Barack Obama says preventing genocide is not reason enough to remain in Iraq:
''Well, look, if that's the criteria by which we are making decisions on the deployment of U.S. forces, then by that argument you would have 300,000 troops in the Congo right now -- where millions have been slaughtered as a consequence of ethnic strife -- which we haven't done,'' Obama said in an interview with The Associated Press.''We would be deploying unilaterally and occupying the Sudan, which we haven't done. Those of us who care about Darfur don't think it would be a good idea,'' he said.
Obama, a first-term senator from Illinois, said it's likely there would be increased bloodshed if U.S. forces left Iraq.
You could counter that the US has a special obligation to remain in Iraq to stop ethnic strife, inasmuch as our intervention in the country removed the dam (the Saddam, to be precise) that was holding back the waters of hate. But I still think Obama is right (as is Matt Yglesias): humanitarian intervention has to be proportional, and have a real possibility of succeeding, in order to justify putting our troops in harm's way to stop genocidal killing.
But what I really want to know is what David Rieff thinks about this.
UPDATE: Niall Ferguson says that Obama has been all over the map on this and related issues. For example:
Obama's call for rapid withdrawal from Iraq would make some sense if he was an old-fashioned isolationist. But he's not. His best-selling memoir-cum-manifesto, The Audacity of Hope, dismisses isolationism as unworkable: out of both self-interest and altruism, the United States has no alternative but to "help make the world more secure". Looking back on what happened in Rwanda, he reflects that "an international show of force ... might have stopped the slaughter".
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
By mentioning the Congo(and Darfur?) is the Senator everybody loves and never offends anyone suggesting that we should send 300K troops to such lands? The difference is that Iraq as per many reports has the 2nd largest reserve or crude oil on the planet. If the beloved dear seantor cannot or doesn't know thwe difference, he should go abck to Illinois and sheake down a few more businesses or landlords like in the old days of "community organizing".
It might upset the would be beloved by all candidate, but nations have interests, not friends. I don't like the current Bush debacle and would so choose to leave yesterday, oil reserves and Iraqis themselves be damned. But a president has to understand those interests. Part of why we're in this mess is a president putting resources and armed forced behind a policy that's more wishful thinking and softheaded feelings than pursuit of said national interests. What this article reminds us is after we've already had one dunderhead telling us about Iraqis yearing to breathe free for 8 years. We hardly need another president worrying about the latest humanitarian crisis Christiane Amanpour shows on CNN every few months. Feelings, nothing more than feelings.THAT'S HOW WE GOT HERE.
The Iraqis are going to kill each other whether we are there or not. I say, let them do it without us.
> The Iraqis are going to kill each other
> whether we are there or not. I say, let
> them do it without us.
The Geneva Convention, which was signed by the United States, makes occupying forces responsible for security. The Iraqis are killing each other because we've failed to provide that security. The same thing would happen to any country, including our own, if the central government was knocked out and there was no authority to fill the political vacuum.
We signed the Geneva Convention. We should honor it by cleaning up the mess we made.
I agree with Marcello. We should honor the Geneva Convention. It is immoral to go into a country, wipe out their security however imperfect it was, release all out mayhem and then say "Adios, have a nice life"
My son just got back from Iraq at the end of May this year. He was in the army in a special operations position where he worked with the Iraqi civilians on a daily basis. He made friends with many of the Iraqis who were eager to get their new government on its' feet. He saw several of them killed - one whose legs were blown off. He brought back many pictures and videos of some of his Iraqi friends. I've thought about this alot since seeing those pictures and videos. Here are real live people who appear to be very nice who will be slaughtered if we pull out now - especially those who have worked with the US. My son has said that he would do as many tours as it took to make sure they had a chance. He said that even the early beginnings of the surge made a night and day difference. After seeing it up close and personal it is hard to just blow off any moral responsibility or say "Gee sorry but we gotta go." I'm even willing to put up with another year of praying each night that my son is still alive when I wake up. (That is obviously easier for me to do than what my son and others would be doing. He was, as they say over there, "blown up" three times without being hurt. And as a parent I would obviously be relieved if he didn't go, which I know brings up the whole issue of being a chicken hawk but in my case I don't think I will get that luxury knowing his determination.)
We should not have started it in the first place but we did. And, I don't think we have a moral responsibility to save everyone on the planet - isolationism suits me fine - it's a republic not an empire etc. etc. But we did put it all in motion.
It is a sad, despairing view to think that human rights catastrophes are an inevitable part of life. So to save some money and protect our own troops we're going to allow a mass slaughter of Iraqi civilians? And after it's over will there be solemn declarations of "Never again", or will we just abandon that pretense?
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.