From: carlson@viking.sps.mot.com (Brett Carlson)
Subject: Re: Somalia
Organization: SPS
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 00:39:52 GMT


In article <1992Dec16.030250.9427@news.columbia.edu>  
egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
> Just noticed something as I was waiting for the message to send....
> 
> In article <1992Dec16.011312.19839@mogate.sps.mot.com>  
carlson@viking.sps.mot.com (Brett Carlson) writes:
> >
> >So you agree, then, that the cause of the war is something other  
than  
> >humanitarianism??  That to me is enough reason to oppose the  
action right  
> >there!
> 
> Hang on for a sec: deployment of troops does not a war make.  

But deployment of 50,000 heavily armed combat troops with air support  
and heavy artillery in a nation halfway around the world *does* a war  
make.....or a military action, or a police action, or whatever.   
Choose your favorite Newspeak term....

> Lemme get one thing straight:
> 
> Policy and the instruments of policy cannot be considered  
separately.

The means does not justify the end??  I agree totally!

furthermore, I think that invading a small nation on the other side  
of the globe in order to stop a few good ol' boys and feed the hungry  
(so that the good ol' boys can come back next year) is not justified.

> The Right has tended to concentrate only on the goals, the policy  
of
> containment for instance, and ignore the implications of the  
actions
> needed to achieve these goals.  Stamping out Communist insurgents
> whereever they can be found without regard to human rights is  
clearly
> wrong, no matter the patriotic rhetoric they may wrap themselves up
> in. 

Agreed.

> Similarly, the automatic condemnation of any military action on
> the part of some liberals is just as short-sighted.  

I'm not disagreeing with this just because it is a military action.   
I'm disagreeing with it because it's pointless.  Read on....

> You are judging
> the tools without regard to the goals.

Didn't you just say that the policy and the instruments of that  
policy cannot be considered separately??!?!?

> I follow Clausewitz's notion
> that war is the continuation of policy by other means, and the army
> may the instrument of these policy goals, for good or ill.  "What  
are
> our policy goals, and are they worth using the tools available?"   
That
> is a better question to ask than, "Is the Pentagon involved?"

Ok.  What are our policy goals in Somalia??  To heighten american  
jingoism??  To throw a monkey wrench into the Clinton  
administration??  To let the boys in the Pentagon stretch their  
muscles a little bit??  To protect the defense industry's profit  
margin???  Are any of these worth using the military tools  
available??  I would argue no.

So you must believe that our policy goal is to feed the hungry in  
Somalia.  Well, we killed the hungry in Uganda, and we imported the  
hungry in Southeast Asia, so I guess that would be an improvement  
over the past....

But i still don't buy it.  I don't think our government is concerned  
about individuals in Somalia.  If they were concerned, they wouldn't  
have sent the guns there in the first place.  George Bush likes  
military operations.  Maybe he's just having one last fling before he  
retires to the golf course.  I don't know, but I refuse to believe  
that the Bush administration is so concerned about the lives of the  
starving individuals in Somalia that it would mobilize thousands of  
US servicemen and women.  I just don't buy it.

going home now,
--brett

_____________________________________________________________________
Brett Carlson		    |	
carlson@viking.sps.mot.com  |	   All new 70 column .sig file!
NeXTmail encouraged.        |	       			    
			    |          This space for rent!
Motorola SPS                |	   
Tempe, AZ		    |		
602/897-4091		    |	
____________________________|________________________________________
   My employer almost certainly disagrees with whatever is written
                    above.   Blame me instead.
Newsgroups: alt.current-events.somalia,alt.politics.org.un,alt.president.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.bush