Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (185959)	5/1/2006 10:35:35 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

He's asking for a NATO intervention and he's asking the US for dimplomatic support to get other NATO countries involved. As the US position in Sudan is genocide, that doesn't seem to big a request. Military Force is Military Force.. It matters not whether it involve the United States or other countries. So what's Clooney going to do when NATO troops (of which we are a member and would be expected to contribute) start getting blown up by IEDs, mortars, and rockets? Aren't y'all afraid of unleashing hordes of Militants to confront this act of aggression?? Are you going to go in with enough forces?? And who's going to pay for all of this?? And what's your legal authority for intervening? UNSC 1556? Don't you have to go back to the UNSC for another resolution authorizing use of military force? And what happens if the Chinese, who have tremendous oil interests in Sudan, decide to veto any UNSC/NATO action? Do you decide to intervene anyway?? Hmmmm..... Btw, I'm not opposed to an intervention. But I don't see a grand strategy being presented by those who advocate use of military force. Is this just about initially going in temporarily, as we did in Somalia, to feed the people and protect them from the gangs? Or will this become, as it did Somalia, a course that leads to becoming involved in affecting the political structure by targeting intransigent leaders? And will this lead to a long-term nation building effort, or will y'all just decide to leave the Sudanese in the lurch after mucking up their psuedo-political order?? But it's nice to see the shoe being put on the other foot.... Let's see Clooney and his gang try and sell his proposal to the American people. Btw, I understand that my tone is a bit "partisan".. It's deliberately sarcastic, but in no way should it be perceived that it represents some indifference on my part toward the people being victimized in Darfur, or anywhere else. I'm just finding it ironic that military force being used to free 40 million people from the brutality of the Taliban and Saddam's regime is somehow being criticized as less worthy than a similiar intervention in Darfur. Hawk

To: jttmab who wrote (185959)	5/1/2006 11:22:58 AM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 281500

And if nato doesnt act? Then cloony would be against intervention by the US alone? I am glad for you that the answers are so easy. They seem damn hard to me. My point is what happens if NATO intervenes and al quaeda enters and there is a quagmire and american troops die along with other nato troops. And we bomb from the air and a janweed safe house is blown up and there were women and children there and cindy sheehan burns the flag and michael moore makes a movie, and islamofascists object to a cartoon and cloony attacks bush for getting us into another quagmire. Like the pig and pancake childrens book.

To: jttmab who wrote (185959)	5/1/2006 6:53:42 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

George Clooney is not asking for a US military intervention in Darfur..... He's asking for a NATO intervention ... Can NATO intervene without heavy US military involvement? I don't think so. But I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

To: jttmab who wrote (185959)	5/1/2006 8:23:55 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Wow. I think Hawkmoon has gone completely off the deep end. He's bought every single rightwing talking point coming down the pike. It's amazing that the rightwing will start a war where there is none in order to gain power and riches. Ask them to intervene simply to help people who are being systematically killed and they have all kinds of arguments as to why that's unacceptable. Scientists will eventually find a genetic defect in rightwingers. It will be a gene that is actually mutating backwards (!) so that rightwingers become less civilized every generation.