Bystanders to Genocide Questions- Bethany Petersen - 25 views

• 
  #1 Bethany Petersen on 03 Dec 11

   

  1) To what extent is the US responsible for protecting human rights abroad?
  
  2) In the article, Power said that "public opinion is rarely if ever aroused by foreign crises, even genocidal ones, in the absence of political leadership" to what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement and what can we do to change this?

   

  <div class="cArrow"> </div><div class="cContentInner">1) To what extent is the US responsible for protecting human rights abroad? <br /> <br /> 2) In the article, Power said that "public opinion is rarely if ever aroused by foreign crises, even genocidal ones, in the absence of political leadership" to what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement and what can we do to change this?</div>

  ...

  Cancel
• 
  #3 Enrique Zaragoza on 05 Dec 11

   

  I think the US should be responsible for the protection of human rights in other countries because we are one of the strongest nations that can actually help these third world countries. However, the United States must be honest about why it's assisting them and can't expect those nations to quickly change. I believe democracy and human rights are critical to long term stability, which these nations need. I think the United States must find ways in public and in private to continue to press for progress in those countries in need of help. Those efforts will lend support to the people who can bring change and will help create the middle space necessary to avoid the choices between repression and anarchy that many might feel they now face. This is not a quick process, and the US must be willing to help until a change is made.

   

  <div class="cArrow"> </div><div class="cContentInner">I think the US should be responsible for the protection of human rights in other countries because we are one of the strongest nations that can actually help these third world countries. However, the United States must be honest about why it's assisting them and can't expect those nations to quickly change. I believe democracy and human rights are critical to long term stability, which these nations need. I think the United States must find ways in public and in private to continue to press for progress in those countries in need of help. Those efforts will lend support to the people who can bring change and will help create the middle space necessary to avoid the choices between repression and anarchy that many might feel they now face. This is not a quick process, and the US must be willing to help until a change is made.</div>

  ...

  Cancel
• 
  #4 Nancy Camarillo on 05 Dec 11

   

  Being that the United States is currently one of the strongest nations in the world, one can easily conclude that they have the responsibility to protect the human rights of those abroad. As much as this sounds ideal, we know this has not always been the case when it comes to US intervention in foreign affairs. We can argue that because we have such great power and influence that we must use this power to protect those who cannot help themselves, but can we help a country when we ourselves are facing deficits, ineffective policies, and a plethora of issues that are affecting the overall well being of our society? On the flip side, we have seen situations in which the US has gotten involved when it feels that individuals are not being treated with basic human respect. Unfortunately we have seen many cases such as Rwanda where the US had the opportunity to stop a genocide from occurring and did nothing to stop it; claiming that they had no knowledge of the masscre taking place in Rwanda, yet we have seen the US get involved in issues in the Middle East with the hidden interest for oil. We have also seen the US support foreign governments with the reasoning that they are helping establish or maintain a democracy such as in Central and South America that ultimately lead to governments that killed innocent civilians and established some of the most brutal dictatorships in South America in order to have influences over the countries. So then the question becomes do we get involved only when we gain something in return?

   

  <div class="cArrow"> </div><div class="cContentInner">Being that the United States is currently one of the strongest nations in the world, one can easily conclude that they have the responsibility to protect the human rights of those abroad. As much as this sounds ideal, we know this has not always been the case when it comes to US intervention in foreign affairs. We can argue that because we have such great power and influence that we must use this power to protect those who cannot help themselves, but can we help a country when we ourselves are facing deficits, ineffective policies, and a plethora of issues that are affecting the overall well being of our society? On the flip side, we have seen situations in which the US has gotten involved when it feels that individuals are not being treated with basic human respect. Unfortunately we have seen many cases such as Rwanda where the US had the opportunity to stop a genocide from occurring and did nothing to stop it; claiming that they had no knowledge of the masscre taking place in Rwanda, yet we have seen the US get involved in issues in the Middle East with the hidden interest for oil. We have also seen the US support foreign governments with the reasoning that they are helping establish or maintain a democracy such as in Central and South America that ultimately lead to governments that killed innocent civilians and established some of the most brutal dictatorships in South America in order to have influences over the countries. So then the question becomes do we get involved only when we gain something in return?</div>

  ...

  Cancel
• 
  #5 Gaby Ramirez Castorena on 06 Dec 11

   

  Well, I think that every single country holds a moral responsibility to protect the human rights of those around the world. That being said, yeah I think that as a leading power in the world, the U.S. does have a little more responsibility for this. I think as a country we need to step in another countries shoes and see what we would like done for us. If we are facing a crisis with genocides and can't find a way to solve the issue ourselves, I am pretty sure that we would be desperately wanting other countries to help us. Maybe we might not be allies of every country, and this might be something that makes other countries turn the cold shoulder on us. But this is about something wayyy more important than simply politics, it is about vunerable people that need the help.

   

  <div class="cArrow"> </div><div class="cContentInner">Well, I think that every single country holds a moral responsibility to protect the human rights of those around the world. That being said, yeah I think that as a leading power in the world, the U.S. does have a little more responsibility for this. I think as a country we need to step in another countries shoes and see what we would like done for us. If we are facing a crisis with genocides and can't find a way to solve the issue ourselves, I am pretty sure that we would be desperately wanting other countries to help us. Maybe we might not be allies of every country, and this might be something that makes other countries turn the cold shoulder on us. But this is about something wayyy more important than simply politics, it is about vunerable people that need the help.</div>

  ...

  Cancel

To Top