Re: Myanmar (formerly Burma)

Greg Goss wrote:
> "ZBicyclist" <ZBicyclist@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>> There's little to say or do. It's unclear that donating to 
>> anybody
>> or writing to anybody will have any effect.
>
> There was an interview between a Canadian radio journalist and 
> someone
> in the US military on what international law would say about 
> "bombing"
> pallets of food into a country with an unwilling government.  The 
> US
> military guy had obviously considered the idea and it sounds like 
> he
> had very reluctantly decided not to do it.  (or at least that 
> someone
> had decided not to do it.  It wasn't clear whether he was in the
> decision making chain.)

I've been thinking about that as well, not that I have any aircraft.

There are lots of ways this could go wrong.

Let's start with the Thais, and consider their history. The Thais 
avoided becoming a colony by a combination of luck and skillful 
diplomacy.  The Thais have also fought a large number of wars with 
the Burmese during their history, and probably see no point in 
having another go at it right now. The Thais have enough of a 
balancing act with the US, the Chinese, and the Vietnamese.  My 
guess would be that they wouldn't be happy with the idea at all.

Second, how much does it help versus how much does it spur greater 
xenophobia among the ruling generals?

Third, lots of people thought we (the U.S.) went into Iraq to 
"help"[1], and we can see how that turned out.

But I don't know.

-- 
Mike Kruger
"You have to be careful if you are reckless." - Richard M. Daley

[1] I wasn't one of them.