April 5, 2011
Thanks for this thoughtful analysis. I don't have your expertise, but I was struggling with these same ideas in a more vague way: concerned about over-extending american military power, concerned that more military action does not always achieve stability and sometimes make it worse, but also believing the global community has a responsibility to the Libyan people. I'm not even sure what to pray for, except God's peace and justice, somehow.
I'm not sure how you equate the Libyan war with the situations in the Ivory Coast, Somalia, Rwanda or even Haiti. Yes, all of these nations have brutal regimes. Their peoples have suffered at the regimes hand. The Ivory Coast, Rwanda nor Haiti have vast natural resources and are truly conflicts of human destruction, a brutalization of its peoples for evil sake. Somalia does have some oil but is more of a fight between religions. A lack of intervention in any or all of these conflicts is worthy of debate. A war to remove a regime and to protect the world supply of oil yet to cloak it in the disguise of an "international doctrine" of a "responsibility to protect" is at best grossly being misinformed or at worse, a weak attempt to justify an agenda. However, if this is truly a just war to protect 6.5m Libyans, then the conflicts in Iraq, with its 31m and Afghanistan with its 30m of equally or more so brutalize populations, certainly meet the same Good Samaritan standard of R2P. Maybe the "Bush doctrine" does deserve credit for its willingness to engage in "just wars".<br><br>
The good Samaritan helped the man and gave him food and shelter. I don't recall the good Samaritan hunting down the robbers and dropping bombs on them.
Add your comment to join the discussion!