#2 No, there is no rational reason to get involved in the Congo's bloodshed. The Central African region made up of the Congos, {whatever names they happen to be using this week}, is important for certain mineral exports but all sides have shown eagerness to export same to anyone with money. Also, the strategic value of the Congo decreased when the Belgians lost their national redoubt there when the region became independent, and almost completely vanished with the end of the Cold War. Especially since all sides are more than happy to sell anything and everything to anyone and everyone.
Arguing against involvement by the West is : 1) the tribalism mentioned in the article; 2) automatic white liberal Western guilt that will be taken out on any troops involved; 3) the lack of any appreciable infrastructure; 4) who do you back since there are no angels there; and 5) the presence of several hemorrhagic fevers with no known treatment regimes and extremely high lethality rates. |