Patch Blog: Politically, Where Do We Draw the Line, Mr. Clooney?

I read in the paper where George Clooney recently was arrested protesting outside the Sudanese embassy in Washington D.C.

Mr. Clooney's done an admirable job describing the humanitarian atrocities in Sudan, and I want to publicly thank him for going into an area of the world that has been largely written off and forgotton, where millions have died.  

Yet I do have a question for someone like him who seems to truly care. What would he have the world, the United Nations or the United States do to alleviate the problem?  Do we as the United States use taxpayer dollars to liberate societies where we have no historical relationships or economic or national security interests?  Where do we draw the line?  He is running into what seems to be the same problem(s) that President Clinton ran into with Rwanda, and why we ultimately did not intervene: President Clinton and his National Security team could never explain an intervention policy.  

What did Mr. Clooney and the others accomplish by getting arrested?  So as not to be a person who "Monday-morning-quarterbacks," I have a solution but it involves something that people generally do not like - military intervention.  The Sudan that George Clooney is shining light on is a nasty place.  I'm not just talking about the hunger, famine and disease.  I'm speaking of the people who are causing the hunger, famine and disease.  If you want the problem solved, unfortunately it will probably involve people with very large guns and United States-issued combat fatigues driving out nasty people who harbor evil intent.

I heard someone say once that what liberated concentration camps in World War II were not the Peace Corps, Peace Studies Departments on College Campuses or feel good slogans like "Coexist." It was big men with big guns like the 82nd Airborne and the Soviet Red Army. Painful and unpleasant to think of, but ultimately true.

Someone remarked in the Justice Ginsburg blog comment section that the La Canada Flintridge Patch is a local online newspaper and blogs like mine shouldn't exist.  I respect that opinion though I disagree, because a man like George Clooney, along with Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie and other celebrities who live in Los Angeles meet with the President of the United States to advocate policy positions that spend vast sums of taxpayer money - our money.  

People like Mr. Clooney, Mr. Pitt and Ms. Jolie need to be questioned when they make broad policy statements while meeting with President Obama.  They have every right to use their fame and fortune, but when it involves my money I want to know what are their exact policy solutions, what will they cost, and what are the interests of the United States?  You may think that George Clooney's arrest has no impact on La Canada, but I would warn that his celebrity profile has the power to spend your money right out of your wallet. That hits close enough to home to be called a local issue in my book.

I'm curious to hear your thoughts and comments on matters like Sudan or other troubled parts of the world because I believe it is citizens all over the United States who hold the solutions to places like Sudan. Maybe, just maybe Mr. Clooney will read your solutions and all of us can be a part of the answer, not the problem.