From: HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.)
Newsgroups: alt.desert-storm
Subject: Global Police (was Re: no-flyzone)
Date: 28 Jan 1993 19:12:48 GMT
Organization: University of Houston Administrative Computing
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: uhad2.admin.uh.edu
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20

In <C1KqKJ.DB@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk> dam@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk writes:

> HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.) writes:
> 
> >In <C1K6xz.Krz@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk> dam@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk writes:

>  [David expresses concern over the self-serving and double-standards 
>  [practiced by the enforcing nations, esp the US (though perhaps I am
>  [being too americanocentric).

> >  Truly fascinating.  If you wish to call the US government hypocritical and
> >self-serving, go right ahead.  You will find little disagreement with me, nor
> >I suspect, a lot of other people.  Governments are that way the world over.
> 
> This still does not make it acceptable, particularly when your talking of
> 'global policemen'

  Whoa.  Time out.  I did in no way advocate making the US or anyone else
a "global policeman".  There is the danger of analogies, we can read more into
them than there truly is.

  Perhaps I should have spoken of a "group of concerned citizens, operating
within the laws they had specified for these circumstances."  More on this
below.

> >  Take Somalia.  The screaming on parts of the net was: 
> 
> >1.  The US has acted selfishly and in its own self-interest in the past.
> >2.  Therefore, the Somalia action MUST be evil because the bas US is involved.
> 
> I believe this was NOT the case apart from a few fanatics. 'Screaming" is not
> the word I would use..even Doug Foxvog approved this action and you yourself
> applauded him.

  Well, I was in the current-events.somalia group.  I say there was screaming,
and I would agree that they were fanatics, though perhaps not the folks we
usually see here.  But the arguments were similar to some you are raising now.
It was not my intention to lump you (or even Doug) into that particular group,
but merely point out the arguments were very similar and not really germane to
the question at hand. 

  I must confess it was quite a turn for this young/old Cold Warrior to find
himself in near-complete agreement with Doug.

>>[I ask what we should do instead]

> I haven't made any comment on my personal view on the US actions.

  I know, and I'm curious.  It is all well and good for us to complain about
what *is* being done, but not providing realistic alternatives limits the
usefulness of such activity.
  
> I do not believe that the US should be the sole guardian of the world's 
> welfare.

  I would agree.  Nation-states will act in what they consider thier own
self-interest, even when this may be detrimental for the world/region as
a whole.  Only the creation of a truly international military unit could
even begin to properly serve in this capacity.  Even then, we would see
problems.

  As I noted earlier, mayhap the word "police" in my example should be
replaced with "concerned citizens".  The same charges of hypocrisy can still
be made, but at least it will not appear I am advocating that the US take
on the policing role.

  And even given all of this, I have yet to see how the existence of hypocrisy
automatically brands the actions taken against Iraq as wrong.  Would things
change suddenly if Saudi Arabia or Canada were to be taking the actions the 
US is now?  Are we complaining about the act or the actor?


semper fi,

Jammer Jim Miller 
Texas A&M University '89 and '91
********************************************************************************
* Speak for my employers?  They don't even know I exist!		       *
*"Become one with the Student Billing System. *BE* the Student Billing System."*
* "Power finds its way to those who take a stand.  Stand up, Ordinary Man."    *
*      ---Rik Emmet, Gil Moore, Mike Levine: Triumph 		               *
********************************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.desert-storm