In article , Tim Streater
writes
In article , Handsome Jack
wrote:

Tim Streater posted
In article , Handsome Jack
wrote:

Tim Streater posted
I suppose one could take the "leave them to it" PoV. So if the likes of
Saddam shell one of their own villages with poison gas we should say
nothing and do nothing.

That's what "we" [i.e. Western governments] did when this gassing
happened in 1998 (IIRC). Until 15 years later it became convenient
to excavate it as a casus belii for launching a war that was
actually conducted in the Western powers' economic interests.

1988. So you think, perhaps that "we" should have invaded Iraq in 1988
rather than 2003?

No, I don't think "we" should have invaded Iraq at all. "We" should
not be intervening in the Middle East at all, except through diplomacy
and negotiation.

Or anywhere, then. So I guess we should disband the UN, then, as those
interfering buggers keep interfering.

The UN does nothing but wring its hands and produce reports - but then
it was never intended to actually do anything. It is a talking shop to
try to avert direct action by others.
Like in East Timor, f'rinstance (not in the ME, I know, but pertinent),
where the "west" (and the UN) pushed to stop the genocide of people
there by Indonesia. Which led *directly* to the Bali night club
bombing.

Oh and by the way, FYI. There are certain people you cannot negotiate
with. ISIS and Al Qaeda being examples. Oe perhaps you know better.


--
bert