US sending troops to Uganda

[Hygro]

Sending in troops to secure African resources for America during the covert second cold war? Who would have thought.

/tinfoilhat

 

[CELTICEMPIRE]

Sending in troops to secure African resources for America during the covert second cold war? Who would have thought.

/tinfoilhat

maybe we'll overthrow Museveni and set up a pro-USA#1 puppet-dictator

 

[Hygro]

maybe we'll overthrow Museveni and set up a pro-USA#1 puppet-dictator

What's the point of overthrowing a government if that government already invites you to station your troops in their country?

 

[classical_hero]

The Taliban use attrocities to try to get something.

From Dawn



http://www.dawn.com/2011/10/15/pushed-into-oblivion.html

The Lords Resistance Army use attrocities to control their own child soldiers.

From UN



http://www.unddr.org/countryprogrammes.php?c=37

I would say that both are just as bad as each, but if you say, then the Taliban is not that bad after all.

 

[amadeus]

Stop it. Just stop it. Your secessionist apologism has no basis in fact.

George III would have loved you!

... disenfranchises in the most fundamental manner an entire race of people?

Would they have been better off in FDR's concentration camps? Of course, the slavery argument is totally debunked once you find out that slavery was completely legal in the Union, the Emancipation Proclamation freed none of the slaves in the Union, and that Lincoln himself had pushed the Corwin Amendment which would have prohibited the federal government from ending slavery.

 

[Lord of Elves]

George III would have loved you!

I love my country so much, I actively defend traitors who tried to tear it apart in a bloody war to maintain property over other human beings.

Would they have been better off in FDR's concentration camps? Of course, the slavery argument is totally debunked once you find out that slavery was completely legal in the Union, the Emancipation Proclamation freed none of the slaves in the Union, and that Lincoln himself had pushed the Corwin Amendment which would have prohibited the federal government from ending slavery.

Because the precedent of punishing treason is something we wouldn't want to establish at all.

 

[amadeus]

If you want to punish treason, punish the government! They ignore and undermine the Constitution every day. If we're really going to punish traitors, start with the ones that live in Washington D.C.!

 

[Whiskey_Lord]

What is positive, at all, about allowing slavery to persist as a negative, backwards economic and social tradition that disenfranchises in the most fundamental manner an entire race of people?

Slavery: the Bible supports it. I believe it. That settles it!

 

[Silurian]

I would say that both are just as bad as each, but if you say, then the Taliban is not that bad after all.

No the Taliban are very "bad" but the Lords Resistance Army are evil.

The Taliban threaten people to stop doing something that in there warped way, they feel is wrong. They murder people who do not stop doing what they were told to stop.

The Lords Resistance Army capture children from a village beat them for a few days, forcing them to kill each other. Then they take them back to the village they came from and get them to kill their relatives so they can not go back to the village.

 

[useless]

Meanwhile Rush Limbaugh defends the LRA

Now, up until today, most Americans have never heard of the combat Lord’s Resistance Army. And here we are at war with them. Have you ever heard of Lord’s Resistance Army, Dawn? How about you, Brian? Snerdley, have you? You never heard of Lord’s Resistance Army? Well, proves my contention, most Americans have never heard of it, and here we are at war with them. Lord’s Resistance Army are Christians. It means God. I was only kidding. Lord’s Resistance Army are Christians. They are fighting the Muslims in Sudan. And Obama has sent troops, United States troops to remove them from the battlefield, which means kill them. That’s what the lingo means, “to help regional forces remove from the battlefield,” meaning capture or kill. [...]

Let's look at the Lord’s Resistance Army objectives. I have them here. “To remove dictatorship and stop the oppression of our people.” Now, again Lord’s Resistance Army is who Obama sent troops to help nations wipe out. The objectives of the Lord’s Resistance Army, what they’re trying to accomplish with their military action in these countries is the following: “To remove dictatorship and stop the oppression of our people; to fight for the immediate restoration of the competitive multiparty democracy in Uganda; to see an end to gross violation of human rights and dignity of Ugandans; to ensure the restoration of peace and security in Uganda, to ensure unity, sovereignty, and economic prosperity beneficial to all Ugandans, and to bring to an end the repressive policy of deliberate marginalization of groups of people who may not agree with the LRA ideology.” Those are the objectives of the group that we are fighting, or who are being fought and we are joining in the effort to remove them from the battlefield.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2011/10/14/obama_invades_uganda_targets_christians

Yeah, the same LRA that uses child soldiers, rape and murder. Oh but they are christian and obama's against 'em so they must be good!

 

[Defiant47]

Meanwhile Rush Limbaugh defends the LRA

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2011/10/14/obama_invades_uganda_targets_christians

Yeah, the same LRA that uses child soldiers, rape and murder. Oh but they are christian and obama's against 'em so they must be good!

Why are people like this allowed to talk??

 

[Silurian]

Well rule according to the Ten Commandments would have Rush Limbaugh's support.

 

[Defiant47]

Well rule according to the Ten Commandments would have Rush Limbaugh's support.

I am the type of guy that views the Bible's relevance to real life on the same level as Homer's Iliad or Odyssey.

 

[Artifis]

More Iraqi lives have been saved because of American operations than if Saddam Hussein would have been left in power. It now has a real chance at democracy and real political and social progress.

Your metric is inappropriate, given the fact that North Korea is probably one of the most stable countries in the world. Of course a dictatorship will be more stable than an emerging democracy. That's not the point.

