[Stratos]

I don't know if I fit into the "Left" you are refering to, but anyway...

Originally posted by John D Harris: 5)On the international front. There has been lots of noise made about the World Court, how many are willing to have your leaders brought up before the World Court, for activities of companies and gov't officals for the UN Oil for food program? After all if President Bush is resposnable for the activities of people he has little or no cantact with then the sam logic must be applied to to the leaders of other countries. Show me you are willing to submit your leaders to the World Court before you come complaining to me about the leaders of my country not willing to be involed with the World Court! I have NO/ZERO/NADDA problem with the leaders of other countries not being tried in the World Court, because I don't want the World Court to have any authority over the leaders of my Nation. Anybody wanting my nation to submitt to the World Court had better show me they are willing to and do submit to the World Court first.

I assume you mean the International Criminal Court. In that case, many countries HAVE signed on and agreed to it's terms.

6)Still on the inertnational front. There has been lots, ("Hale" I'm being nice here) complaining about the war on Iraq, complants that the USA went alone, tell that to the other countries that have troops there. Tell that to Spain which suffered a terrorist attack Because they had troops there! Tell that to our(USA) allies downunder that had nearly 200 killed in a terrorist attack (Bali), because their nation had sent troops to Iraq. Tell that to the UK whose intel and law enforcement has stop and thwarted several terrorist activies.

European intelligence service and law enforcement has been thwarting terrorist atttacks way before the war in Iraq, or even 9/11.

There have been complants about the war being for Oil, yet no evidence has been presented to suport that asumption. Oh, there has been accusations presented, but accusations are not evidence. Evidence would be show where, when, and the testimony of people involved in any meetings where it was discused that the USA should go to war for Oil, Zero evidence has been presented to suport the assumption. Even if the war was for Oil, and make NO mistake there will come a time that there will be a war for Oil, why is that wrong? Does not everybody use Oil and products from Oil? Did the computer you are viewing this on just spring in to being or was oil refined for the plastic used in the computer? What about the energy used to make to components of the computer where they just willed into being or was Oil burned/Electrcity made that ran the machinery used in the manufacturing of the pieces parts for your computer?

The war haven't been just for oil, but it's most likely been in the background. Anyone who seriously believed that the Coalition invaded Iraq just to steal and ship out their oil should have their head examined. Nonetheless, the Middle East is a very oil rich region, and our society is running on oil, literally. A democratic (or at least Western friendly) ME will be a better guarantee for a steady oil supply, not to mentioned the pressure on and threat to Israel will be lessened.

If Oil is not a good reason what is? Humanitarian reasons? Tell that to the Rhowandians(sp?) the world stood by while there was genocide going on. Nations that have a history of colonizing the area. We all know, or it has at least been professed that colonialism is/was a great evil and must be attoned for, but the very nations that would be considered guilty of this colonialism did nothing or at the very most vurtualy nothing. Nations that the "colonailism was evil crowd" blame (for the colonialism), and therefore have a compeling national interest (attonement for the colonization) did nothing. Where is the condemnation for those nations that stood by while people where being killed? What about the current sitation in the Sudan? We have learned there is Oil there, as well as a Humanitarian crisis, but where are the nations of the world on the Sudan? Why are they not running to help? Sending troops to stop the killing? It would seem that if there is Oil involved then it is OK to sit idealy by and alow Humans to die, lest somebody accuse any Nation willing to solve the problem of doing so only for Oil. Well I don't know about anybody else but as for me and my family, I would rather have on my conscience(sp?) that killings and torture of fellow humans was stopped as a by product of a war for Oil, then to Know Killings were alowed to continue, because a war for Oil didn't look good to some.

The genocide in Rwanda is a failure by many political actors.

As for Sudan, how are you gonna stop the killings there? Thwarting the goverment? Democracy building in the Middle East is a bumpy road indeed, but it would be even worst in Africa. The risk of running in without a plan is that you would just be turning the tables around, the formerly oppressed would take revenge on their former oppressor. If you go in and interfer with such deep rooted conflicts such as those in Africa, you're really open Pandora's box, and you should be pretty darn sure you know what you're doing. An oppressive regime like that one in Sudan is just the top of an iceberg. Underneath you have you have religious and ethnical conflicts that run deep.

The ideal would be if the Africans solved their problems on their own. The AU (African Union) is trying to do exactly this as we speak (or type).