Would you support an invasion of Burma?

[/(. . )/]

(Sorry if this has been talked about before. I haven't had internet for 2 months.)

Just some facts:

Burma has various ethnic groups. The Burmese are the majority. The Karen have been fighting a civil war against the Burmese state military.

When Iraq was "liberated," it broke out into a civil war.

The refusal of the junta to let in foreign aid workers to help people in Burma means that the junta is trying to hide what is happening.

They don't care about the people. It would probably benefit the junta if people died.

The rice belt has been reported to be destroyed by the cyclone. The junta has a 400,000 military. If not fed, the soldiers might rebel. Many people become soldiers because it's the best way to feed their families. It is highly likely that the junta is stock piling the donated food to feed their soldiers. This means that the victims are being left to die.

This is a crime against humanity.

France has hinted at a UN invasion. There is already talk of unauthorized airdrops of aid.

Would you support a UN or independent (France, US) military action to remove the junta?

The junta is slowly, slowly following a "road map to democracy." They just held elections that passed a constitution. The constitution makes it illegal for people who have married foreigners or have half foreign children to be president. This law was written to prevent 1992 elected President Suu Kyi, whose late husband was British (they have two sons) and has been under house arrest for 12 of the past 16 years, from becoming the president of Burma.

Don't forget the 8-8-88 massacre and the brutal suppression of the recent monk protests.

[Kingsumo]

If this had happened 8 years ago, I would be totally behind it.. Now, I think that the US' attempt at liberating Iraq has proven that it would just be a bad idea.

And besides that, liberate them to what end? Would we overthrow the Junta and then step aside? Seems unlikely at this point.

I think as a solo action it would be ill advised, and add to that the fact that most of the world now sees us as a big bully, it would make things a bit worse.

Being part of a UN force and just adding muscle and logistics however, I think I might be able to be behind that.. If only barely.

[Jason California]

No.

[Amos Moses]

Dear God no. We should help that lady under house arrest though. But an invasion? Fuck that. Haven't we learned our lesson when it comes to that?

[c. page]

as part of a UN force, maybe, but only in terms of providing support.

[RickLM]

Our military has exhausted itself, and we are currently incapable of such an action. But we should encourage our NATO or Asian friends to do the right thing and prevent a humanitarian tragedy.

[Jerome Gibbons]

It's a scientific fact that invading other countries always works out well for the US.

[Amos Moses]

It's a scientific fact that invading other countries always works out well for the US.

Reagan had a Ph.D in it.

[Humphrey_Lee]

If the UN finally ruled that what they're doing to their people there was so immoral they had to do something about it, I'd be the first to hoot and holler in endorsement about it, but sadly, short of a new Hitler coming into a power I'm not a huge fan of invasion. But I dunno, the shit that goes down there is so fucking invasive of just base human rights I think I could change that position rather easily.

[nick maynard]

un invasion - yes. us invasion - no.

edit: secret invasion - omg yes.