blatham wrote:[
Clinton was too slow there. But the notion that a conservative government (recall Bush's statements re "nation building") would have been quicker in that case isn't credible. Intervention for reasons of human suffering hasn't been a serious part of American foreign policy. I think it should have been and should be (one corner of agreement I have with neoconservatives).
It is true that we don't know what Bush would have done under those circumstances. However, it is a fact that it was the Republican leader of the Senate and Clinton's Republican opponent in his second election who persistently called for action with respect to Bosnia and who politically forced Clinton to act.
Is intervention for the relief of human suffering a part of the policy of any nation? Has the UK intervened to relieve the suffering of its former colonial subjects in Zimbabwe?? or to limit Apartheidt in the old South Africa?? Did the Belgians intervene to protect their former subjects in Rwanda? France has intervened in its former African colonies numerous times, but always to protect French commercial interests, never the distressed population. Has Canada ever intervened to help anyone?
I suspect that helping the Iraqis achieve a modicum of Democracy and a better life was indeed a part of our motivation, but recognize that our security interests were the greatest part of it.
Quote:But the notion that Bush went into Iraq for humanitarian reasons just doesn't pass muster. It is strategic and relates to ensuring petroleum supplies essential to the US and world economy. Far worse suffering is occuring now in Africa than was the case in Iraq.
I think the oil question is less significant than the importance of influencing future political development in that part of the world. We seem to have achieved a degree of success at that in Afghanistan. What help has Canada given Africa? Worse still are the Europeans who won't open their markets to African agricultural imports and who have effectively prevented African countries from using sorrely needed GM seeds to raise crop yields.
Quote:I don't know how often we folks from outside the US have to tell you that what we are yelling about IS this notion of the US heaving so easily to a big daddy presumption in the world. It isn't jealousy that pisses everyone off. And the degree to which this stuff loses you friends and affinity, to that degree you will not get help up the road. Believe me, george, you could remove the top ten centimeters of John Bolton's brain and it wouldn't make the slightest difference.
While the Soviet Union was a threat to all we got very few complaints in this regard. The sudden collapse of the Soviet Empire left us somewhat stranded in a position of super prominence, and suddenly the object of the jealousy and resentment of those who, moments earlier, were only too glad to stand in our protective shadow.
The U.S. has lost a good deal of confidence in the U.N. both as an organization and as a useful forum for resolving serious matters. I believe the facts strongly support both judgements. John Bolton's appointment is an indicator. Whether or not he is stupid is something I don't know and I'm sure you don't either.
.
