Posted on 10/15/2011 5:45:45 PM PDT by DemforBush
I never said because we lost on the battlefield. Clearly we didn’t. But war is more than a military endeavor. To use a football analogy, I can still gain more yards than the other team and lose the game. Thats what happened in Vietnam.
While America’s impact on Africa is not insignificant, it tends to be overestimated. There is a World of difference between impacting the lives of a few greedy bureaucrats through a poorly thought out aid driven foreign policy and transforming lives through trade.
Trade and the resultant creation of economic opportunities is the reason why the Chinese have high popularity ratings in most African nations. America’s appeal has more to do with the idea of America than any physical, tangible benefit.
The humanitarian situation in East Africa and Congo’s simmering crisis and the prominence of these two events in Western media reports makes it impossible for any Westerner to have a true understanding of an incredibly complex, diverse and strategic continent.
It appears sir, that your World view has been shaped by several decades of negative reports about Africa and there is precious little I can do to convince you about the strategic importance of that continent.
Bump to you chargers.
mazda, all you have to do is google ‘lords resistance army’ and follow the links. NOT Christians, NOT freedom fighters.
End of subject for me.
A few years ago, the US enlisted African allies like the Ugandans to take care of business in Somalia. They are taking care of the business in Mogadishu to the best of their ability.
Today it is payback time. Are you so naive as to believe that America can make demands on its allies armed forces (Al Shabab in Somalia) without allies making similar demands on the US armed forces.
Well, the Lords Resistance Army is Uganda's number 1 national security challenge. It is a cult led by a mad man with no logical political aims. If you want Ugandan, Rwandan and Burundian soldiers to do the work that you'd loathe to send US Marines to do, then you've got to get used to this sort of thing.
Secondly, you probably haven't read the US Congress bill on the LRA. I am quoting a report from IPS last year
The U.S. Congress has cleared legislation requiring President Barack Obama to devise a strategy over the next six months to help capture the leadership of the Lord's Revolutionary Army (LRA) and protect the civilian population in four eastern and central African countries from its rampages.
s far as I am concerned we SHOULD leave...both Iraq, and Afganistan...
but do it right...declare victory and leave.
Bin Laden is Dead....KSM is in jail....Anwar al-Awlaki was just killed by drones in yemen.
let these 3rd world, dark age idiots, live and die by there own hands...and ban any future islamics from moving to the USA.
finally take all our soldiers and place them along our southern border....
MEGA BUMP!
In Iraq we have won.>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You are right. George Bush liberated 57 million Iraqis fro tyranny.But thats the problem. Obama wants tyranny.
Obama plans to de-win in Iraq.No success of George Bush will be allowed to endure.And Obama intends to push the scions of the colonial era, British proxies in Obamas narrow nationalist socialist mind....The House of Saud into a corner and hang them.
“No success of George Bush will be allowed to endure.”
Uh you do realize that it was Dubya that signed the SOFA which specifies that ALL US troops leave Iraq by December 31st 2011? The only relevance Obama has to this issue is (a) he’s fulfilling Dubya’s agreement and (b) he’s only in office as a consequence of Bush being such a disgrace of a President.
In case your head was in the sand back then (as many were when it came to Bush’s antics around here) here’s your prince at his best:
http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/11/20081127-2.html
I know my history, there is no North Vietnam, backed by the USSR ivading Iraq, and the South Vietnamese never asked us to leave! As for Iran, if they are a problem, lets go after them directly rather than have a bunch of troops playing defense in Iraq.
And btw, how about answering my question from earlier? No one else has. “The Iraqi government wants us to either submit our troops to Iraqi law or leave, which, btw, we signed an agreement to do. Are we supposed to overthrow the government we set up and militarily occupy Iraq forever? What do you suggest? I would like to hear a real plan.”
Can’t afford to keep them there. We’ll be lucky to afford a military the size of Canada’s once Obama gets through with us.
I can understand that Iraqis might not acquit to the US invading for Freedom sake,I will point out that the soldiers who got send there and died there...didn’t have much of a choice beyond “they signed up for it”.
I assume the Iraqi government would establish a memorial for the US soldiers who died,were crippled or fought there?
Many of us did certain things that weren’t exactly in the realm of liberation but ultimately we realized that there was a soul to this country worth appreciating.
So Hussein is Shiaa. I’m trending to believe.
That’s not exactly the deal. The Iraqeez wanted us to keep feeding them with a 50K training force but they wanted us to give up civil immunity for our troops. It’s clearly better for us to bail than give up legal protection for our guys. I just say our last guy out drives a sign in the ground that says “We’ve been here twice to bail out your sorry buttz-—don’t make us come again.”
No more troops in Iraq, no more SOFA. And maybe this time my nephew, and the rest of The Leavenworth Ten will get out of Leavenworth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.