In Africa, the Darfur conflict has lead up to more than two million people living in camps after fleeing for almost four years of fighting to keep their region. Millions killed, raped, tourchered, and displaced. The fighting of the thriving Civil fight is continuing with little or no help from other supporting countries.

My main discussion is; Why are we in Iraq when we could start to help, solve or create a self-start of peace in other countries. Yes, I know it shouldn't be our problem but neither should the continuation of 'Iraqi Freedom.' We've done our part and if the Iraqi Government can't support themselves with some of the worlds most horrific terrorists taken down, then they will never be a country for peace unless they can take action into their own hands. They need to fight their own war for peace we have ours to deal with. Unlike them we do take care of ourselves, with crime comes our legal system which works very well. The majority of innocent people being killed in Iraq is our doing. I know that because when their is a terror ambush they hide the women and children. We need to move our thoughts on peace to other countries that need them extremely more than others. With our president we have now even though I am for him, we must always be in a conflict. That being so, move it to people who can't defend themselves to start to give them a real helping hand. (Africa)

Iraq will get settled one way or another. Without our continued and ongoing support, the Iraqi government will implode in short order. Should we abandon them knowing this? All we can do is what we are doing, and we must continue for the sake of the entire region. Iraq may never become a country of peace, but then again, thats not required. All they really have to become is stable and self sustaining, and that is what we are working towards.

Africa is a totally different situation altogether. Each side is hellbent on perfecting genocide, and its not just two factions doing all this killing. What would it take to stop the killing in that area of the world? It's already been shown in Iraq, that one cannot disarm entire nations, much less a continent. When guns are so readily available, (AK-47's for less than $20.00 US)and when gun's aren't ready to hand, machette's are the favored weapon of choice. So now what, shoot everyone with a gun and a machette? Sure the refugee's want someone to come over and kill those that are actively hunting and killing them, but only so they can seek revenge in return.

Let's say we do turn our attention to Africa. We transport multiple American Armored Divisions and Brigades to the region. We show up in massive force. We start sweeping the countryside, and rounding up all those carring weapons..and do what with them? Process them through new internment camps? Hold them for how long? What do we do with the existing governments? Oh those guy's...... did they actually invite us? Or are we now an invading Army? You can't really call it a Humanitarian Force if you have to go in shooting. You can't make any progress there without shooting sombody or bunches of somebodies.

I dunno, none of this has easy answers. I am getting to the point in my own mind that the United States really needs to do something totally unpredicatable to gain any hope of making progress with whats happening in the world today.

North Korea wants to be a world nuclear power? Fine, start detonating nuclear devices at altitude, and repeat by getting lower on the next and so on until they decide they've had enough. Same goes for Iran. Want to play in this game, then lets give them a first hand taste of the power they so desperately want. Don't like these ideas? OK, leave the nukes for another time and place.

Let's say we leave the Korean pennisula completely. Withdraw everything. Leave and withdraw from Japan, Turkey, Iraq, Philipines, Kuwait, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Italy, Germany and any other US military installation in Europe. Bring all of them home.

Lets let the world stew for a while in events of their own making.

Turn our focus inward to shore up our own nation and its borders. Build up our own nation and take care of our own people.

And let the world stew for a while longer along whatever path they choose to take.

Thoughts? I recognize its an extreme view point, but hey, what we are doing ain't working to anyone's satisfaction, and I haven't heard any other ideas tossed out there.

I am not sure if the world is ready for the U.S. deciding to become disengaged with the world. They love to bitch about our military being posted around the world but would bitch even harder if we left them defenseless (though, it is not really such a bad idea in some instances).

We have so many economic ties with so many areas of the world that it might not be possible to disengage militarily with the world. The U.S. would not have invaded Iraq if it did not have oil because we would not care about a country that had to vital economic ties. The key has always been economic and rarely humanitarian. Not even World War II was as humanitarian as it was economic.

Maybe we just need to choose our military interventions much better and try to exert much more control on our own economic well being. Yea, I know, it is not that simple.

I know, we're just too dammed predictable for our own good. But ya gotta admit, it sure would shake things up good an proper! Even in our own nation, the effects would be immediate...all them SUV's sitting useless, Oil companies having to actually use all those billions of dollars to stay operational for a while longer, gun sales increasing 1000 fold, politicians actually having to work for a living, for a change.

