Justin Schwartz wrote:
>
>
> What has strengthened the
> >freedom of operation of u.s. imperiaolism most in the last 20 years is
> >precisely those interventions which got by with least left opposition
> >and received most support from liberals and naive leftists. Haiti did
> >even more damage. The refusal to interfere in Rwanda also strengthened
> >imperialism, since it provided an artificial example of when
> >intervention "would have" been desirable.
>
> ??This last (about Rwanda) is very strange. You lose me here. Btw, what do
> you think would have been the right position to take about Rwanda, apart
> from calling on the Tutsis to resist?
I lost myself some -- it was an idea thrown off as I wrote the post. But I think there is something to it. It stands there as a hypothetical example of why the u.s. should intervene to stop horrible things. (Like the endless invocation of Munich: it would have been good to fight then, so it's good to fight now.) But I wouldn't try to push the point very hard.
I agree with Yoshie's response to the rest of your question.
Carrol
>
> jks
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
> http://www.hotmail.com