2012-03-09, 01:07 PM
I'll edit and read/respond to you in a minute, but, just wanted to post this link before I forget.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...-film.html
The one thing I care about in that article is this; There has not been a single soul from the LRA here since 2006. Now we have peace, people are back in their homes, they are planting their fields, they are starting their businesses. That is what people should help us with.
It should be about giving them what they need, not what we think they need. If they believe he won't be back, then maybe he won't, they know more about the area than we do. Sure, I feel like it's important to get rid of him, but first priority should be stabilizing the areas he has been through.
edit:
I have no argument against the fact that when the US tries to fix something through force it breaks it even worse, but the difference is, I believe if it is done CORRECTLY it will have positive effects. Perhaps you are right, and blindly taking action can be worse than doing nothing, hell, even planning for it and doing something can be worse than nothing, if our track record is any indication. But, I still feel like we can do something about this; relying on other governments to fix something is frustrating and usually doesn't even work, because they are either sympathizing with or being paid off by the person/group we are trying to get at. I don't have a good way around that, and obviously nobody else does either, but that doesn't make it any less wrong.
One thing I will say is, I did not realize the region was that stabilized on its own already, so I probably should have had a bit more faith in their ability to put things back together on their own.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...-film.html
The one thing I care about in that article is this; There has not been a single soul from the LRA here since 2006. Now we have peace, people are back in their homes, they are planting their fields, they are starting their businesses. That is what people should help us with.
It should be about giving them what they need, not what we think they need. If they believe he won't be back, then maybe he won't, they know more about the area than we do. Sure, I feel like it's important to get rid of him, but first priority should be stabilizing the areas he has been through.
edit:
CommanderJinn Wrote:Frankly this is just an issue of the west's Saviour Complex, and it's inability to get over the fact that we're not colonialists anymore. We don't have any responsibility, nor authority, to go intervene in a foreign country. Almost every instance in which we enter a third world country, things are much worse off after we're done than before we interfered in the first place. Iraq is in shambles, the Taliban is stronger than ever in Afghanistan, Middle-eastern insurgency has hit an all time high.
I have no argument against the fact that when the US tries to fix something through force it breaks it even worse, but the difference is, I believe if it is done CORRECTLY it will have positive effects. Perhaps you are right, and blindly taking action can be worse than doing nothing, hell, even planning for it and doing something can be worse than nothing, if our track record is any indication. But, I still feel like we can do something about this; relying on other governments to fix something is frustrating and usually doesn't even work, because they are either sympathizing with or being paid off by the person/group we are trying to get at. I don't have a good way around that, and obviously nobody else does either, but that doesn't make it any less wrong.
One thing I will say is, I did not realize the region was that stabilized on its own already, so I probably should have had a bit more faith in their ability to put things back together on their own.