What would you imply to be the best result of staying in Iraq. Discuss the benefits of staying in Iraq and the cons. Discuss the benefits of helping Rebel countries and Africa and discuss the cons.

Hmmm, I believe I did just that. Your turn.

But I'm wondering what benefits would be for both situations. you talked about why we should stay and what we should do. Not what good or bad could come out of it.

In Iraq we are supposedly benefiting from oil. Yet the prices from before we invaded in the state of California we were below $1. It now averages between $3.20-$3.60. So That right there from being in Iraq isn't really benefiting. Yes we are helping the Iraqi Govt. but in the end we effect our Nation. We first went for W.M.D. We've uncovered them and we've silenced them. We did our part. For benefits in Iraq if we complete the mission, we could have a friendly alliance with not only Iraq but neighboring Arab nations. Cheaper oil and in some cases if for some odd reason we don't like the sand we have turn to their overly large deserts. Basically Iraq is meant for oil. Which fighting the war and so far not solving much is just costing the U.S. money we don't have. Our money supply is backed by gold which by my understandings is held in Fort Knox. We don't have that large of a supply yet we find it important to help a country who is too lazy to take action for themselves without the help of the U.S. Benefits in Africa. They have spices along with many untouched resources. They have gold,silver,copper,coal and natural gases. We have those but wouldn't it be better to focus ourselves more on natural gases or something that we can start on for power other than oil which is costing us more to import than we can actually afford. So more natural untouched resources which I'm sure most villages would be glad to hand over to use for helping them survive. We wouldn't have to send entire forces. We could designate half or less of our troops in Iraq in each country that needs civil help. We don't have to sweep the country but we could put our money to good use than killing innocent people and have camps until we can protect the countries with the help of the African Govt. and the inhabitants. I'm not saying fully support them but at least give them time to get back on their feet. They are sitting ducks waiting to be raided and stolen from. we can benefit more from untouched resources than fossil fuels that we are close to running out of. We would do it with less troops, less money and create a better economy for not only ourselves but our allies. Once again I'm not saying create a masacre or anything but we would also gain more support from Africa than we already have.Now the cons would be yes, we would still lose troops and it would still cost money. but we are doing a better good for people who need it. Iraq doesn't need us. A poor country does. Like Chad,Africa is the most poverty filled country in the world.
We have a strategy team in the Pentagon along with the CIA. I'm sure with a little effort(it would be less than we are doing now)we could help a country in need and not be adding to civil violence in Iraq.

quote:

They have spices along with many untouched resources. They have gold,silver,copper,coal and natural gases. We have those but wouldn't it be better to focus ourselves more on natural gases or something that we can start on for power other than oil which is costing us more to import than we can actually afford. So more natural untouched resources which I'm sure most villages would be glad to hand over to use for helping them survive. We wouldn't have to send entire forces. We could designate half or less of our troops in Iraq in each country that needs civil help. We don't have to sweep the country but we could put our money to good use than killing innocent people and have camps until we can protect the countries with the help of the African Govt. and the inhabitants. I'm not saying fully support them but at least give them time to get back on their feet. They are sitting ducks waiting to be raided and stolen from. we can benefit more from untouched resources than fossil fuels that we are close to running out of. We would do it with less troops, less money and create a better economy for not only ourselves but our allies. Once again I'm not saying create a masacre or anything but we would also gain more support from Africa than we already have.

Horseshit. Helping Africa will NOT get any natural resources, and IF it did it would start a bigger war than Iraq for control over them. How do you think Aideed rallied support against the Americans in Somalia? BY CLAIMING THAT THE AMERICANS WERE THERE TO ROB SOMALIA OF HER NATURAL RESOURCES. Somalia doesn't even have any natural resources to rob! What if there were natural resources in that country? And it will be the same damn thing in every country in Africa in which USA steps into. There will be multiple uprisings and factional fighting. Think I'm making stuff up? Look at Somalia now. You're living in a la-la land to think that stepping foot in any African country will be perceived by all as solely a goodwill gesture. Pick a faction, any faction and you will find motivations for "stirring the pot" and fomenting hate against the Americans.

