What do you think about war? Has the US been to laid back in peacekeeping missions? Is war senseless, or...?

Question

is it the only way to bring about peace?

The US has watched countless wars go out of control.

Rwanada - 800,000 dead
Liberia - 200,000 dead
Sierra Leone - 75,000 dead
Somalia - they are still blasting each other.

Liberia was founded by freed American slaves. America did little, militarily, to quell the violence. Countless conflicts around the world have been allowed to fester while the US government abdicates its responsibility. Can this be morally justified? Is it just simply not our business?

The US gov (as well as the UN) allows problems to escalate into full scale crises and until genocide is reached.

What's your opinion?

Answer 1

We got our asses kicked by kids using burning rubber tires in Somalia. We have no business interfering in other countries conflicts. We are stretched to thin already. No doubt, what is going on in Darfur is tragic...but we can't fix it.

Answer 2

Point 1. The US and its military is not a World Police Force.

Point 2. the United Nations is basically a humanitarian Organization with no standing military force of its own, by their mandate they cannot interfere in countries until called upon to do so.

Point 3. Other countries "festering" problems cannot be laid at the door of the USA.

Point 4. Would the US Taxpayer foot the bill for the uSA to interfere in the worlds problems.

Answer 3

We're damned if we do and damned if we don't it seems.

If we go in heavy handed we're aggressors, imperialist swine.

If we go in singing 'come on brother now smile on each other everyone learn to love one another right now' and the other guys are rocking out to 'let the bodies hit the floor' then we are needlessly risking the lives of our military or inept in combat operations.

If we stay the heck out then we are uncaring and callous.

If I were king (ha! This is of course completely unworkable.) I'd recall all the military to the US, SEAL the borders, evict the UN, renounce our compliance with the Geneva convention, shut off ALL foreign aid, expel all ILLEGAL immigrants, deport all legal immigrants for a period of 1 to 2 years. After that year of complete isolationist policy determine if the world is better off with the US being a participant or if the US is nothing more than a hindrance to the rest of the world.

Answer 4

Even though the U.S. passed the UN Participation Act in 1945, we didn't participate in any peackeeping missions authorized by the UN Security Council under Chapter Six of the UN Charter until after the collapse of the Soviet Union. And, with the exception of Bosnia, our contribution has mostly been in the areas of heavy lift transport by air or ship and other logistic and communication support. In short, we haven't been laid back. We've almost been invisible.
Peace Enforcement Missions authorized by the Security Council under Chapter Seven of the Charter are an entirely different matter. From Korea to Kuwait, Somalia and Kosovo we have made robust troop contributions.
Still I see some sunshine peeking through the clouds with respect to the conflicts you mentioned. The U.S. recently established the Africa Command as one of the unified and specified commands, joining such better known ones as the European, Pacific and Central Commands. But, that has to be backed by the will of the Congress wanting to have more involvement by U.S. troops in Africa. I don't see that happening in my lifetime, no matter which party controls the Congress.

Answer 5

Its simple the US military has always been a "Fighting Military" even if you dont agree with the concept one of the main reasons is we have always been terrible at peace keeping look at Iraqi for example we defeated a country larger than california in about 3 weeks with minimal casualties but keeping the peace has been a mess for us over there. Thats the main reason the other reason is for the most part we are fighting terrorism by ourselves with very few countries willing or able to help us, we cant be everywhere at once.

Answer 6

Honestly, I think that if every country minded its own damn business, we would have world peace. Yes genocide is wrong, but if it is not our business, as much as we would like to think that we should butt in there and try to "fix" other countries, its just not our place, its Gods place, democracy does not work for every country, some are way too uncooth for democracy ie. Iraq, they havent changed in five years and that is not just because they are too dumb to figure it out, its because it goes against everything they have known since the beginning of time.

Answer 7

I think the U.S. stays out of some conflicts around the world because they don't effect us. We can't go to each country around the world and police for them. Instead of asking why the U.S. does nothing, why don't you ask the same question for any other country in the world?
Let's blame France for something.

Answer 8

whilst the international locations (different than Liberia) has a pacesetter emerge from the gang of mafia variety gangs who could make a distinction we can bypass in even without the UN. yet till there is possibility for administration all we are in a position to do is watch in pity. it particularly is a lesson we found out (previous administration) in Somalia. As for Liberia, early of their life we did nicely by utilising Liberia. They gained an impressive variety of help from this u . s . and did nicely. we are and could proceed to assist that u . s ..

Answer 9

The World started getting mad whenever we went in for one of these missions you talk about. An example, we went into Iraq and it didnt go how we planned; the whole world is getting shitty with the US about it. At the same time theyre all whining about how we need to help Darfur, but the second we go in there and it doesnt go right; it will be all our fault, whats the point in trying?

Answer 10

A man more intelligent than me by the name of Lao Tsu once said "war is an extension or politics"