French inconsistency

| | Comments (2)

The French are preparing to invade Haiti without the backing of the United Nations and with no just cause except for humanitarian aid (in particular peacekeeping). How is this different from Iraq?

1. They're not in bed with the enemy this time.
2. They don't have 34 nations on their side.

In both ways, they come out looking worse.

If France's action here starts to be seen as a good thing, then I will certainly be making the case that there's general and multilateral support for the idea that unilateral action for pure peacekeeping and humanitarian aid reasons is legitimate (not that 34 nations is unilateral to begin with, but this is the really serious departure from traditional just war theory that the Democrats say Bush was behind, though it's also the same sort of thing that happened in Kosovo, which Clark and Dean both supported even though it was against the U.N. and not out of self-defense).


Oh great, just what we need. Sounds like the French are going imperialist again.

It turns out we were talked into sending some troops ourselves, so we'll see what happens. It is telling that they would propose this with no support whatsoever from any other nation and yet said that was a problem with what the U.S. did in Iraq (despite the other 33 nations involved and the self-defense argument, neither of which is present with Haiti).

Leave a comment


    The Parablemen are: , , and .



Books I'm Reading

Fiction I've Finished Recently

Non-Fiction I've Finished Recently

Books I've Been Referring To

I've Been Listening To

Games I've Been Playing

Other Stuff


    thinking blogger
    thinking blogger

    Dr. Seuss Pro

    Search or read the Bible

    Example: John 1 or love one another (ESV)

  • Link Policy
Powered by Movable Type 5.04