From today�s NY Times:

July 22, 2003

U.S. Resists Entreaties to Send Peacekeepers to Liberia

By CHRISTOPHER MARQUIS

WASHINGTON, July 21 � The United Nations secretary general and West African countries implored the Bush administration today to send peacekeepers to Liberia as fighting intensified there and the American Embassy came under mortar fire.

But administration officials resisted the appeals, countering that Liberia's neighbors should act first in helping stabilize the country. The administration called on rebels and the government of President Charles G. Taylor to respect a cease-fire.

Even as they balked at taking the lead in peacekeeping, administration officials acted to strengthen the American security presence in Liberia. The Pentagon sent a security team to protect the United States Embassy compound, where fewer than 100 Americans remained. An apartment building in the embassy complex was hit by a mortar round, which officials described as "stray," wounding two; a second round exploded at an embassy annex, killing numerous war refugees, officials said.

In recent days, the Pentagon ordered about 4,500 sailors and marines to move closer to Liberia in preparation for possible peacekeeping or evacuation duty, officials said.

Administration policy makers are torn over how to proceed, if at all, in Liberia. Officials indicated after President Bush's five-day trip to Africa this month that he might be willing to send a peacekeeping force of limited scope and duration. Pentagon officials are the most resistant, while the State Department is more eager to find a solution.

Among the chief reasons cited for the ambivalence: The United States has no vital interest in Liberia; the military feels overextended in Iraq and elsewhere; the last African intervention, in Somalia, ended in a debacle; Pentagon officials, in particular, increasingly chafe at noncombat missions.

Kofi Annan, the United Nations secretary general, pleaded for the United States to intercede "before it is too late" and the best opportunity vanishes. "I think we can really salvage the situation if troops were to be deployed urgently and promptly," Mr. Annan told reporters.

Philip Reeker, a State Department spokesman, said today that the administration remained in close consultation with Mr. Annan and West African leaders who brokered a cease-fire, but he said no decision had been made to send troops.

Instead, Mr. Reeker strongly condemned the rebel group, Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy, for "their continued reckless and indiscriminate shelling" of the capital, Monrovia.

Advocates of American action said the administration's failure to lead in Liberia was unconscionable�

James Phillips, a research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a research institution with ties to the White House, said he opposed sending troops to Liberia. The military, he said, is already overcommitted, with half the Army in Iraq, and training missions elsewhere.

"To undertake another peacekeeping operation would make things worse," he said. "There's going to be a very unsettled situation."

Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company

~~~

OK, does anyone really need any more proof that morality has nothing to do with our military actions? Because if you do, I have lost patience with you and am going to call you as I see you, which is just plain stupid. You are stupid if you think we are in Iraq to �liberate� their people. I blanch every time I hear that bullshit expression �Operation Iraqi Freedom�. If we had people�s liberation in mind, our attitude in dealing with Liberia (and many other nations, Iraq included) would be totally different.

And I just have to laugh at the phrase �Unsettled situation�� (you know, as opposed to that situation over there in Iraq).

And by the way, our "last African intervention, in Somalia", was a debacle because of extremely poor planning and underestimation of our opponents and because we didn't have the balls to back up our initial actions there. In essence, we took off running at the first sign of trouble. I would think we could avoid all of that.

We are the biggest hypocrites ever to walk the face of this planet, people. And that means not just Bush and Company; that means you � those of you who say nothing and do nothing or downright applaud while our present administration lies not only to us but to the world at large; while they invade other nations for no reason aside from what we �think� may happen sometime in the future; while we talk about �liberating� people who never asked us to do so, while turning our collective backs on people begging us to do just that.

And why can�t we help the people of Liberia? WHY?

Because we have stretched our military too thin, fighting unjust wars.

I understand totally that to become a military presence in Liberia means we would be there for a long, long time. I understand that when we went over to Kosovo on a �peace-keeping mission�, we intended to be there for a year and are still there � nine years later.

So what?

We�re going to be in Iraq for many, many years and anyone who thinks we�re not�well, come talk to me in ten years. If we�re not still there I�ll admit you were right, OK? Why is it OK to be in Iraq; to help those people to build a new government (read: help them set up a puppet regime that will do our bidding) and to �liberate� them from their oppressors, but it�s not OK for us to do it in Liberia and any number of other African nations that are actually in dire need of our assistance and, as I said before, are begging us for help?

If you really need me to answer these questions, then again I say you are stupid. At the very least, you need to read a newspaper.

Well, at least we have the excuse of our military being stretched too thin. I sincerely doubt Bush would have sent peace-keeping troops over to Liberia regardless, because there�s nothing in it for us; but hey � at least he has this cop-out to fall back on.

I am sick. I am really sick because I know it�s true that we simply do not have the number of troops required to handle the numerous military operations going on right now. I am sick because we have spent our resources fighting an unjust and morally reprehensible war under the guise of being The Great Moral Leader so that when it comes time to step up to the plate and actually BE that, we have nothing left to offer.

I really hope I am wrong and that there is a hell. And I hope there is a special place in it for this type of hypocrite.

last / next



~~~~~~~~~~~peace, love and smooches~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Don't know why you'd wanna, but on the off-chance you may feel tempted to steal any of my words and claim them as your own, please be advised: All material
Copyright 2002-2005, Howl-at-the-Moon Words



***DISCLAIMER: These are my thoughts and my thoughts alone. If you know me in my "real life" off the net and have come across this page purely by accident, please keep in mind that you were not invited here and I would suggest you leave this page now. However, should you choose not to do so, please be warned that reading my thoughts here is not an invitation to discuss them off-line. You may discover things you do not know about me and may not like very much. Such is life. Again, this is MY space and I will use it as I see fit. If you are offended by anything here, well that's pretty much your own fault at this point. I say all of this with love, of course, but there it is.