I have to add my voice to those of Ben and Casey on this thread. I think it's fairly clear that the US is frequently in an extremely invidious position in so far as it is subject to a wide number of demands for its intervention across the world and is often castigated when it does not intervene (Rwanda). Conversely, on the occasions it does intervene it still faces castigation and frequently from the same quarter; those who opposed US policy on Israel are frequently demanding more US involvement not less.
That said, I think Casey makes the most valid point when he said that the US often fails to consider the consequences of many of its actions. As a current example, I can't help wondering if the damage it is doing to the mechanisms of international law at present are not likely to create a more violent and unpredictable world that will blowback on the US in the fullness of time. If I were in the position of the US at present I would certainly consider such doctrines as pre-emptive defence to be wholly within the interests of the US and in support of aims that could be considered benevolent. But said doctrine clearly violates international law and is effectively a right of invasion, and I can certainly see states like India and Pakistan deciiding to avail themselves of such a right to pre-emptive defence.
---- This message was posted by kharin to the Virus 2002 board on Church of Virus BBS. <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=51;action=display;threadid=25860>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Sep 22 2002 - 05:06:17 MDT