# Why support war in Liberia but oppose war in Iraq? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 11, 2003, 11:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683 "2003-07-11T11:34:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 11:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/1 "2003-07-11T11:34:27Z")
A number of European and American opinion leaders have encouraged the US to take military action in Liberia, even though they opposed military action in Iraq. Why do they prefer Liberian intervention? When one outlines the key aspects, intervening in Liberia does not look more advantageous:[ol][li]Both interventions could be justified on humanitarian grounds. Both countries suffered from dreadful governments, although Saddam had caused a much greater number of deaths.[_]Both interventions are risky, open-ended, and potentially expensive. Iraq is likely to have a considerably greater cost.[_]Iraq was a big potential threat to much of the world, due to Saddam’s desire to acquire and use WMDs. It was important that Iraq’s oil resources not be controlled by the evil Saddam.[/ol]So, it seems that military action in Iraq has more potential benefit than military action in Liberia. Therefore, I give higher priority to the war in Iraq.[/li] However, maybe that’s the very reason some prefer Liberian action. Is Liberian intervention considered better _because, it can’t do America any good_? Do these opinion leaders consider pure altruism a better motive than a mixture of altruism and realpolitik? ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/2 "2003-07-11T11:53:00Z")
Here’s the problem **december** : > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\*3. Iraq was a big potential threat to much of the world, due to Saddam’s desire to acquire and use WMDs. > > 1. It was important that Iraq’s oil resources not be controlled by the evil Saddam. > > So, it seems that military action in Iraq has more potential benefit than military action in Liberia. Therefore, I give higher priority to the war in Iraq. > \*\* Iraq didn’t actually _have_ any WMDs, and didn’t have the ability to _acquire_ them. The _desire_ was completely irrelevant, and didn’t constitute a real threat to anyone. And how exactly does the **U.S.** benefit by spending hundreds of billions of taxpayer funds to wrest control away from the “evil Saddam”? Lots of individuals associated with U.S. oil companies may benefit, but lots of other U.S. citizens (i.e. soldiers) have been _killed_. Are you hitting a new low here, **december**? ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/3 "2003-07-11T12:07:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Desmostylus \* > \*\*Here’s the problem **december** :Iraq didn’t actually _have_ any WMDs, and didn’t have the ability to _acquire_ them. The _desire_ was completely irrelevant, and didn’t constitute a real threat to anyone. > > And how exactly does the **U.S.** benefit by spending hundreds of billions of taxpayer funds to wrest control away from the “evil Saddam”? Lots of individuals associated with U.S. oil companies may benefit, but lots of other U.S. citizens (i.e. soldiers) have been _killed_. > > Are you hitting a new low here, **december**? \*\* Uh, but how does that address Liberia? **December’s** question presumes that you would have been opposed to intervention in Iraq. I think the reasons for opposition have been blathered upon endlessly. But do you support intervention in Liberia, but opposed it in Iraq? If so, why? I am all for setting up a long-term presence in Liberia. We will be getting more involved in Africa over the coming decades. Liberia is nicely situated for exerting force in western Africa. Then again, I was/am all for a long-term presence in Iraq, so I do not have a contradictory position on these two countries. ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 12:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/4 "2003-07-11T12:09:33Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Desmostylus \* > Iraq didn’t actually _have_ any WMDs, and didn’t have the ability to _acquire_ them. The _desire_ was completely irrelevant, and didn’t constitute a real threat to anyone. Nobody knows how likely it was that Saddam would again acquire and use WMDs. Because we don’t know, there was some degree of risk. But, there’s no risk at all that Charles Taylor will use WMDs. ---
**Author:** ![TwistofFate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/cdc98d/32.png) [@TwistofFate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TwistofFate)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 12:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/5 "2003-07-11T12:18:24Z")
There is a difference between a peace-keeping force and an invasion force. I doubt that if soldiers went into Liberia they would be going in with “Shock and Awe” tactics. ---
**Author:** ![TwistofFate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/cdc98d/32.png) [@TwistofFate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TwistofFate)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 12:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/6 "2003-07-11T12:21:08Z")
> [@](#): > > Nobody knows how likely it was that Saddam would again acquire and use WMDs I thought that Bush thought that they already had them? Ready to deply in 45 minutes? Ring any bells? ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/7 "2003-07-11T12:22:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Brutus \* > \*\* But do you support intervention in Liberia, but opposed it in Iraq? If so, why? \*\* I can point out that **december** ’s argument is bullshit without having to take _any_ stance regarding Liberia. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/8 "2003-07-11T12:23:22Z")
