On 14/12/2002 11:07 PM, "lbo-talk-digest" <owner-lbo-talk- digest at lists.panix.com> wrote:
>
> What does any of this have to do with whether we go to war?
Ok. Let's suppose these atrocities mean that the US should go in and wipe Hussein out and install a benevolent regime, unlikely thought that is given that the US was complicit with Saddam during his worst crimes and is busy right now ignoring Mr. Dostum's indiscretions. Then why can't Brazil form a coalition with, say Argentina and South Africa to bomb the US out of Central America? The scale of atrocities there is at least comparable and it is indisputable that the US presence has been a major factor in escalating the horror, in some cases it has been the major factor. Maybe we can sweeten the deal by bombing Bush out of the white house while we are at it, and install a Southern-cone friendly puppet without a track record of frying undesirables.
If this scenario sounds preposterous, and it's certainly nutty enough, that's hardly an outcome of the idea that South Africa, Brazil and Argentina 'lack credibility' in establishing the rule of law, by force of arms on a foreign land. Bringing up this entirely legitimate complaint would be like swatting an elephant with a french baggette.
How little sense this lofty humanitarian war talk makes when you don't have the ICBMs and trillion-dollar army to back it up. The conclusion is obviously that when it makes sense, that's the ICBMs talking...
Thiago Oppermann
ps. Fabbo aliteration on the title.
------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: www-mail.usyd.edu.au