|
Even if you accept Human Rights Watch's figures, and grant the U.S. military was not as precise as they should have been...to suggest that doing nothing as an alternative was acceptable is simply not credible. It is clear there was massive murder, rape, and forced displacement going on and something had to be done. And to suggest that this operation actually contributed to the genocide is likewise not true.
If you want to wipe out a population of people, then dropping bombs is the easiest and most convenient strategy.
but if the objective is to save the lives of victims and potential victims of genocide, bombing the victims is not exactly the solution we should pursue.
Intervention essentially means boots on the ground, as well as other economic and strategical tactics... let's say for arguement sake that strategical strikes can be effective i suppose, but we engaged in massive bombings.
I've have personal testimonys that suggest conflict in the reportage. but that's alaways a given in the fog of wars.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
