>Yes, they are selective, and disgustingly so. But what
>are we to do then? It's despicable, as you imply, that
>the US establishment doesn't really give a rat's
>backside for anything but the wealthy. But isn't it
>even worse to let positively _every_one suffer?
>Surely ameliorating the lives of a few for the wrong
>reasons is better -- at least for those few! -- than
>letting everyone go hang. Isn't it?
>
>Rather than protest the intervention in Kosovo,
>wouldn't it be better to protest US _failure_ to
>intervene on behalf of the Kurds et al.?
I never trust the U.S., especially when it's acting on "humanitarian" grounds. Maybe I'm a bit rigid in applying this principle, but I really doubt that killing for peace will save many lives. If the long-run effect of this bombing is to make the Russians and Chinese more bellicose then it starts to get very scary.
Doug