< link rel="DCTERMS.isreplacedby" href="http://davejustus.com/" >

Friday, September 03, 2004

Reynolds rips Kerry

Instapundit does not approve of John Kerry's pro U.N. view of how to handle the Darfur genocide:

I guess Kerry's not willing to call for unilateral action (that is, action not approved by France), here, but that's what we need. Some special forces trainers and some weapons to organize the victims in Darfur (and across the border in Chad) would go a long way toward ending this genocide. But if you think that Security Council approval is essential for legitimate military action, then there's not much that can be done here.


Blogger Aric said...

In some respects though, Kerry is calling for more drastic action than it initially seems. The administration has deliberately not referred to the problems in Darfur as "genocide", because we have signed legal treaties (such as the Genocide Convention which went into force in 1951) that might bind us to action in such a circumstance.

I disagree with Instapundit that we should send in Special Forces and train and arm local insurgents to fight back against the agressors. While it may be the expedient method of handling the situation, expediency is not always the best method of handling an issue. Recall that we trained and armed the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan during the 1980s to fight Russia. Russia is now gone, and those same skills and munitions are being used to kill Americans now.

-- Aric

9/05/2004 10:33:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home