The civilized world have turned a blind eye to many of the world's problems, yes. Especially that farce of an organization called the United Nations whose drones sit in a semi-circle producing nothing more than an open statement condemning ruthless actions around the world. The burden often falls upon the philanthropy of the United States in times of crisis and great need. People around the world desire our help while remaining very cynical and hostile towards us. Our contributions to the global society are overshadowed by Iraq.
The United States leads the world in development assistance. To say all of that is done with self interest is naive.
As much good or evil we do people still want us to action taken in the most publicized dilemmas around the world. But the fragility of these events are overlooked.
-Hugo Chavez is backing Columbian rebels to overthrow their government. Do we put sanctions on them which would stop them from selling us oil adding to our energy crisis? Do nothing and let the onslaught continue?
-The Burma cyclone death toll could reach half a million. However most of the aid is being seized by their own government. Do we send in a military force to ensure the people are being aided? Keep negotiating while people die?
-Then there is Tibet. I have never heard a solution from all the people who scream about the injustices there. Do we really want to go head to head with China? It's so easy to demand action while holding a 'free tibet' sign made of products from China.
-Same goes with Darfur. Only force would stop those people, and only a permanent presence would keep it from happening again.
So when you say we shouldn't be in Iraq, we should be doing this or that, ask yourself if it would mirror what is happening right now. And if we still wouldn't be viewed as the big bullies of the world.
Linear Mode
