Did it bother you when they said nobody knew what was going on??
Did it bother you that every single one of them didn't know except they refused to use the word genocide because the UN would legally be obligated to enter?
Did it bother you that it was America that somehow assumed responsibility for this? That bothered me when the Belgian contingent left. All of a sudden it became America's issue. America failed. Cut me a break. Not one country came to their aid.
It's not as if America failed, everyone failed. Every single country failed when they butchered those people. Clinton didn't even apologize. Nobody did.
The genocide is comparable to what Saddam did to his people but again nobody did anything. When Saddam was taken from power, they still wished the US had done nothing.
-Rudey
--The best line was how we had no friends, only interests.
Quote:
Originally posted by FHwku
The PBS story marks the 10th anniversary of the 1994 Rwandan genocide of 800,000. Watching it, you hear the term "in retrospect," more than once, but i got the feeling that hindsight was still far from 20/20 for most of the people involved.
1. What are yall's thoughts on the current administration's foreign policy stands on the US's responsibilites to the world, particularly in the Middle East?
2. Can there be an acceptable blend of American interest-based involvement, isolation, and ethics in world situations?
There's always anti-war sentiment, but it seems like most conflicts, in my lifetime at least, have been riddled by a diatribe against any kind of action--anywhere. a sense of "what are we doing there/why are we fighting for them?" "this is just like Vietnam." i'm trying to express some late-night frustration and confusion, and i'm not sure if it's translating clearly onto the page.
|
Threaded Mode