- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Is it a good thing? I don't really know.

Posted by: Samuel Day Fassbinder ( Citizens for Mustard Greens, USA ) on April 18, 1999 at 16:41:02:

In Reply to: Differing view posted by Joshua on April 17, 1999 at 10:16:44:

SDF: Dear readers: Hope you're not exasperated by my fence-sitting on this issue -- it just happens to be my actual position...

: Humanitarian reasons for a war are as good as any. The U.S. has stayed out of other such situations, but when will someone say that enough is enough? There has to be a first time for everything, and now is the time for the United States to state something and stick with it.

SDF: Since the eviction of Albanian Kosovars have accelerated concurrent with the beginning of bombing, who is to say that the current episode of "ethnic cleansing" is not occurring because of the bombing? Well? Is it or isn't it? How well do you know your Balkan history?

: There has always been, in history, a point in time when one action could have prevented a disaster. Stoping Hitler in Munich, Pushing the slavery issue in the Constitution, ect.

SDF: Neither of which was the real reason for US entry into World War II or the Civil War.

: I believe now is the time to prevent one man from extending his dictatorship.

SDF: As far as I know, there is no attempt here to oust Milosevic (esp. given that the bombing has solidified his support within Serbia, which was running very low beforehand), nor any attempt to modify the terrorist activities of the KLA. Any evidence to the contrary would be greatly appreciated.

: If we don't show Milosevich actions will be taken against his acts of hostilities, he will continue to do as he wishes. Yes, NATO does control the airspace over Yugoslavia. Good. Maybe his losses will clue him in to reality.

SDF: Would you be willing to supply just one example from history of where a bombing campaign, all by itself, has forced a dictator to "cry uncle"? I can think of many counterexamples, esp. Vietnam, where numerous bombings totalling more than the total tonnage dropped during World War II on a tiny strip of a country did not succeed in making the Communists "give in," and the 500,000 troops the US stashed in the southern part of the country didn't seem to do the trick either. Sending troops to Kosovo would show that NATO Command has a bit of brains left. I really can't say for sure what else it would show.

: People are people, and no one deserves to be driven from their home.

SDF: Including many of the Maya, who were driven from their homes and killed by US-trained Guatemalan troops. Now the Maya I can sympathize with -- I'm probably already working for some of 'em as it is...

: Outrage and anger should be inspired by such actions. We need to help those people get their homes back, any way possible.

SDF: Would you be willing to die for Kosovo? I wouldn't.

: Most of the homes are gone, and thats a shame. We need to help them rebuild, and force Milocevich to do the same. No one should have to endure the things these people have gone through.

SDF: This is an admirable goal -- just wish I knew the US actually had such a goal. Since I don't really have any power to affect US actions, I guess we'll all find out what happens next, whether there's a wider war in the Balkans, whether NATO occupies Kosovo with troops, or whatever...

: I would hate to see my father and brothers shot in front of me, and my home burned down. Warfare is one thing, but Total Warfare is quite another.

SDF: Nope, all warfare is total. NATO is intervening in a civil war between Albanian Kosovars, and the Serb government of Yugoslavia, because it's scared that the Serbs might be winning. Is it a good thing? I don't really know. See, I don't really know why they're doing it, what their grand plan of conquest is.

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup