We should have intervened in Rwanda???

Discussion in 'Politics' started by kyzr, Mar 27, 2011.

?

If you had a relative that would be sent, would you vote to intervene in Rwanda-2?

  1. Yes, we should always stop genocide, like in Kosovo, etc.

    1 vote(s)
    11.1%
  2. NO. There are no vital US interests in Rwanda

    6 vote(s)
    66.7%
  3. Yes, but only as a member of a coalition, like NATO

    1 vote(s)
    11.1%
  4. Can't decide...will explain in my post....

    1 vote(s)
    11.1%
  1. kyzr
    Offline

    kyzr Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,446
    Thanks Received:
    449
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +629
    I keep hearing the Left whining about how Clinton screwed-up by not intervening in the Rwanda civil war, you remember, when the Hutus and Tutsis were battling.

    I want to take a poll to see who, if it happens in the future, would send US troops in to stop the slaughter in a country that has no strategic US interests, like Rwanda.

    The poll will assume that the voters have a close relative that would be sent into the war zone.
     
  2. snjmom
    Offline

    snjmom VIP Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    678
    Thanks Received:
    104
    Trophy Points:
    78
    Location:
    st louis mo
    Ratings:
    +105
    I believe it is a strategic National Interest to prevent and punish genocide.

    That's a war I would have signed up for.
     
  3. spectrumc01
    Offline

    spectrumc01 I give you....the TRUTH

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,823
    Thanks Received:
    257
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    The United States
    Ratings:
    +260
    I can see intervening in ruwanda if it is part of a policy that says genocide is wrong and we will do what we have to to stop it. This policy must be applied fairly and evenly to everyone facing genocide in order for it to work. Stopping the Genocide from happening in Libya and allowing the first Ruwandan genocide to happen was pure hypocracy. We need some consistancy in our foriegn policy so we can be trusted in our dealings with other nations.
     
  4. kyzr
    Offline

    kyzr Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,446
    Thanks Received:
    449
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +629
    Why would you want to go to Rwanda instead of just sending weapons? If we took a poll of those in the military seeing who would want to volunteer, there wouldn't be many.

    The best arguments IMHO are "we are NOT the world's policemen", and "we simply don't have the resources to get involved in every civil war". You can call every civil war a "genocide" from the losers perspective.

    We disagree.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. kyzr
    Offline

    kyzr Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,446
    Thanks Received:
    449
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +629
    There is some consistency as follows.
    1. Ghadaffy is a murderer and terrorist that we want to get rid of and prosecute. He is not an old friend like Mubarak.
    2. Kosovo was a NATO operation supported by our NATO allies. That was a vital US interest.
    3. There are uprisings in Yemen, Jordan, Syria, Bahrain, even in Saudi Arabia. We simply can't send troops everywhere.
    4. There was a major genocide in Indonesia, where Suharto killed millions, that would have been a major war if we got involved.

    IMHO we need to pick our interventions carefully.
     
  6. spectrumc01
    Offline

    spectrumc01 I give you....the TRUTH

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,823
    Thanks Received:
    257
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    The United States
    Ratings:
    +260
    I fine with it either way, if it is a moral descision against genocide or if it is in our intrests to intervene. Lets just call it what it is and stay consistant.
     
  7. Sunni Man
    Offline

    Sunni Man Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    Messages:
    40,001
    Thanks Received:
    5,328
    Trophy Points:
    1,860
    Location:
    Patriotic American Muslim
    Ratings:
    +12,444
    People need to read the US Constitution.

    It only talks about defending our nation.

    There is nothing in it about intervening in other wars are stopping genocide.

    The last constitutional war that America fought was WWII

    That was because both Germany and Japan declared war on America.
     
    Last edited: Mar 27, 2011
  8. kyzr
    Offline

    kyzr Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,446
    Thanks Received:
    449
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +629
    Fair enough. I just get pissed when I hear the Left whining about not stopping some civil war where we have no vital interest, using a military they loathe, with soldiers that they would never be one of?!

    Not worth one US soldier's life.
     
  9. NYcarbineer
    Offline

    NYcarbineer Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    95,791
    Thanks Received:
    11,241
    Trophy Points:
    2,060
    Location:
    Finger Lakes, NY
    Ratings:
    +30,129
    I'm a liberal. I'm a veteran. No, we should not have intervened in Rwanda. So fuck off.
     
  10. Mr.Fitnah
    Offline

    Mr.Fitnah Dreamcrusher

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,480
    Thanks Received:
    2,673
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Paradise.
    Ratings:
    +2,673
    Did anyone in Rwanda jerk G Soros chain and make him look foolish and willing to support his open border incentive then screw him over?
    No?
    Then no.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

should the us have intervened with rwanda