The Democrats don't get it either.
Except for the most hardcore of rightists, it is generally acknowledged by Americans today that invading Iraq was a mistake. Most won't look at you funny if you tell them that it was a morally reprehensible, completely unjustifiable act, even if they disagree. Naturally, the Democrats are capitalizing on this mistake by attributing it to Republicans (even though many Democrats voted to invade as well), hoping to score points with voters so that they'll have a chance to screw up your life - the Democratic way.
An easy lesson to learn from the situation in Iraq is non-intervention except in the case of an attack (for example, I contend that the invasion of Afghanistan was justified, although why we're still there is a mystery to me.) The Democrats should logically be arguing for a less aggressive foreign policy. Instead, everybody's darling Barack Obama is arguing that the United States should put its soldiers in harm's way in Darfur.
I disagree not because I'm a heartless icicle who has no concern for the victims of Darfur, but because our troops should not be sent abroad and put in dangerous situations except to defend America. If I had any confidence that the various schemes to help Darfur would do something besides put money in the pockets of the dictators causing the problems, I'd help. If people wish to protect the natives of Darfur with military might, they can (and ought to be free to) raise a group to protect a village, a family, whatever. But those who signed up to protect America should not be forced to protect Darfur.
An easy lesson to learn from the situation in Iraq is non-intervention except in the case of an attack (for example, I contend that the invasion of Afghanistan was justified, although why we're still there is a mystery to me.) The Democrats should logically be arguing for a less aggressive foreign policy. Instead, everybody's darling Barack Obama is arguing that the United States should put its soldiers in harm's way in Darfur.
I disagree not because I'm a heartless icicle who has no concern for the victims of Darfur, but because our troops should not be sent abroad and put in dangerous situations except to defend America. If I had any confidence that the various schemes to help Darfur would do something besides put money in the pockets of the dictators causing the problems, I'd help. If people wish to protect the natives of Darfur with military might, they can (and ought to be free to) raise a group to protect a village, a family, whatever. But those who signed up to protect America should not be forced to protect Darfur.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home