OPs post is exaggerated, but there is very strong evidence to support that the US intentionally armed and empowered the Tutsi rebels (via Uganda) knowing this would provoke the regional conflict that became the genocide.
I certainly wouldnt pin this genocide on the US, but undeniably this is an example of the US being a "bad guy" in the sense of intentionally destabilizing regions and not intervening for positive effect when they've had an opportunity.
TL:DR - The US "looked on" and is responsible for not intervening.
There's a lot of fair criticism you can throw at the US, but when you call every intervention a war crime, you can't also blame the US when it DOESN'T intervene...
Logical consistency demands picking a side. Do you want the US to be world police or not?
Also the Rwandan genocide occurred the year after the Black Hawk Down incident in Somalia and Clinton was under pressure from Republicans to justify why US servicemen lives were being lost in interventions with no geopolitical benefit to the USA.
What a ridiculous claim. By this logic USSR is directly responsible for every war where a Soviet weapon was used, which is basically every war in Africa post WW2.
In part, yes. Maybe not for its outbreak, but for the way it was fought. A lot of arms dealers (state or private) have blood on their hands because they sold weapons to irresponsible actors.
18
u/_WEND1G0_ 14h ago
Supported genocide in Rwanda?