Ok what about this particular situation: “We should have intervened in Rowanda earlier!”
-
-
Afficher cette discussion
-
My personal OP is non interventionist period but Pasta was arguing in some cases. He made Rwanda a good place of contention. I just tend to think we do more harm than help. But can see it may not be unilateral.
Afficher cette discussion
Fin de la conversation
Nouvelle conversation -
-
-
I gotta say the genocide in Rwanda was really bad, as was the Holocaust. But generally as a rule I think us intervening hurts more than it helps.
Afficher cette discussion -
Also for the record NO ONE nation should be policing the world. We should have a council that’s far more effective than the U.N
Afficher cette discussion
Fin de la conversation
Nouvelle conversation -
-
-
"unilaterally intervene" might be a useful modifier here
-
Perhaps yeah
Fin de la conversation
Nouvelle conversation -
-
-
intervention = imperialism
Merci. Twitter en tiendra compte pour améliorer votre fil. SupprimerSupprimer
-
-
-
but if the international and well-reviewed consensus is that US intervention can prevent genocide, im ok with limited intervention to assist refugees
Merci. Twitter en tiendra compte pour améliorer votre fil. SupprimerSupprimer
-
-
-
They support actual dictators they impose while acusing everyone that doesn't subordinate to them; dictatorships.
Merci. Twitter en tiendra compte pour améliorer votre fil. SupprimerSupprimer
-
-
-
The US never intervenes to “prevent genocide” or “spread democracy”. The US intervenes when it is in the financial interests of our elites, and for no other reason.
Merci. Twitter en tiendra compte pour améliorer votre fil. SupprimerSupprimer
-
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.
. But here’s the question: “The U.S shouldn’t intervene, even to prevent genocide & help spread democracy.”