Hacker News Reader

Comment by aaron351 | Hacker News Reader

>8. Why haven't the U.S. or Europe fixed this?

Seriously?

Obama's administration has been getting hammered for getting involved in these types of conflicts. Not sure he wants to stretch the US resources any further and is already hesitant to involve US military resources.See Egypt as exhibit A.

Also, it's pretty frustrating when you see countries crying for help, then when we finally send in military and financial aid, they're called "occupiers" and told to leave the country and stay out of their affairs.

I'm of the opinion these places need to figure it out themselves. The US shouldn't be in the position of being a global police force and jumping in every time something breaks out somewhere.

I agree with you, except "countries crying for help" part. Did Afghanistan cry for help? Or Iraq?

Sometimes I wonder when people say, "Why isn't the US helping out in (insert country here)?" Then turn around and say, "Well, we never should have been in Iraq." and forget about all the things Saddam Hussein did to his people:

http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/2000/02/iraq99.htm#repression

Iraq has refused to allow the UN's Special Rapporteur for Human Rights to return to Iraq since his first visit in 1992. The government of Iraq has refused to allow the stationing of human rights monitors as required by the resolutions of the UN General Assembly and the UN Commission on Human Rights. The regime expelled UN personnel and NGOs who, until 1992, ensured the delivery of humanitarian relief services throughout the country.

Iraqi authorities routinely practice extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions throughout those parts of the country still under regime control. The total number of prisoners believed to have been executed since autumn 1997 exceeds 2,500. This includes hundreds of arbitrary executions in the last months of 1998 at Abu Ghraib and Radwaniyah prisons near Baghdad.

In the 1970s and 1980s, the Iraqi regime destroyed over 3,000 Kurdish villages. The destruction of Kurdish and Turkomen homes is still going on in Iraqi-controlled areas of northern Iraq, as evidenced the destruction by Iraqi forces of civilian homes in the citadel of Kirkuk

Iraq's 1988-89 Anfal campaign subjected the Kurdish people in northern Iraq to the most widespread attack of chemical weapons ever used against a civilian population. The Iraqi military attacked a number of towns and villages in northern Iraq with chemical weapons. In the town of Halabja alone, an estimated 5,000 civilians were killed and more than 10,000 were injured.

Or maybe we should review life under the Taliban in Afghanistan prior to the invasion?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban#Human_rights_abuses

According to a 55-page report by the United Nations, the Taliban, while trying to consolidate control over northern and western Afghanistan, committed systematic massacres against civilians

UN officials stated that there had been "15 massacres" between 1996 and 2001.[28][29] They also said, that "[t]hese have been highly systematic and they all lead back to the [Taliban] Ministry of Defense or to Mullah Omar himself."[28][29] "These are the same type of war crimes as were committed in Bosnia and should be prosecuted in international courts", one UN official was quoted as saying.[

n 1998, the United Nations accused the Taliban of denying emergency food by the UN's World Food Programme to 160,000 hungry and starving people "for political and military reasons".[152] The UN said the Taliban were starving people for their military agenda and using humanitarian assistance as a weapon of war.

On August 8, 1998 the Taliban launched an attack on Mazar-i Sharif. Of 1500 defenders only 100 survived the engagement. Once in control the Taliban began to kill people indiscriminately. At first shooting people in the street, they soon began to target Hazaras. Women were raped, and thousands of people were locked in containers and left to suffocate. This ethnic cleansing left an estimated 5,000 to 6,000 dead.

Maybe you're right, it would've been better to just stay out of both places. . .

Your long list qualifies as "asking for trouble". The original question was whether Iraq and Afghanistan were "crying for help".

Besides none of the items in your list was the real reason why US invaded those countries.

>>>> Your long list qualifies as "asking for trouble"

SPEECHLESS.

So summary executions, starving your own people and using chemical weapons qualifies in your mind as "asking for trouble"? I'd love to see the rest of your Human Rights scale and what you think it takes to get to a level where you think interdiction is needed.

My scale is simple - do not intervene at all. US pretense that they intervened purely on humanitarian grounds is a pathetic lie obvious to the whole world. After they intervened they left a mess that is worse then before. Besides, after infamous appearance by Mr. Powell at the UN providing undeniable evidence of universal evildoing, I think US would be a bit more, ...how should I put it..., careful about spreading justice around the globe.

>countries crying for help

That's a huge stretch. The 'cry for help' isn't unanimous by very far.

That's truly a staggering heading to see in an article isn't it. People write scornful things about news services like the Washington Post but to write that in black and white is a sign that it's readership occupy a totally foreign planet to most of the world.

Yes seriously. The US and EU are the reason why Russia sees the need to defends its western borders. This conflict is as much about internal politics in Ukraine as it is about geopolitical failures.

If the EU members would cling less to the US (instead of letting them build a rocket shield in Poland), Russia would possibly have fewer reasons to keep a pro-Russian buffer zone.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com