General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Kick and Goddamned R if you don't want to Attack Syria! [View all]mythology
(9,527 posts)A crime of omission is still a crime. There's a reason Bill Clinton called failing to intervene in Rwanda one of the biggest regrets of his presidency. Twiddling our thumbs during the break up of Yugoslavia didn't exactly save lives either. Where as our giving aid to the Allies before our entry in to WWII did a lot of good. Additionally I would classify our intervention in Korea as having a positive outcome for South Korea, especially since we can compare it to North Korea for a reasonably good idea of what would have happened to the entire peninsula if we didn't intervene.
As Shakespeare said "heavy hangs the head that wears the crown." People will die for a lot of the foreign policy decisions made by U.S. presidents. Pretending that we only have moral culpability if we intervene just isn't a serious philosophical position to take in my opinion.
Instead I believe a president should take the best information available, not only about the numbers of people dying both with and without our intervention, the potential economic and human costs on our end, what the probably outcomes are for once the situation has been changed etc. And then make a decision. Saying either we have to go to war, or we absolutely can't go to war without considering all of the facts are equally poorly thought out positions.