Thank you USA for caring – many do not!

Dear Residents of the USA:

Thank you for caring enough to intervene in the internal affairs of other sovereign nations in order to stop mass murder.  Thank you for the lives that you have saved at the incalculable sacrifice of your sons and daughters, our brothers and sisters.  My words are an insufficient expression of the gratitude that I feel, but thank you none-the-less.

You are not obligated to save the lives of people of other nations, and you do not intervene in all countries that desperately need military intervention, but thank you for when you have intervened.

I believe that nations should not interfere with the internal affairs of other nations, and should respect their sovereignty and territorial integrity.  I do not believe that any nation has the right to violate another nation’s sovereignty in order to bring relief to citizens suffering under a leader who is corrupt, and has mismanaged the country’s finances and social services.  That is an internal matter for the citizens to resolve.  However, some leaders see their citizens as their property, to torture and murder at will.

When leaders begin to mass murder their citizens, then those leaders should become illegitimate and the United Nations should remove them.  Unfortunately, the United Nations is not effective at removing despots, so generations of people continue to suffer.

Human beings are not property, as African slaves were legally defined some 200 years ago.  All human beings are our brothers and sisters, and they are not somehow less valuable just because they have the misfortune of living under an oppressive regime.  Every oppressed person has the right to expect to be liberated.

Being liberated must be a wonderful feeling.  In neighbouring Grenada, despots executed the Prime Minister and members of the Cabinet, and massacred some civilians in 1983.  The governments of Barbados, Dominica, Jamaica, St. Lucia, Antigua, and St. Vincent responded by informally asking US President Reagan to join them in a coalition of the willing in order to liberate the people of Grenada.  The USA only agreed to participate after these nations made a formal request.  President Reagan then convinced the American public to support the intervention, by explaining that the operation included securing the safety of American medical students at the university in Grenada.

I followed that operation with interest since Barbados was used as the staging area for what was called Operation Urgent Fury.  I remember when it was all over, and President Reagan subsequently visited Grenada, that the Grenadian people were so elated that they wanted to change their national anthem to the US national anthem – such was the temporary exhilaration of being liberated, and I felt their joy.

I have subsequently read publications that criticised the USA’s involvement in the operation.  I understand that the US has meddled in the affairs of other nations and has supported despots who have committed mass murder.  That is clearly wrong.  However, I have visited Grenada many times and regardless of the US Government’s motives, Grenadians are generally happy that the US participated in their liberation.Many people have misgivings about the war in Iraq.  However, that invasion sent a message to depots and potential despots worldwide that sovereign borders will not be respected if they start to mass murder their citizens.  It should be noted that people living in developing countries, under leaders with little accountability, can potentially be one election away from despotism.

Thank you again for caring.

Advertisements

9 responses to “Thank you USA for caring – many do not!

  1. Hi, this is a comment.

  2. For a Christian, I find your logic of the ends justifying the means to be bewildering at best and evil ignorance at worst.

    The Americans making the sacrifices are the poorest, most marginalised of your people. What would Jesus say about sending them into harms way with weapons of mass destruction to use against one of the poorest most oppressed peoples on earth.

    See – no logic.

  3. Hi Australian:

    I should extend my thanks to the people of Australia as well, since they also participated in the operation despite the valid objections of persons like yourself.

    The decision to liberate the oppressed does come at a price, and that is why the sacrifices of the liberators must not be taken for granted.

    Just for the record.

    1. I am not an American.

    2. The American military personnel were not conscripted but they volunteered.

    3. The American military personnel who died were not the poorest and most marginalised of Americans. Where did you get that idea?

    4. I suggest that you try to improve your method of presenting your arguments. Using insults may be an effective (but infantile) method of silencing a teenager in a debate, but it is inappropriate for mature adults.

    Regards,
    Grenville

  4. Hi brother,

    In another of your interesting articles you thank the USA for their work on regime change. When I first read it I thought it was a caustic attempt at sarcasm, but having read your response to a comment from ‘Australian’ , your message of thanks comes across as sincere. My understanding of your position is challenged by the message that I get from your article on the Kingdom of God where you state;

    “In God’s Kingdom, the focus is not placed on where you have gone, but rather on how you got there. Not on what you had but on how you obtained it. Not on what you did, but on how you did it. The process is much more valuable than the end result. The end result is illusionary since the desire for pleasure, wealth, fame, and power is insatiable. Focusing on the end result can be an effective motivating factor and related achievements can bring a measure of accomplishment. However, while such benefits are temporary, the process can be an eternal investment or an eternal liability.”

    Am I correct in assuming therefore that the means is as important if not more so than the end result? That if we want to stop a despotic leadership from slaughtering their own people then slaughtering even more people is not the best means to go about it? That any gains will only be temporary?

    Peace

  5. Hi Maat:

    Let me apologize for the delay in responding because I intend to respond promptly to all comments while managing this site.

    The Kingdom of God article, linked below, is specific to individuals:
    https://researching.wordpress.com/2007/04/11/the-kingdom-of-god/

    This tribute of gratitude is to a nation.

    I do not believe that the US should liberate oppressed persons by sending in ground troops or occupying forces. They do not need to keep opposing forces at bay; let the UN do that. If the UN fails to act, then as an interim measure, the US should simply tell the despot to desist and surrender to the International Criminal Court. (I know that the US is not currently a fan of this court.)

    If the despot does not comply, then he should be targeted with a missile and his successor should be warned to expect the same if he/she continues with the mass murder.

    The point is that political leadership that commits or sanctions mass murder in their country has committed a crime against all humanity. They should be effectively stopped without wasting too many resources.

    The US is not the de jure world’s police; but being the most militarily powerful nation on the earth coupled with an ineffective UN, they can become the de facto world’s police.

    Regards,
    Grenville

  6. Grenville,
    I quite disagree with your column as it seems to suggest that not only was it right of America to invade Iraq but that they also invaded with the best of intentions.The Iraq Invasion was exactly that, an invasion, not a mission to emancipate the people of Iraq.It was a rushed kneejerk reaction to the 9/11 attacks and many more lives were lost as a result.Undoubtedly Saddam Hussein wasn’t the best thing for Iraq, but with a civil war on the Horizon, i’m not sure America was either.

  7. researching

    Hi Liquid Soap:

    Thank you for your comments.

    There has been much speculation about the motives for the Iraq war. I cannot find any evidence that the US’ motive was oil or liberating the people of Iraq or related to 9/11.

    Before the war, it was not widely known that Sadaam used the 12 years of encouraging a Diplomatic Solution to murder approximately 300,000 civilians. That was realized later – much like Hitler’s murder of approximately 10 million civilians and Stalin’s murder of approximately 20 million civilians.

    Just before the war, during the US and British military build-up outside of Iraq, I researched and presented the evidence available at the time. See the 19th March 2003 article – Iraq in the Balance: https://researching.wordpress.com/tag/iraq/

    Regards,
    Grenville

  8. Seems you should have stayed away from this one. Two wrongs never made a right. I have accepted by reading history books that all things come to a head eventually, for good or for evil. Life on planet earth is definitely going somewhere. We are just not there yet.

  9. Hi Syl:

    I realize that some articles are not going to be popular; however, if I feel compelled to write about them then I must do so.

    Please note that while I am willing to defend my opinion, I will not do so stubbornly. If new information is presented and it is found to be factual after rigorous scrutiny, then I am willing to modify my opinion.

    Regards,
    Grenville

You are encouraged to present your opinion.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s