Comments on Hope and Change: War and Peace

You are probably right that many international ins...

2009-12-15T11:00:46.258-08:00

You are probably right that many international institutions are not of much value unless the United States takes a leading role. The League of Nations, for example, was of little value because we were not involved. The Kyoto Treaty was of limited value because the United States did not support it.

But in the specific situations that you gave as examples, which were mainly civil wars, it is pretty difficult for the United States to justify intervention unless it goes in with the support of the United Nations or NATO or a coalition of other nations. Such interventions without partners are not only difficult to do as a practical matter, they may also violate international law.

They did not do enough because we relied on intern...

2009-12-14T20:08:39.396-08:00

They did not do enough because we relied on international institutions, that's why they're worthless unless one country (America) sticks its neck out and LEADS.

I think in all of those examples, the problem was ...

2009-12-12T11:13:22.213-08:00

I think in all of those examples, the problem was that the UN or other international organizations did not do enough, not that we relied on international institutions.

Obama's claim that international institutions ...

2009-12-11T21:56:30.308-08:00

Obama's claim that international institutions are the key to keeping peace and preventing suffering are wrong and dangerous ideas. Think Bosnia, Tibet, Darfur, Rwanda, Bosnia, etc...