Posted on 05/14/2008 3:55:17 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
Libs are always for use of the United States military as long as there is no national interest for us. See: all military operations under the Clinton Administration.
Kaplan is actually a good guy - have read IMPERIAL GRUNTS and HOG PILOTS, BLUE WATER GRUNTS. He’s very complimentary of the US military.
Perhaps the Dutch and the Italians? ( after all these countries actually deploy troops to support the US occasionally).
The left only opposed Iraq because it was a vehicle to oppose a Republican and not make it look like vile partisanship. That is the only reason.
liberals have always done this.
remember darfur?
they want intervention.
remember vietnam?
that was a liberal war until the left dumped it on nixon.
and, dumped nixon.
the results:
1. opec
2. a sunni insurgency.
3. a shiite insurgency.
but most americans don’t know the difference between the sunni’s and shia,
nor could they locate countries in the middle east.
we haven’t recovered from the carter administration, nor has any u.s. president since dealt effectively with the problem.
Invade the country because we don’t like the government? Hasn’t the Left accused the U.S. of this many times?
We invaded Somalia for humanitarian reasons, and our liberal President Clinton pulled them out. Somalia has turned out real well.
How could I forget Haiti? That turned out real well, too.
I would be the first to volunteer. So unless you have something constructive to say....remain quiet. If I wanted your opinion I would give it to you.
A case can be made for US national interest. 1. China is likely to be our biggest threat in the future. A pro-western democracy of 40 million people between India and China would be to our great benefit. 2. The current junta is deeply involved the drug trade. They are large suppliers of Heroine and Meth. They sold the port facilities in Rangoon to a drug lord under indictment in the US. 3. The SPDC are currently at work on a secret nuclear power plant and have ties to North Korea. 4. The exit strategy is already in place. Burma had an election in 1990. Most of the winners including Aung San Suu Kyi are in jail or in exile. The National League for Democracy won 83% of the vote in that election and could take over fairly quickly if the junta was removed.
I've been working on humanitarian relief in Burma for 8 years and I would be all for intervention on humanitarian grounds alone. However, there is an option that most politicians overlook. We do not have only two choices, do nothing or invade. There is a third option. There are millions of oppressed people in Burma and pro-democracy rebel groups that have been fighting for 60 years. There are plenty of people in Burma who would be willing to fight for their freedom. Arm and train the rebels. Throw in a couple of B2’s and some JDAMS and the US could free 40 million people from oppression and gain a new ally in Asia. Unforunately I think the most likely outcome is that the world will stand by again as they did in Turkey, Cambodia, Rwanda and Darfur while innocent people are slaughtered and tyrants strengthen their grip. To learn more go to: www.freeburmarangers.org www.prayforburma.org
I think he sees Myanmar as the perfect opportunity to test out some of the tactics he talks about, but I agree with the general sentiment to pass on this one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.