Amazon.com Widgets

Should the United States avoid supporting Sudan's military?

  • Yes, there are no trustworthy sides to support in Sudan

    Despite the unimaginable tragedies that have occurred in Sudan, the United States should avoid military conflict. As has happened in the past few years with countries in the Middle East, the good guys are often as corrupt and violent as the regime being overthrown. There have been too many conflicts where the U.S. ended up backing the worse of two evils.

  • Yes, the U.S. should concentrate on aiding suffering civilians.

    Both sides of the conflict in Sudan have histories of corruption, human rights abuses, and instability. This makes aiding the military a risky venture, because there is no guarantee that aid will be used to help struggling civilians or that the U.S. won't be unwittingly contributing to more atrocities. The U.S. and Sudan would be better off by working on non-military forms of aid, such as food, water, sanitation, and education initiatives.

  • The United States should stay out of international affairs as much as possible.

    The United States has engaged in multiple wars in Iraq and Afghanistan over the past decade, which has put an economic strain on our country. It has contributed towards our national debt, and it has also made us look like an imperial bully to much of the rest of the world when we try to dictate world politics and military power over others.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.