Life's Pleasures Quote by Les Aspin

Aspin’s phrasing is doing two jobs at once: it sells intervention as both urgent and limited. “We ought” is moral pressure without the full commitment of “we will.” It frames action as a basic obligation, then immediately narrows what that action is supposed to look like: “protective sanctuaries,” not regime change; “some places,” not an open-ended war.

The key rhetorical move is how quickly “Kurdish rebels” becomes “food and water and medical help.” That pivot launders a hard military reality (protecting territory from attack requires force, air cover, rules of engagement) into the softer vocabulary of relief. It’s a politically savvy rebranding: sanctuaries sound humane, almost administrative, while “rebels” signals that the people being helped are combatants, not only civilians. Aspin wants the credibility of humanitarianism without admitting the costs of enforcement.

The context is the early 1990s, when the U.S. faced the post-Gulf War fallout: Kurdish uprisings, repression, refugees, and a suddenly visible moral debt created by American rhetoric about liberation. “Protective sanctuaries” echoes the era’s growing idea of safe zones and no-fly zones - policies pitched as middle paths between doing nothing and full invasion. The subtext is domestic as much as international: a Democratic defense voice trying to square public compassion with post-Vietnam caution, offering a plan that sounds actionable, finite, and righteous.

It works because it flatters the listener’s conscience while sidestepping the uncomfortable truth that “sanctuary” is never just a place; it’s a promise backed by power.