Saving Myanmar

In an earlier post this week, I mused about a possible global push back against the military junta of Myanmar once everyone began to see how messed in the heads these guys truly are.

A week now has passed since the cyclone hit and still the generals are toying around with visas, relief and voting polls.

I've been watching the news reports out of one eye all week long, dutifully clicking on a Burma headline each time I see it's been updated. I've turned into somewhat of a media junkie when it comes to Myanmar, but I just can't help myself. I am astonished.

This morning I spent some time with my coffee and my Internet, reading deeper into the crisis.

I came across a BBC article in which British politicians were wondering about the moral obligation that we as human beings have to the people of Burma.

At this point, have the generals proved themselves to be so crazy and inept that we have a moral obligation to invade the country on humanitarian grounds in order to deliver aide?

A journalist for the Asia Times thinks so. This morning, Asia Times published an article written by Shawn W Crispin titled The Case for Invading Myanmar.

In the article, Crispin claims that a US invasion of Myanmar makes sense. An invasion, lead by the US and backed by the rest of the world, would go a long way toward restoring America's rattled reputation, he says.

Toppling the junta would clear the way for Burma's already democratically-elected president, Aung San Suu Kyi, to finally leave house-arrest and take her rightful spot as the country's leader -- a move sure to be supported by the majority of Myanmar's people as they are the ones who voted for her.

Is the idea of invading Myanmar far-fetched and silly?

I'm not so sure. What I am sure about, however, is that if the United States actually did step into this crisis and invade Burma, I'd be much more likely to support it than I would some of its other foreign policies.