Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: C 111 Nardo
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
RE: Do you want the USA to police the world?
In a broad sense, No!
Localized interventions are not to be excluded though, for security or humanitarian reasons.
Unilateralism should not be the only way either, a cooperation of people of good will and common interest should allow us to judge of the merits of an intervention. Difficult to achieve though, maybe too much so, and certainly not amicable to all parties involved.
One thing that comes to mind. Before I emigrated (or immigrated depending which side I feel like supporting today) to the US, (I was born and educated, partly, in Western Europe), I had friends directly affected by the genocide and tribal conflicts taking place in Rwanda. Europeans did not respond to the call, they should have. We should have policed that region, together, to prevent the attrocities that have taken place, are taking place.
No doubt now that Holywood has produced "Hotel Rwanda", things will be much smoother for the natives. I'm only 53.7% sarcastic here. My experience is that the US media is not very prone to report on international happenings. People posting here are the exception, not the norm, most my neighbors could not care less about Intl. Affairs, as long as it does not affect the price of gas, or the lack of capture of Bin Laden. In that respect, I do not fault the media, I fault the public. Regardless, Europeans were aware of the sad state of affairs, did not need a movie to alert them, and could, SHOULD, have intervened.
Crap, I'm not sure what my answer to your question was, somewhere on the spectrum of "Emphatically Yes" to "Absolutely No", without eliminating "Maybe" as a definite possibility however improbable it supposedly is.
Just because we missed out on the Crusades, we should not be penalized and not have our go at conquering and converting the infidels. Now taking donations...
“I feel so miserable without you; it’s almost like having you here.”
-- Stephen Bishop