"there are a number of African countries that fall under that category, but as long as they don't blow up our buildings, then that is allowed to continue."
And this is just not true. The UK government ended a terrible war in Sierra Leone, by sending in troops. After a few weeks drugged up child soldiers who killed thousands (incl. pregnant women etc.) were removed. Nobody talks about that because it worked.
The US government ended a similarly pervert war in Liberia. It worked nobody talks about that.
The French government has troops in Cote d'Ivoire, most likely the only thing that has kept things (prosperous) country from falling into civil war. There are problems but no carnage.
The US government and others strongly lean on the Sudanese government which resulted in a peace accord with the south after a decade of battle. Now there are problems in Darfur but without outsiders it would be even worse.
None of these countries has or exports(Sudan) much oil into the west. So these are purely humanitarian efforts. This isn't done for every conflict but the cynical approach that people suffering never results in intervention is simply wrong.
No the Iraqi government didn't have WMD (although every western Intelligence Agency and by some accounts even some parts of the iraqi govermnent thought it had).
No Saddam didn't harbour Al Qaida they were his enemy also.
But the Hussein's were some of the most perverted rulers of any nation. A family member of a quarter of all families had seen a torture cell from the inside. It is true that now as many people die because of terror than before because of the Hussein's but this isn't inevitable and should be handled. Iraq has great potential and its oil reserves give it a chance for great prosperity. The invasion gave them a chance. We will see if it comes through.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
