Too bad we don't do Regime Change for Humanitarian Reasons

[mburbank]

I agree with all of that, that it's harder to sell even though I agree with Kev that it's all about terrorism and the conditions that breed it. I agree the fact that no one does intervene has a lot to do with the people of america and the world, not just there leaders.

Here's what I'm saying. 1 million people are being murdered. You drive someone away from food and shelter in that climate, you know damn well you're killing them. It's genocide, there's no other desription. There are a lot of reasons why were not making a huge, military, multinational or unilateral effort to stop it. Some of them are horrible reasons, soem are practical reasons, and some are even arguable reasons.

But it being the case that we are watching genocide hppen and not trying to stop it pretty much wipes out the credability of any argument that we are in Iraq for humanitarian reasons. Sadaam Huessein was a bad guy, no doubt. He did terrible things to his own people, no doubt. But if that's why we're there, we would have been all over Africa first.

So, no WMD, no Liberation, what does that leave? The Neocons had a vision of dominating the middle east and controlling it's economy for the greater good of US hegemony. W had a sick little need to prove he's more man than daddy.