I think it's too messy and dangerous for the UN and the press, Amnesty Int'l, Doctors w/out Borders and the Red Cross inside Iraq - oh, and Dem politicians / socialists. For their own safety, they should remain outside the border until the troops and the Iraqi people find and remove the bad guys, the WMDs - and get settled.
(^;
As much as it pains me, I need to disagree.
What has infuriated me about the NGOs is this expectation, or perceived right, to safety while performing a charitable or humanitarian mission. BS! Crime and violence exists where charity and humanitarian relief is most needed.
To me there are three types of caregivers:
1. Those that demand others defend them - then they must either applaud or at least remain silent concerning the violence and ugliness that security requires.
2. Those that are willing to defend themselves - they are less hypocritical.
3. Those that want to ameliorate the needs of the world, without resorting to violence to defend themselves - they need to do it with the courage of a martyr.
These are volunteers, no different than our military volunteers. They have answered a calling. We should expect these caregivers to go into places that are not secure. We should mourn their deaths and proclaim their heroism. Otherwise we should call them cowards, hypocrites and charlatans.
Having met and operated alongside some of these exceptional folks, I have a very high expectation based on a standard set by their predecessors.