Reply #6: The fact to intervene or not and how is not a discussion that is worth having, but

[Mass]

seeing pols supporting funds for democratization for later abandoning those you have pushed to rebellion because they dont matter is what the rest of the world like so much about the US.

I have never heard Webb vote against one of these funds to push democracy in those areas where it is not culturally existing. I wished he had because it would be a position I could easily support.

In substance, and as much as I agree with the finale position (no intervention) and know nobody who wants to intervene (all I heard of was protecting the civilian populations, and, apparently, and African life is not worth a life in Asia or Europe), Webb, Haas, and others' position is that the only thing that matters is what the US want. How is it different that what Bush was promoting.

Can the US have a consistent policy: either become non interventionist even with money and propaganda, or finish what you do. I prefer the first solution, but at least be consistent.