Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Tailgunner Joe
Does it bother you that we are enforcing the UN no-fly zone, or are we violating it by exceeding its mandate and not "protecting civilians?" Which is it?

Yes. As time goes by and I feel I have a clearer image of "The Big Picture" the more of an isolationist I become. The idea that our armed forces are being used to depose recognized foreign leaders on what can only be described as a whim scares me greatly.

Afghanistan I can understand, they attacked us. Iraq I can still justify in some way, because they threatened us and aided our enemies. Also, we were able to lure great numbers of Al Qaeda to Iraq and kill them, a task which is infinitely more complicated in Afghanistan.

But the list goes on, seemingly ever expanding. We attack Pakistan, our reluctant ally, who helps us out of fear and betrays and robs us any chance they get. Yet we pour billions into their country and still call them friend because we can not get out of Afghanistan. We bomb Yemen and Somalia, not because their governments have attacked us but because terrorists from those countries have taken advantage of our shoddy and schizophrenic security at home. We make Libya an ally, establish diplomatic relations and trade, invest in their industry, welcome their terrorist leader with a hearty handshake and a promise that all is forgiven. Then when a bunch of disaffected protesters in a distant town are suppressed we turn on our newly minted friend and begin to destroy his military and target him for assassination. Why? Because he didn't immediately abdicate power.

Who will we attack next? What dictator, king, or President-for-Life can rest easy, not knowing who the next U.N. mandate will be against? Zimbabwe? Belarus? Myanmar? Venezuela? How many No-Fly-Zone-Regime-Changes under a U.N. flag will NATO enforce? What have we become?

33 posted on 08/25/2011 4:28:28 AM PDT by Pan_Yan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]


To: Pan_Yan
Zimbabwe? Belarus? Myanmar? Venezuela?

Personally I favor regime change in all those places. If the UN does not veto these actions, then good! All the better!

We should relieve Pakistan of the burden of their weapons of mass destruction.

We should bomb Yemen and Somalia a lot more.

Kadaffy was never an ally. You believed that because you wanted to. You wanted to believe that Bush made an enemy into an ally, but that was never true. The United Kingdom is our ally, not Libya.

If you believe that nations have no permanent allies, but permanent interests, then you need to understand that we dealt with Kadaffy only because it was in our interest to do so at the time, just like it is now in our interest to destroy him. Overthrowing Kadaffy has nothing to do with "protecting civilians", "international law", or any other "humanitarian" concern. It was entirely strategic and geopolitical. It was indeed wise for President Bush to have tricked Kadaffy into disarming himself. It made regime change possible.

37 posted on 08/28/2011 3:17:33 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson