LIVE STREAM at 3:30 – Intervention, Human Rights, and Ending Wars From Afghanistan to Libya

-

DSC_0141.JPG
TODAY at 3:30, please join New America Foundation/American Strategy Program senior fellow Steve Clemons in a discussion with Ralf Fuecks, Co-President of the German Heinrich B

Comments

11 comments on “LIVE STREAM at 3:30 – Intervention, Human Rights, and Ending Wars From Afghanistan to Libya

  1. DakotabornKansan says:

    Nancy Youssef, McClatchy Newspapers, reports that a day of battle shows Libyan rebels’ weaknesses.
    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/03/29/111237/a-day-of-battle-shows-libyan-rebels.html

    Reply

  2. DakotabornKansan says:
  3. T-Mobile Sidekick 4G says:

    Great post now a days human rights should be in first priority in front of World
    this is so necessary

    Reply

  4. T-Mobile Sidekick 4G says:

    Great work as write in my language, I couldn’t find better source like this, but i found it. I am a huge faithful regarding commenting on blogs to help the blog writers know that them

    Reply

  5. Paul Norheim says:

    I just saw a very interesting discussion on Al Jazeera about Libya, with Mark Perry, a former Israeli
    Ambassador to the US (forgot the name), and Professor Johan Galtung. Galtung is a Gandhi-inspired (like the
    protestors in Egypt and Tunisia) 80 year Norwegian who has been deeply involved in peace studies for more
    than half a century. Here is – in extenso – an article published two days ago by Johan Galtung on the invasion
    and the UN resolution:
    “Libya: The War Is On
    by Johan Galtung, 28 Mar 2011
    Indeed. A physician who heals only friends, not foes, is no physician but party to a war. An organization that
    protects only our side civilians not the other side is not humanitarian but belligerent. We are far from the
    Hippocratic Oath in world affairs. Thus, there is nothing historical about the March 17 Security Council
    Resolution 1973.
    Historical would have been a resolution protecting possible foes and restraining friends of the Anglo-
    American-French trio dominating the UN Security Council, putting their NATO at the UN disposal as a world
    cop. The NATO that made headlines the same day exactly for killing civilians, a daily routine it seems, in
    Afghanistan. Historical would have been R2P, a no-fly zone over Gaza, over Bahrain, over Pakistan,
    Afghanistan; against themselves. What happens now is intervention supporting one side against the other. It
    is normally called war.
    True, President Obama became more multilateral than Bush. But that is a formalistic perspective. The
    problem is not who and how many decide but what they decide. Also true, the resolution excluded the Fidel
    Castro prediction of 21 February that NATO will occupy Libya:

    Reply

  6. Don Bacon says:

    Ivory Coast has been a U.S. “national emergency” for five years. Ever hear Obama mention it?
    from Obama’s executive order:
    Cote d’Ivoire

    Reply

  7. DakotabornKansan says:

    Human Rights and Intervention: If Libya, Why not Cote D’Ivoire?
    Mark Goldberg, UN Dispatch, on the violence in Cote D’Ivoire
    http://www.undispatch.com/be-very-concerned-about-cote-divoire-violence

    Reply

  8. Don Bacon says:

    How cynical that the U.S. should preach to others about human rights. If the world could laugh, it would.

    Reply

  9. questions says:

    “WASHINGTON

    Reply

  10. Don Bacon says:

    New Afghanistan Plan: Hole Up in Fortress Districts
    By David Axe
    March 29, 2011
    LOGAR PROVINCE, Afghanistan

    Reply

  11. DakotabornKansan says:

    General Petraeus continues to extol the progress of counterinsurgency (COIN) in southern Afghanistan, the Taliban’s heartland. Petraeus cites the Nawa District of restive Helmand Province as a “proof of concept” for counterinsurgency dogma.
    However, Scott Dempsey, The Fallacy of COIN: One Officer

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *