Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Rude Pundit: Why the U.N. and the U.S. Should Invade Myanmar and Why We Can't

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
meegbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 10:48 AM
Original message
The Rude Pundit: Why the U.N. and the U.S. Should Invade Myanmar and Why We Can't
What's occurring right now in Myanmar, post-cyclone, is nothing short of the slow-creep beginning of a genocide. When a nation's leaders willfully keep aid provided by humanitarian and relief agencies, governmental and non-governmental, from the desperate, starving, dying people who need it, then that nation's leaders want large numbers of people to die.

Right now, in addition to the complete fucking abomination that is the junta's refusal to allow the wave of aid workers needed for the devastated nation, there are credible allegations that the regime is hoarding high quality food from relief shipments for itself and the military while giving the citizens poor quality or spoiled food. 'Cause, you see, if you run a country with the military, then you better fuckin' feed the military first, or revolution is gonna happen. That's 400,000 members of the military and roughly a couple of million family members. Yeah, the people of the Irrawaddy Delta are fucked.

We're at a likely 100,000 or more dead, at least a million homeless. Bodies are polluting the rivers, bloated corpses bumping into sewage and debris. If there's an uprising by people who are watching their kids starve to death, the well-fed military will take care of that. Otherwise, it's just kick back in the bunkers of Naypyidaw and wait for those bastards who dared to defy the junta to get their fill of cholera. You can goddamn well bet there's gonna be a paucity of monks in Burma come summer.

Over at the Asia Times, Shawn W. Crispin, no rabid interventionist, makes the case for invading Myanmar. Prodding the United Nations to take action beyond a shaking finger and a strongly worded letter, Crispin says, "In the wake of the cyclone, the criminality of the junta's callous policies has taken on new human proportions in full view of the global community. Without a perceived strong UN-led response to the natural disaster, hard new questions will fast arise about the UN's own relevance and ability to manage global calamities."

However, the UN has "limited powers of projection," and Crispin states that the United State would need to lead any armed intervention into Myanmar against the paranoid savages that run the country. And he gives a reacharound to the Bush administration, saying, basically, "You wanna raise the American standing in the world? Kicking the shit out of the junta in Yangon in the name of saving the people would go a long way to rebuilding the broken dam of American foreign policy." What, he asks, as well he should, is the price of doing nothing?

Indeed, if it is possible, this might be a modified use of the shock doctrine to do good - get aid to a population that is being murdered by its own government and getting rid of a thuggish, repressive government in the wake of a massive disaster. Fuckers are already so nutzoid panicked over possible outsider invasion that the leaders are in hiding. Now, we could say, let's make their worst nightmares come true to prevent genocide. (Update: Anne Applebaum at Slate also makes the case for intervention.)

Except...we can't. "We" being the United States. In the wake of Iraq, we have so lost all moral authority that, even in a situation where the murky rivers of fluid morality clarify, we cannot plausibly say that we have the interests of the people of Myanmar at stake (even if one possible outcome is a Myanmar that might open to U.S. interests). Because we used it all up on the Iraq war, all the chits we had. America can no longer make predictions about what might happen after an invasion because we fucked it all up so very badly by even invading Iraq in the first place. We don't know if it'd be a Bosnia or a Somalia. Bush invaded out of trumped-up fear and weakness. Now, when we're at a situation that's potentially an inexorable Sudan-like death march, we are simply floating bereft on that river of morality, hoping someday we can dock.

Also, George Bush has so degraded this nation that we no longer have any leverage with China and Russia, who have gotten the backs of the junta at least in the U.N. and whose approval would be needed for any U.N. effort. In other words, if we piss it off, China fuckin' owns us. And Russia doesn't give a shit about relations with us except in how it can exert more and more power inverse to our degradation. (That's a vast oversimplification of shit, yes, but it's close enough.)

To bottom line it: we can't be trusted. And no one's got our back.

And thank fuckin' god for the China earthquake so we can move on to talking about another country's dead.

How often do we have to stand by and abide madness? In Bush's America, we have reached the point where we have no choice but to smile and wave as parts of the world claw themselves to pieces.

http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 10:55 AM
Response to Original message
1. Let's be clear: this messianic "regime change" crap was idiocy BEFORE the botched occupation
of Iraq. Not because George Bush didn't have pure motives, or executed the battle plan incorrectly.

The idea of the "humanitarian war" and military occupation is, in itself, complete and utter madness. Which is why the UN, EU, Japan, China, Russia, and every other civilized society on earth rejects the very concept.


"Also, George Bush has so degraded this nation that we no longer have any leverage with China and Russia, who have gotten the backs of the junta at least in the U.N. ...To bottom line it: we can't be trusted."

Apparently the author doesn't do irony.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muryan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Removing the military from power is only an option
If there is civilian leadership ready and waiting to take over the goverment. I'm not sure thats the case. I am in favor of us just loading up some planes and dropping large amounts of aid in the delta area, where its needed most.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Don't know if you caught this: "Junta stealing Myanmar aid, says UN"
Junta stealing Myanmar aid, says UN

  Terrible situation.

PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muryan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. I was aware of that, however I was under the impression
that the aid was being sent through normal channels, straight to the government. I was suggesting a more direct route, as in literally dropping crates of aid on the people who need it most.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Crunchy Frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. I believe that they have a legitimately elected president
under house arrest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muryan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. If that is truly the case, then intervention is certainly a more feasible option
However I'm not as up to date on the politics of the country as I'd like to be. And as a rule I would rather see there be political pressure put on the Junta first, before any military intervention is called upon as a last resort.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
2. I am so pleased to be able to give this its first rec. This piece illustrates...
...perectly how fallout from George Bush's failed policies have seriously harmed our ability to root out real evil and help lift the yoke of tyranny from others' necks.

  It is a terribly sad story, what our country was and what it has become.

PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Sadly
Bushco is as real as evil gets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. Your post sends a shiver down my spine
"seriously harmed our ability to root out real evil..."

The real evil is self-righteousness and messianic hubris. The very vocabulary of "evil" is central to the problem, in other words.

What makes you think that your vision for a militarily-imposed solution to the problems in Burma would be any less deranged than the current regime?

Mao and Stalin both considered themselves patriots serving the people of their countries...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 11:18 AM
Response to Original message
7. "When a nation's leaders willfully keep aid..from the dying people who need it..."
Oh, we're talking about Myanmar! I had deja vu moment there, thinking about the Bush Junta's outrageous, murderous, criminal delays of aid, and refusals of aid, during Katrina...

------

"When a nation's leaders willfully keep aid provided by humanitarian and relief agencies, governmental and non-governmental, from the desperate, starving, dying people who need it, then that nation's leaders want large numbers of people to die."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
8. Hey wouldn't many of the arguements apply to the US after Katrina?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
9. its not JUST moral authority
we do not have the PHYSICAL capacity for another invasion. our military is tapped out.

but Burma DOES have a civilian government ready to take over - its leader won the nobel peace prize, remember? and the buddhist infrastructure is countrywide.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ToeBot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
10. If Myanmar were invaded, Chevron would have to renegotiate. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
damntexdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
12. Don't invade Myanmar, invade Burma!
"Myanmar" is what the military thugs renamed it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
15. Well, Who's Going to Do It?
Our military is tied up in Iraq.

We don't want China or Russia in there ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
16. Well, somehow the world's finest military couldn't drop food & water in New Orleans . . .
Edited on Tue May-13-08 01:27 PM by hatrack
So why should we expect anything else?

:mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KamaAina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-13-08 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Actually, the Canadians were on standby and ready to go in
then the world's former finest military told them to butt out. :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC