Uganda Foray Misses Big Picture

IBD Editorials ^ | October 17, 2011 | Editor

[Kaslin]

Leadership: President Obama's decision to send U.S. troops to Uganda was a valid one. But its timing was odd, coming as the U.S. disengages from Iraq and enlists Kenya to hose out Somalia. What are his priorities?

First, there's nothing seriously wrong with President Obama's decision to send 100 U.S. troops to aid Uganda in its war against the Lord's Resistance Army. The LRA is the 20-year terrorist plague that has unleashed untold horrors not just in Uganda but in South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the Central African Republic (CAR).

And make no mistake, it's in the U.S. interest. Those countries are our allies as well as frontline states against Islamofascism and have asked for help. Their bill from LRA's depredations already runs in the billions and costs them investment and development.

The Uganda mission shows the world that America takes care of its friends — and our Special Forces take care of the rest.

Obama is on solid legal ground, too, quite unlike his decision to send troops to Libya. The troops are being sent under the LRA Disarmament and Uganda Recovery Act of 2009, which passed by a huge bipartisan majority in Congress. And the White House has kept Congress informed of its actions, too.

[Kaslin]

What leadership?

[Sudetenland]

A mission to protect Soros's Ugandan oil interests???

Doc Savage says so on his program tonight.

[opentalk]

Why U.S. military in Uganda? Soros fingerprints all over it Obama's billionaire friend has interests in African country's oil

[Sudetenland]

That might be deserving of a separate thread.

[Sudetenland]

Oops, I see it was . . . yesterday.

www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2793456/posts

[opentalk]

Looks like it was posted Sunday, I missed it. Savage had a good point tonight, said anything bad happening with government, Soros is usually involved.

thread, Soros and Uganda

[GAB-1955]

Savage is probably wrong. When you combine the U.S. actions in Yemen, the Kenyan push against the Somali kidnappers of Al-Shahab, the independence of South Sudan and its incorporation into the Christian Anglophone East African world, and the U.S. advisers in Uganda (a country that definitely is not ARVNed), you have a strategic move to unseat Islamic terrorism from the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean.

[silverleaf]

I doubt if obama is a on “solid legal ground” if some massive feel-good “support Black Africa” bill was shoveled through Congress in 2009 and is now used to justify sending US military troops abroad.

The same type of maneuver could be used to take military action anywhere in the world (why not Zimbabwe?) ...and at what level?

200 boots on the ground is putting 100 American lives in harm's way, and could be the start of a geopolitical quagmire for our entire nation

Anyone care to examine the constitutionality of this act? (crickets)

Notifying Congress he sent them after the fact is not “keeping Congress informed”

Is obama’s unilateralism implying the OAU is an incompetent organization???

[Lorianne]

Obama, the king of Africa
http://olddogg.com/user/history/Lorianne/

The reality in Uganda is an absolute, murderous mess. As much as the LRA “rebels”, Museveni’s government (helped by Washington) has also perpetrated horrendous massacres against civilians. Kony may even be an amateur compared to Museveni - a sort of dictator for life who has just supervised the displacement and mass murder of at least 20,000 Ugandans on behalf of British corporations.

Obama’s Uganda surge should be seen as a crucial exchange of favors with Museveni - who has sent thousands of Ugandan troops to the African Union (AU) force that is fighting the hardcore Islamist al-Shabaab in Somalia. So while Uganda fights a proxy war for the US in Somalia, Washington helps the dictator to get rid of the LRA “rebels”. No wonder the Pentagon is quite fond of Uganda;

MUSEVENI recently got $45 MILLION IN EQUIPMENT, including FOUR SMALL DRONES.