You don't necessarily have to help Somalia. It can be any country. I'm also not saying just randomly invade a country. If we work with the Govt. and they want our help which I'm 100% positive they will. I know for a fact that in Kenya they would. One of my relatives works for the President over there. They have discussions and meetings about aid from the U.S. and how they would benefit as one country to. Every time a topic is posted about something like this everybody always had ONE place in mind. Think Globaly and not locally. You think some countries wont see the good it could have? If they see the good they will be more than happy to once again accept aid. Peace doesn't happen all at once. You work for it. We can pick the best country to start on that continent. You're thinking of the worst possible place to help. Help one who want to be helped and others can see the goods. And okay Somalia may not have any but you think thats the only country on that continent? There are plenty more resources. And the majority of the people if not all after they see how we can help their lives just as we are supposedly doing to the Iraqis they would see we are meant for good.

Also you quoted one thing. So I guess the other stuff I wrote isn't horseshit. It's logical. And well worth thinking about. And the rest is in debate.

There is no logic in that argument.

Awwww screw it. If we have to invade another country, I say let's invade Tahiti. We could use some quality liberty.

if you invade any country in Africa, please make it South Africa. Our government fecks up even more than john kerry and hillary clinton would do together.

PLEASE HELP!!

Haha Tahiti. Lets do it.

quote:

Lets let the world stew for a while in events of their own making.

Turn our focus inward to shore up our own nation and its borders. Build up our own nation and take care of our own people.

And let the world stew for a while longer along whatever path they choose to take.

Thoughts? I recognize its an extreme view point, but hey, what we are doing ain't working to anyone's satisfaction, and I haven't heard any other ideas tossed out there.

I do think that would be a smart idea. We have most of our Military deployed as is. It doesn't take more than a day to round up enough troops from another country to start a war. Keyword:START. With our military deployed even with our allies, we wouldn't lose people but it would be difficult to defend our nation. We have nukes aimed at probably every threat to us and enough to destroy them. But if we were to start a nuclear war we would effect ourselves. Think off all of the radiation coming from them. Radiation doesn't stay in one place. I also doubt most of our allies will still be allies with us if and when many countries decide to launch attacks on us. They will find it easier to go against us for power than to have us stay the number one power in the world.All in all nobody fights their own war. They either have help or someone else do it for them. Say we pull back work on our borders that can do us more good. Big deal we don't kill people for a couple of years. We can train with new technological weapons without a press for time on getting people to get them down. We can be experts in what the enemies call themselves experts. They want a war we'll giv'em hell. But working on our own military can do a lot of good. Also think of what it can do when we do redeploy.
What are peoples thoughts on this?

Your first example was Darfour, another mess. Then you accuse me of thinking of just one place-- I said--

quote:

And it will be the same damn thing in every country in Africa in which USA steps into. There will be multiple uprisings and factional fighting....You're living in a la-la land to think that stepping foot in any African country will be perceived by all as solely a goodwill gesture. Pick a faction, any faction and you will find motivations for "stirring the pot" and fomenting hate against the Americans.

There's a reason the USMC does an "annual Embassy evacuation" somewhere in Africa. Most of the nations are unstable and will (at first) welcome US assistance, it's only a matter of time before jealousies develop, who's being favored by the Americans, who NOW wants them out to grab the bigger piece of the pie (and thanks to the US there IS a pie) and then some shit-head Muslim faction starts recruiting.

I wasn't aware of the annual embassy evacuation. What is the reason for it and what do they exactly do during this period?

It's a joke....sort of. Whenever a country begins to lose stability and Americans are at risk (revolution, insurgency, terrorist attacks, tribal fighting, etc.) they send in the Marines to evacuate the embassy and the American citizens in the country. For a while, almost throughout the entire 1990s, the Marines were sent to some country in Africa almost every year to either reinforce an embassy or evacuate it.

Dammed if we do and dammed if we don't. We need to finish what we started in Iraq and get that country back on its feet and as a player in the world economic markets. We need to see a positive return on our investment in that country.

As for the Annual embassy Evacuations in Africa, I have participated in several during my career. Loads of fun to be had by all. Burn barrels going round the clock in multiple rooms, sledgehammers to harddrives, grenades in the vehicles......