National Review is airing a debate on intervention in Liberia. Here's an eye-opening part from the "against" column:

"This intervention may be technically in line with the Bush National Security Strategy, but if it is, it reveals that that strategy has little to do with protecting American security. For example, Carstens points approvingly to the strategy's stated aim to "make the world not just safer but better." This phrase gives me the chills. Better by whose standards? At what cost? For how long?"

And why?

I could care less about "improving" the world, I just want it to not f^&$ with us, that's good enough.