Quote:
Originally posted by cherrycola
but when is it our right to intervien in a sovereign nation. The genocide in that country has been going on for quite a sometime.
Also our reasons for invading a country had nothing to do with the genocide, it was only a subfactor if anything.
|
It wasn't the reason, but it was a reason. Just because the genocide had been going on for some time, does not mean that it should be allowed to continue. Bill Clinton should have demanded a regime change as soon in 1994, but he was a moral coward.
In my opinion, we have the moral obligation to intervene in any genocide, past American transgressions not withstanding.
In the first week of March, of 2003, Eli Weisel met with President Bush and urged him to force a regime change in Iraq. Not because of WMD, but because of genocide. That Eli Weisel would urge such an action speaks volumes about the moral imperative to intervene.
We did not go into Iraq for WMD (that was an excuse for the British population) or for oil. Our primary motivation was to remake the region, and do so in the interest of national security. That region needs to be changed. Genocide should have been the primary shield against our motivations. Instead, the Bush administration chose the WMD argument, something that I opposed at the time.
This war is just, and history will probably show it as such.
Threaded Mode