View Single Post
  #14  
Old 04-17-2008, 11:52 PM
shinerbock shinerbock is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by pbear19 View Post
First time I've been online today, so let me clarify why I think threatening 'massive retaliation' against Iran is different from 'free darfur'.

One (to me) means the United States taking military action in no uncertain terms, being the physical agressor. The other means taking internationally-backed diplomatic action. I do not support US military action in Darfur, and I have not been under the impression that the majority of democrats support US military action there, either. I will absolutely concede I am wrong in that if someone can provide the tangible evidence.

I wholeheartedly disagree that we should be using agressive military tactics to push our individual country's agenda. If we choose to use negotiation, economic sanctions, peaceful organization, etc, acting in concert with the collective wishes of the UN, then I find that action to be acceptable. The promise of agressive military action by Hillary is what I found disturbing, and what to me is more in line with the current administration's foreign policy.
I understand what you're saying. Of course I fundamentally agree with your hesitation to use military tactics, but nevertheless I see where you're coming from.

I understand your willingness to accept more peace-driven interventionist policy, but I think it has a history of failure. We tried and failed in Lebanon (by failure, I don't mean our military, I mean our attempted role). We tried and failed in Somalia (same thing). The UN has been unbelievably inept in Somalia, Rwanda, and now Sudan. If you advocate intervention into one of these situations, US servicemen are going to pay with their lives. I'm not saying that there are no causes that may be worth it, but I am questioning whether tying their hands behind their back is blatantly irresponsible. My Marine buddies all joke about how they're gonna end up in Darfur with rifles unloaded and absurd ROE (Iraq isn't far off, really). Basically, I think it is easy to advocate one because it is much more palatable to do so, but reality is often a different story (and you probably know this, I'm just clarifying my view).
Reply With Quote