That was last week. The truth has changed several times since then. Really, **Twist** you simply must learn to keep up! ---
**Author:** ![Zorro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/ad7895/32.png) [@Zorro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zorro)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/9 "2003-07-11T12:23:59Z")
There are several reasons for American intervention in Liberia. After having observed Dubya for a few years, I refuse to believe that he would do anything whatsoever for purely altruistic reasons. However, the problem with Liberia and Charles Taylor is that it wields a highly destabilising influence on that region of West Africa. Liberia is partly to blame for the current mess in Cote d’Ivoire since it backs at least one of the rebel factions, and the French have stepped in militarily to try and sort things out. The whole region is something of a disaster area, and is the top place for displays of large scale inhuman atrocities in the world. However, preventing massacres and genocides is a side effect of the main reason for intervening there which is the fact that Nigeria and the Gulf of Guinea are swimming in oil. The US is trying to diversify it’s sources of oil to reduce dependance on the Middle-East, and already imports 15% of its oil from West Africa. Now the US doesn’t want Liberia making even more of a mess of the area than it already is and getting in the way of developing the oil industry. In addition, it’s a PR stunt. The majority of the world is pretty peeved at the US right now for the self-serving way it handles foreign policy. So it looks good to be helping out the Africans. Only they’re a bit late on this bandwagon: the French have been in and out of Cote d’Ivoire for decades, the Brits in Sierra Leone for a few years now, and now extra French troops under an EU flag are in the seriously nasty place that is the Democratic Republic of Congo. Charles Taylor is however a proper and absolutely real threat to neighbouring countries. And of course, the US were asked to intervene there on humanitarian grounds, and didn’t just act unilaterally, which makes a world of difference. ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 12:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/10 "2003-07-11T12:24:53Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by TwistofFate \* > \*\*There is a difference between a peace-keeping force and an invasion force. I doubt that if soldiers went into Liberia they would be going in with “Shock and Awe” tactics. \*\* Wasn’t there another small coastal African country that we went to on a UN-approved ‘peace keeping’ mission? IIRC, that one turned rather hot. Some ‘shock and awe’ could have saved that mission, if the political will (not likely at time) existed in Washington. ---
**Author:** ![TwistofFate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/cdc98d/32.png) [@TwistofFate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TwistofFate)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/11 "2003-07-11T12:31:09Z")
Ah, right. Lets save civilians by killing civilians. Makes sense. ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/12 "2003-07-11T12:34:04Z")
Nice try **Brutus**. As you correctly point out it was the U.S. that prevented substantial forces from being deployed. And “shock and awe” would have been effective in Rwanda? Now you are being silly. Really you should leave attempts at spin to **December** , he’s much better at it ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 12:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/13 "2003-07-11T12:39:33Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Zorro \* > … Now the US doesn’t want Liberia making even more of a mess of the area than it already is and getting in the way of developing the oil industry. > > In addition, it’s a PR stunt. > > And of course, the US were asked to intervene there on humanitarian grounds, and didn’t just act unilaterally, which makes a world of difference. These three points make a lot of sense to me, as reasons for Bush to intervene in Liberia. They explain Bush’s motivations. But, they don’t explain why, e.g., many European leaders, the New York Times and Howard Dean support Liberian intervention. – Why is blood for oil OK in Liberia, but wrong in Iraq? – Why do Bush’s political opponents support a PR stunt that will help him win the next election? – It’s true that the US was asked to intervene in Liberia by certain Europeans. But, why did they ask us to intervene in the first place – particularly those who asked us \*not \*to intervene in Iraq? ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/14 "2003-07-11T12:44:40Z")
errr…, or did you mean Somalia? It’s difficult to keep up with all the places where you bungle things. ---
