Imo the idea that the USA might be positioning themselves as an international referee was heartily disproven by our simultaneous responses to Bosnia (small poor country, strategically located, tens of thousands are dying badly, here we come) and Rwanda (small poor country, strategically nothing, millions are dying badly, who?wanda). cn
exactly, well put. This point I tried to make in the initial post.
Must spread some reputation around
. Anyway, well said.
Well in my first response to the thread I referred to the approach to Africa as non direct government rule but rather economical rule through private firms and other contractors. Industry can get tangled all they want but Government wont put to many chips in the pile. They learned their lesson from "spreading" democracy in Latin America under the guise of the Monroe Doctrine.
Spreading democracy is the new age colonialism pure and simple.
That's a major oversimplication of all the scenarios. There are always political motivations and it certainly does appear that right now the US wants to get involved with Africa (in large part because China has become so involved of late).
Of course, in a lot cases, stability isn't the goal. It is the opposite of the goal in fact (middle east in particular).
That is why It is more relevant what it has done to Uganda, How about the Uganda "kill all gays law" lol