Abstract
Nobody has openly pronounced that stopping genocide is immoral or that allowing genocide to proceed is moral. It would, therefore, seem that since no one is capable of posing an argument contradictory to these statements, they must be inherently true beyond debate.
How is it then, that on numerous occasions, the world has proven itself to be quite content to sit idly by while so many are brutally murdered? What happened to the moral imperative? What happened to morality in general? To understand these questions an analysis of the underlying motives that seem to dictate the actions of the nations of the world might prove illuminating. What seems to become overtly evident, though, is the fact that self-interest, or the lack thereof, ultimately rules the world, while morality is discreetly pushed under the rug.