human rights?

[Feekee]

[ QUOTE ]
If you do the research, Rwanda is a good example of where the UN, and the Western members in particular, could have acted (with in place Canadien peacekeepers)to stop the genocide. But, failed to do so.

[/ QUOTE ]

No one wants to go in and keep the peace at great expense to the occupying forces (UN...i.e US). Rwanda has nothing to offer the world in terms of natural resources(as far as I know). I think it was a strategic decision because intervention has no time-table and the cost will run up to billions of dollars, and what is truly accomplished? (in terms of international relations, I do realize that many human beings were killed)? Unfortunately, I think this is the main decision factor, and until the United States or any other 1st world country looks at these types of situations in terms of human cost instead of monetary cost, this way nothing will change. It's like they do an EV calculation of intervention. What is the expected value of saving this small 3rd world country. Usually is isn't +EV. Certainly a sad way to look at these types of situations.
A good example of why they will no longer intervene unilaterally is the movie "Black Hawk Down" where the U.S's botched humanitarian intervention in Somalia ended in the death of 19 U.S. soldiers and around 1000! somalis.