Actually, if you looked at the metric I was using, The Failed State Index, you will see that North Korea is 22nd on the list. Sure, it's more "stable" than Iraq, but is it a properly functioning state which can serve its people properly?

Furthermore, we know that the war on Iraq was for the non-existent WMDs. Claiming that more Iraqis were saved by Saddam's removal is a moot point considering the fact that it wasn't even the main cause of the war. If you want to use that as your measurement, the USA should be invading Somalia, Syria, and North Korea right now.

There may be positive signs for Iraq right now, I can grant you that. But the situation is still highly fragile, so I wouldn't place my bets on the country until things settle down more.

Afghanistan was done to thwart international terrorism, as well as to help the locals against the brutal Taliban. The Taliban are not in complete control, and terrorism has been severely hampered. Al-Qaeda hasn't had many successes recently, and I daresay it's because we've been raiding what was previously their training and operating grounds.

The Taliban is not in complete control, no, and Al-Qaeda hasn't had many successes recently. Unfortunately, the Haqqani network is doing a pretty good job of filling in that vacuum.

Iraq was done for the wrong reasons in the wrong way. It turned out being the right thing to do (military interventionism), but that doesn't necessarily make it right. Just like stopping the abusive husband from beating his wife and children because you want his oil, not because you want to save them.

Afghanistan, well... it's a difficult operation as is. I'm sure there would have been better ways to handle it, but it's been an ongoing learning situation. Hindsight's always 20/20.

I think here you're calling it a success for the wrong reasons. From the standpoint of the invaders, Iraq was a failure because they failed to get the WMDs. To suddenly champion the freedom of the Iraqi citizens is to blatantly shift the baseline.

 

[Artifis]

Meanwhile Rush Limbaugh defends the LRA


http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2011/10/14/obama_invades_uganda_targets_christians

Yeah, the same LRA that uses child soldiers, rape and murder. Oh but they are christian and obama's against 'em so they must be good!

Excuse me while I throw up over something.

 

[useless]

They don't care defiant, the truth doesn't matter to them. Facts mean nothing, and to them this is obama trying to trample on these righteous christians, fighting the "Good fight".

As long as they can go against obama, the democrats and the "liberals", they will do it. Even if it violates basic human morality, decency and dignity.

 

[Defiant47]

Actually, if you looked at the metric I was using, The Failed State Index, you will see that North Korea is 22nd on the list. Sure, it's more "stable" than Iraq, but is it a properly functioning state which can serve its people properly?

Furthermore, we know that the war on Iraq was for the non-existent WMDs. Claiming that more Iraqis were saved by Saddam's removal is a moot point considering the fact that it wasn't even the main cause of the war. If you want to use that as your measurement, the USA should be invading Somalia, Syria, and North Korea right now.

There may be positive signs for Iraq right now, I can grant you that. But the situation is still highly fragile, so I wouldn't place my bets on the country until things settle down more.

We should invade Somalia, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain, etc. Any and all illegitimate governments that use violence to suppress their own populace should be invaded and overthrown. Certain areas in Africa should not only have their governments overthrown, but one of our governments instated there (using force) to ensure that peace and prosperity occurs, instead of raging genocidal warlords.

As for Iraq, it has a much better chance for the future now, and overall more Iraqi lives were saved. It is not a moot point, because those are real lives that were saved, so although doing it for the wrong reasons, some good came out of the Iraq war.

The Taliban is not in complete control, no, and Al-Qaeda hasn't had many successes recently. Unfortunately, the Haqqani network is doing a pretty good job of filling in that vacuum.

The solution is to then occupy Pakistan, the parts that aren't well-controlled by the government and have these terrorist cells popping up. Of course, you can't politically do that, and the reason I didn't include North Korea on the list above is because of the risk of their nuclear weapons.

But then again, we can't invade anything, no matter how much we want to save those people, because of the current entrenched geopolitical situation that would forbid such military action.

I think here you're calling it a success for the wrong reasons. From the standpoint of the invaders, Iraq was a failure because they failed to get the WMDs. To suddenly champion the freedom of the Iraqi citizens is to blatantly shift the baseline.

The wrong reasons were the WMDs and the lies and deceit used to start the war. The right reasons were to free the Iraqis from a brutal dictator. The Iraqi war achieved the right thing for the wrong reasons.

As I believe I said before, it's like we stopped an abusive husband from beating his wife because he owed us money. Wrong reasons, but somehow we still did the right thing.

 

[Winner]

Isn't it possible to just quarantine Africa for a hundred years, and then return to see how the situation there sorted itself out?

 

[Defiant47]

Isn't it possible to just quarantine Africa for a hundred years, and then return to see how the situation there sorted itself out?

Isn't this what we've been doing? Nobody gives a "doodle" about Africa, except for maybe lip service and a few peacekeepers here or there. We just left it and it is rotting, and nobody's doing anything about that.

Fix my economy. Make more jobs. Make economic growth. I want a bigger TV. What's Africa?

 

[Defiant47]

They don't care defiant, the truth doesn't matter to them. Facts mean nothing, and to them this is obama trying to trample on these righteous christians, fighting the "Good fight".

As long as they can go against obama, the democrats and the "liberals", they will do it. Even if it violates basic human morality, decency and dignity.

This is the type of talk that I would expect moderators here to infract and ban for trolling. [in reference to Limbaugh's comments]

This is what should happen in real life. He should be removed, and somebody replace the rhetoric for real facts as justification for his removal from public discussion.