Through precedent set out in the U.S. constitution, in any Free State, the onus is on the government to “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”.
It’s difficult to do this when genocide is happening right next door and spilling into your borders. Comparing genocide to the lack of universal health care is not an apt analogy.
Chad is right next door?
I really hope Barack Obama starts a Democratic Freedom Army, one that avoids all the patriarchal trappings and provides equal opportunity/affirmative action for the historically disadvantaged. Female helicopter pilots, encounter groups, therapists, grief counselors. “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell?” Pshaw. TELL! ASK!
Then, we can load them on the C-130’s and drop them down in the heart of Africa and see what the warlords make of them. Solve a lot of problems.
I didn’t suggest it was next door.
I’m suggesting it might have been in Chad’s interests (if they had the resources) to invade the Sudan since the Sudan was incapable of keeping the peace and therefore the violence entered Chad’s territory.
The U.S. is geographically blessed by it’s location that intervention by the government anywhere in the world is probably never necessary for it to fulfill it’s constitutional purpose.
But this is the doctrine of national interest not of humanitarian interventionism.
Yes, the two go hand in hand.
No they do not go hand in hand. They only go hand in hand in that any excuse for a war is a good one in the warmonger minds.