**Author:** ![TwistofFate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/cdc98d/32.png) [@TwistofFate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TwistofFate)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/15 "2003-07-11T12:51:21Z")
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3022740.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3022740.stm) Because the U.S. have been asked by Liberia themselves to come in. And if a force does come in, it will be a coalition of French, US and UK forces. ---
**Author:** ![Zorro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/ad7895/32.png) [@Zorro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zorro)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/16 "2003-07-11T12:52:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\* > > – Why is blood for oil OK in Liberia, but wrong in Iraq? > > – Why do Bush’s political opponents support a PR stunt that will help him win the next election? > > – It’s true that the US was asked to intervene in Liberia by certain Europeans. But, why did they ask us to intervene in the first place – particularly those who asked us \*not \*to intervene in Iraq? \*\* The Europeans and others called for US intervention in Liberia primarily for humanitarian reasons, as they’re already engaged in Sierra Leone, Cote d’Ivoire and Congo. It just happens that this suits the US just fine so they’re doing it. And of course the Europeans aren’t fools, they know this. Iraq was a different case. It wasn’t actively threatening anyone else (OK, Saddam supported Palestinian terrorrists but so does everyone else in the Arab world), and there wasn’t a dirty great civil war going on with the attendant massacres and so on. ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/17 "2003-07-11T12:53:13Z")
Err, I was referring to Somalia. I don’t think we ever sent troops to Rawanda, did we? Lets rehash some of the anti-War in Iraq arguments, and apply them here: [ul] [li]Liberia poses no threat to America. [/li] [li]The real threat is Osama Bin Laden, not Charles Taylor. Osama who? This is just a misdirection ploy by the administration.[/li] [li]The CIA World Factbook lists Liberia’s natural resources as being: “…iron ore, timber, diamonds, gold, hydropower.” Obviously, this is just a ploy by Big-Hydropower to line their pockets, courtesy of Dubya. No blood for timber![/li] [li]There are no WMD in Liberia, either.[/li] [li]So what if Taylor is a brutal dictator? What, are we going to start taking out _all_ of the brutal dictators?[/li] [li]Liberia will turn into another Vietnam. [/li] [li]America has no nation-building plan for Liberia. It will be a mess.[/li] [li]We can apply pressure in other ways. There is no need to resort to the warmongers toolchest, and send in the Army.[/li] [li]There is no UN resolution authorizing the deployment of troops to Liberia. If we send troops in there, we will become international pariahs.[/li] [li]We should certainly not go in alone! We need to build an extensive coaltion before we even consider to use of the military![/li] [li]Our military is already stretched too thin, fighting terrorism. Sending troops to Liberia will take away from the troops hunting Al Queda.[/li] [li]It wasn’t Liberians flying those planes on 9/11![/li][/ul] ---
**Author:** ![rsa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/839c29/32.png) [@rsa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rsa)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 12:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/18 "2003-07-11T12:54:13Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > Is Liberian intervention considered better _because, it can’t do America any good_? :rolleyes: As pointed out above, this would be a peace keeping force, not an invading force. President Taylor has agreed to step down and says he wants the US to come in to support the country. We’re talking about a few thousand troops here, not 150,000 or more. Liberia was founded by freed America slaves with the help of the Quakers. A bit of a historical connection that stills ties us to that country. ---
**Author:** ![Zorro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/ad7895/32.png) [@Zorro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zorro)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/19 "2003-07-11T13:02:59Z")
**Brutus** , that’s quite a hodge-podge of random stuff you’ve just brought up. I’ll just pick up on one of them, when you say that there are other ways of applying pressure. What or whom so you intend to pressure? There is no functioning government, there are no effective institutions (which is another way in which this is different from Iraq). This isn’t a war, it’s a peacekeeping mission. ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2003, 1:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683/20 "2003-07-11T13:13:01Z")
(If it isn’t sufficiently clear: I do think we should intervene in Liberia. I am just arguing the other side since nobody else is. I take my inspiration from those opposed to the war in Iraq.) We can apply pressure on the warring parties in Liberia. LURD and MODEL can be better brought to the peace-table with economic carrots, not military sticks. As the ‘Blackhawk Down’ incident shows, peace keeping can quickly turn to something resembling war. Why risk the danger of conflict (which would harm the innocent Liberians most of all), when we haven’t exhausted all other means yet? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-support-war-in-liberia-but-oppose-war-in-iraq/187683.md?page=2)