More to the point, perhaps, is whether this should be supported, or at least not criticized. Given the lack of a compelling U.S. interest and the limited intervention implied, we might expect some good to come of it.
mbs
************
I've been searching far and wide for background information regarding this as the Administration's decision to intervene has puzzled me as well.
The Counterpunch angle on oil vessel registration truly seems to have been taken from deep outside of the ballpark and doesn't have the ring of truth to it.
As near as I can tell, it really appears as if the Bushies have painted themselves into a 'pre-emptive intervention is our game baby' corner. Although the initial, stated justification for War Plan Iraq was countering an imminent threat it soon morphed into a 'we must free those people from oppression' spin campaign.
Having the Liberia crisis reach the boil-over point so soon after the Iraqi 'crusade' may be a PR problem (if you acted in Iraq but won't act here, maybe there isn't enough oil - that sort of thing). Also, unlike the Iraq situation, there are people - inside Liberia and in the UN, Mr. Annan himself in fact- who are clamoring for US action.
All conjecture of course. We may have to wait for events to play themselves out to learn more about motives.