Lover of Purple, on Feb 18 2003, 02:53 PM, said:
Lil, I'm not sure anyone can have a good answer for your questions. Perhaps 9/11 was inevitable to get the US to start reacting to these human rights violations world wide. At least that is something good that might come out of all of this. Yeah, the US has ignored these problems (well the government), but maybe it's a little not being able to fix it all at once. I mean where do you start?
Well, I think this has something to do with it. We spent the last decade (or two) ignoring a lot of things that where happening. People like Al Queda constantly sniping at our heals. Afterall, we realize we're suppose to be the grown ups because we're the 900 lb gorilla. And we realize there's risk outside of our boarders, at emabassies and ships like the USS Cole. But then 9/11 happened. And I think people decided it was time to start dealing with the mess out there instead of waiting for it to come here.
If nothing else, we have started and that maybe a benifit of all this, people getting basic human rights.
this is certainly true. the fact is no one was interested in what the Taliban where doing, I'm talking about the people, not the government. They never could have gotten the support to deal with the situation before hand. I have no doubt that the fact a large portion of those suffering were women was part of the disinterest. And despite any protests, the majority of the country is still behind what we're doing now. The polls show that on a regular basis. It's more of a "why us" because everyone is tired, than a "it's wrong".
As far as who gave us the "power" to decide? I guess we did. Is that a good answer? Not really, but don't we all do things because of our own ideals?
I think the world did. They certainly seem to hold us responsible for everything. We're the ones they come running to when they need help. And we're the ones they blame if their lives aren't perfect. I have no problem with us having a say about how that all plays out. If we're going to be the ones to clean up the mess (and you know we are, there's no way around it) then we get to decide when, and whether we want to do it sooner, when it's safer for us, or later, when more of our people might die. I have no problem with us chosing the battles we can win, and getting them out of the way, one at a time. Iraq and N.Korea aren't the same thing. We can just deal with Iraq and settle the mess. N.Korea isn't as easy. But ultimately I think N.Korea is less dangerous. I think they are just trying to blackmail us into giving them more aid so they can survive a little longer. But again, it comes back to someone wanting something from us.
And personally, I don't think we will end up with a global confortation if we attack iraq. And no, I don't know that for sure. I just don't think anyone will want to"defend" Suffam Hussain.
Of course not. The countries in the area want him gone. I think the only ones who seem to want to protect Saddam are France and Germany, and that I find disturbing. But, if this is handled well, and a democracy created, I think it'll go a long way to easing tensions in the area in general. But it will take awhile.
I saw on the news tonight the S.African ambassador to the UN giving a little speech. And basically he thought we should continue inspections, because not to would be admitting they (the UN) failed. So is that the real problem?