My east yard is a big flat grassy nothing, more than an acre and a half without trees, power lines or water conduits. We can bury the parents up to their necks then practice our lawn-mowing techniques.
Phaedrus
Phaedrus
Phaedrus,
We agree on most of what you wrote, except Iraq.
There's 50 different sitiations around the world similar to Liberia and the US cannot fix them all, if any. So why Liberia? Why not Rwanda? Why not the murdering going on in Sudan?
Howard Dean is ready to send troops to Liberia.
Bush seems ready. I say they're both wrong.
We agree on most of what you wrote, except Iraq.
There's 50 different sitiations around the world similar to Liberia and the US cannot fix them all, if any. So why Liberia? Why not Rwanda? Why not the murdering going on in Sudan?
Howard Dean is ready to send troops to Liberia.
Bush seems ready. I say they're both wrong.
"And it would be great to see us send troops to help people rather than just to secure our oil interests."
Besides ww2, that has never happened, nor will it ever. How bout bubya sending some humanitarian help for kids in east harlem shooting each other up with guns and themselves with drugs, oh wait, he has, guns and drugs.
"animals is a pretty accurate description."
As much as i agree that almost all arab world is barbarically backward and people are dehumanized, i think anyone calling another person an animal is pretty fvcked up and requires psychiatric help. Besides, a lot would think that a good proportion of americans, some of which are overweight, hamburger eating, gun owning, mentally impaired middle class comfort addicts are animals too. As as a great philosopher once said, maybe a middle eastern animal struggling for his life, a dying animal, is more human like a lot of pig acting human being, even if they like to consider themselves as democrats. And lest we forget the pretzel choking animal.
Besides ww2, that has never happened, nor will it ever. How bout bubya sending some humanitarian help for kids in east harlem shooting each other up with guns and themselves with drugs, oh wait, he has, guns and drugs.
"animals is a pretty accurate description."
As much as i agree that almost all arab world is barbarically backward and people are dehumanized, i think anyone calling another person an animal is pretty fvcked up and requires psychiatric help. Besides, a lot would think that a good proportion of americans, some of which are overweight, hamburger eating, gun owning, mentally impaired middle class comfort addicts are animals too. As as a great philosopher once said, maybe a middle eastern animal struggling for his life, a dying animal, is more human like a lot of pig acting human being, even if they like to consider themselves as democrats. And lest we forget the pretzel choking animal.
Oh, YAY! Now Taylor has decided to step down, but has established no timeline and basically makes the US "coming to the rescue" a condition of leaving office.
Story here.
So now, if we don't send troops, it's our fault that this weak, corrupt little backwater is rapidly vanishing from the map. They haven't seen a day of peace in nearly fifteen years, but if we won't go here in 2003 it's all the US' fault.
Phaedrus
Story here.
So now, if we don't send troops, it's our fault that this weak, corrupt little backwater is rapidly vanishing from the map. They haven't seen a day of peace in nearly fifteen years, but if we won't go here in 2003 it's all the US' fault.
Phaedrus
