Response to Taylor's Comment (Dec, 5)
9:14 AM by Brian Norton
Taylor: Does the book give any reasons as to why nobody intervened? View Original Comment
Brian: The books seems limited in its approach to this idea of intervention, however i may shed some light on the subject. As the tensions grew in the areas in an around Rwanda, the world viewed this as a normal rise and fall of popular opinion. As we know now, this is untrue and nearly 500,000 Tutsi's lost their lives to this large miscalculation, and human vengeance. When the world realized what was happening people simply didn't react with speed or skill. The UN stood by, and claimed the struggle was internal and natural. From the US standpoint, a military intervention would be to costly and bold, and by the time UN leaders learned of the genocide one-quarter of the people had already been killed, and another two thirds would have died before full deployment. These facts by no means excuse the lack of action on the worlds part. They should not be excused, intervention should have happened and happened fast.
Brian: The books seems limited in its approach to this idea of intervention, however i may shed some light on the subject. As the tensions grew in the areas in an around Rwanda, the world viewed this as a normal rise and fall of popular opinion. As we know now, this is untrue and nearly 500,000 Tutsi's lost their lives to this large miscalculation, and human vengeance. When the world realized what was happening people simply didn't react with speed or skill. The UN stood by, and claimed the struggle was internal and natural. From the US standpoint, a military intervention would be to costly and bold, and by the time UN leaders learned of the genocide one-quarter of the people had already been killed, and another two thirds would have died before full deployment. These facts by no means excuse the lack of action on the worlds part. They should not be excused, intervention should have happened and happened fast.
Labels: genocide, intervention, response