Re: The debate

From: Eliyahu Rooff (lrooff_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 10/04/04 

Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 21:28:16 -0700

"Anne Carle" <acarle@munge.com> wrote in message
news:2l11m0dlnd3p7ohd7mt519r58fqjs9rr2g@4ax.com...
> On 03 Oct 2004 21:47:35 GMT, gdubson@aol.comnospam (Gdubson) wrote:
>
>>> I don't really equate the ousting
>>>of a regime not supported by the country's people as war in the
>>>traditional sense. The world may well be done with "traditional"
>>>wars.
>>>
>>>Anne/OH
>>>
>>
>>And it's mighty damn nice of our country to decide who needs regime
>>change,
>>isn't it? Imagine how grateful we would be if someone decided we
>>needed
>>similar help.
>>
>>Gisele
> It smacks of arrogance for sure, but I hold hopes that our intentions
> are good. Surely you agree that the people of Iraq have been horribly
> oppressed during Sadam's regime...? Not that I'm advocating
> intervention, but the oppression and crimes against humanity are real
> enough.
>
That's the problem... deciding who to tolerate and who to depose. As bad
as Saddam was (and he's someone who, as my friends in Tennessee would
say, "needs killing"), there are others still in power who are far
worse, everywhere from North Korea to despotic African republics. In
theory, the UN should be dealing with these tyrants. Unfortunately, the
UN has become a toothless tiger that fills its human rights commission
with the worst violators of human rights, lets tinhorn dictators and
rulers of tiny banana republics have an equal vote with the major
powers -- and since there are more of them than of major powers, they
effectively styme efforts to free the oppressed.

Eliyahu

Quantcast