On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Nathan Newman wrote:
> As the discussion has gone in the past, I support federal troops to
> protect the black vote in the South and to protect abortion clinics when
> necessary, so I just don't buy that military intervention to prevent
> mass murder of the oppressed is always a bad thing,
Phrased like that, I've never met anyone who does.
But it's perfectly possible to think military intervention can sometimes do some good, and to think military intervention in Iraq is nuts from top to bottom. I do.
There is also an qualitative difference between using troops against small domestic disturbances and initiating wars. The former has little uncertainty of outcome; the latter has such enormous amounts that any chance of getting the same result without war has to be preferred on both the grounds of efficiency and suffering.
And as for results, what ends exactly are you trying to pursue? To prevent the suffering of the Kurds? They are doing fine, better than they've ever done in their history. The no-fly zones are just fine with them, and they would much prefer the status quo to stay as it is.
Michael