Rwanda

(sp) they're* - you're* just incase you're podantic

And who cares if people are dying?  They die all the time.  People are dying right now in Somalia, Zimbabwe, Sierra Leone, Colombia, etc. but if anyone tried to intervene and stop it all, they would be ruined militarily, financially, and politically.

I personally would never want to fight and die for a bunch of people of some victimized ethnic group unless it in some way made me, my family, and above all my countrymen better off.

 Genghis
[/QUOTE]

Your argument is deeply disturbing as it logic would suggest that you would not sacfrice one single American life for x number of other nationals. In the case of Rwanda up to one million Rwandans died most of which could have been prevented with the deployment of 5,000 troops (I say deployment of troops not deaths, and bearing in mind they were armed with equipment used for farming rather than modern warfare what serious risk can you foresee?). Your argument furthermore diminishes the value you pin to national identity. How could you take pride in an identity that takes the view that you should only care about those in your group? I am British and you are American we can both take a certain pride in are nationalities but how can we, if it excludes us from caring about people who do not carry the same passport as us. If you saw a child drowning in a river and you were a good swimmer and could save the child with out causing serious risk to yourself would you actually question the nationality of the child? If the child conforms to you nationality you would save them if not you would watch them drown? The case of Rwanda was very similar America, Britain and France could easily have saved the people in Rwanda without sacrificing are vital national interests both economic and military. It is also interesting that you take so much from your national interest, but America is not natural, humanity is natural we are born with it and have since the dawn of time nationality is relatively modern and has been created. This is not to undermine the importance of nationality. In particular the formation of the America is particularly interesting America was formed on the idea of independence and democracy that people should not be born into positions of power and subjugation. In the 21st century should we not say that people should not be born into a situation where they are subject to genocide irrespective of their nationality? In fact we did it's called the 1948 Convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide and was signed by both the United States and Britain. Isn�t about time we started to act on beliefs?

Rubbish American troops are not forced to join the army they make a choice to sign up and when they sign up they agreeing to do their governments biding. If that happens to be to save Rwandans so be it. Furthermore on recruiting, adverts specifically highlight humanitarian responsibilities as a role of both the British and American armies. And where do you get the idea that Rwanda is a centuries old conflict the idea of Hutu and Tutsi is largely false. Hutu's are generally poorer and shorter and Tutsi's are generally richer and taller. But there was a lot of intermarriage and the majority of Rwandans did not take much from the term. It was only after Rwanda's colonial masters after WW1 sought to divide the country by issuing Hutu and Tutsi identity cards as part of a divide and rule strategy. The Hutu extremist further sought to increase this divide by instigate false attacks on Rwandan's to create a climate of fear and then blame the aggression on the Tutsi's. But despite all of this the majority of Rwandan's did not accept this divide, which is why there were peace protests on the streets of Kigali before the genocide broke out, and why later on a number of the Rwandans killed were Hutu. And how can you call it a colonisation to intervene in Rwanda when the majority of the population would support it with open arms. Were we colonising Europe when Allied troops invaded Western Europe liberating countries like France. You still take too much national identity. America is a nation of 250 million people and yet you have not met hardly any of them. It is an identity, which is artificial as opposed to are natural identity as human beings. Why should a solider risk their life to save a stranger just because they happen to have been accidentally born into the US whereas another stranger a Rwandan happens to have been born outside of the US? Any argument you make in reply to that question can equally apply to a duty to save the Rwandan as well. Your reply about the baby analogy not applying to international diplomacy thank God that FDR along with the majority of Americans did not accept that argument when they introduced the Lend and Lease Act justifying it on the grounds that if you neighbour�s house is on fire you don�t haggle over the price of a hose.