Posted on 05/22/2007 9:44:13 AM PDT by edcoil
You're half right and half wrong. Neither Darfur, nor a tin pot secularist like Saddam were threats to the U.S.
What’s his exit strategy? These Darfurese need to quit dragging their feet.
-if Biden speaks, is anyone listening?
.....defending our own country from terrorism. Apparently, Biden doesn't feel our own country is that important?
Nothing. However, we are already busy with Iraq and can't step in and help deal with all the world's problems. Sometimes we have to make hard choices, and we are already committed in Iraq.
Hey what a plan, Joe...Mission Accomplished, huh? What do we do the next day when IED's and homicide bombers start blowing up? We could always just change the subject.
Ron Paul the LIBERTARIAN surrender monkey posing as a republican? The GOP’s Dennis Kucinich? Bwahahahahaha, yeah I will take him or his supporters seriously, not.
Either you have been asleep for the last 20 years or you are conviently closing your eyes to justify your isolationist view. I suspect the latter.
‘Tell me Senator Biden, what makes THOSE lives more important than Iraqi lives?’
Exactly! Biden is a joke...that is not at all funny.
I agree in intervening. I reecently saw a Fox report on the fighting there. Militia men - er animals - after plundering a village then rape all the women. One woman was raped many times daily for a week while her children watched. Then the men disemboweled her husband while they forced her to watch while being raped.
I believe if no one acts to stop this, as they can’t do it themselves, it affects the entire planet. Noblesse oblige.
America is big enough to do this.
we’re not exactly an all-white country. I’m more concerned that innocents are being slaughtered there.
I don’t support a troop invasion, but I think a NATO bombing mission to take out their tanks and gunships would be appropriate.
The other African nations won’t deal with this.
If the democrats think the mideast is a mess they haven’t seen nuthin yet. African wars make the brutality of the mideast look like a cakewalk.
Can you imagine the field day the media would have if American troops were dropped into direct conflict with the child armies of Africa?
From the persepective of the American government...there should be no difference...the US government has one moral obligation...to defend Americans and American interests...anything else will cost us more than we expect (to paraphrase Ralph Peters)
We Americans must avoid fantastic schemes to rescue those for whom we bear no responsibility, and we must resist imagining a moral splendor for murderers who better understand media manipulation than the murderers with whom they are in conflict. We must learn not to trust our eyes and ears--and, especially, their electronic extensions: the media, forever focusing on the crisis of the moment, almost never understand what they witness. In dealing with nationalism and fundamentalism, we must be willing to let the flames burn themselves out whenever we are not in danger of catching fire ourselves. If we want to avoid needless, thankless deaths among our own countrymen, we must try to learn to watch others die with equanimity.
We won't learn this, of course. We will be moved to action because of our emotional needs, heightened by the nonsense of post-colonial guilt. We will send troops to places where they can do no long-term good. We will be forced to choose which human beasts to back. And we will always pay more than we expected to pay when we began our intervention.
--Lt. Col. Ralph Peters
But f*ck those Kurds that got gassed, eh Joe?
My issue with Biden’s remarks is he want to surrender Iraq and engage in Sudan. This is idiotic.
Iraq, Afghanistan (and Iran) have priority. I could agree on engagement in Sudan, not by sending troops, but by destroying the militias and as said above the Sudanese army vehicles and airforce. We should also drain their finances, since they are a longtime terrorist base aswell.
Troops from stable African nations can then be stationed in the areas of question.
I wonder if the Democrats will “fix” Haiti again.
The same reasoning was used to get the US involved in Iraq in the first place, in 1991. Oppressed people (the Kuwaiti) were being held hostage by a neighboring tyrant, and the world was stirred to send the US military might in to pacify the region.
At least then, there was an important factor to demanding intervention - the oil supply to the world was in danger of being disrupted. Well, maybe not so much, but the equivalence was established in the minds of many - war (and American blood) for oil.
But now, in Darfur, intervention becomes a way to “redeem” ourselves, fighting a battle for the benefit of freeing an oppressed people, without the stigma of doing it for oil.
It is apparently immoral to go to war for economic reasons, but highly honorable to go to war for a purpose, and in a place, where there is absolutely no economic benefit. whatsoever.
No I have been reading what all the objective official reports have been saying for the last five years (other than the Bush spin machine which is based entirely on wishful thinking)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.