bbarsh wrote:Come on, Brian. We liberated Kuwait from a murderous, raping, army out of Iraq and then placed sanctions on them. The consistently violated every single sanction placed on them. How is that related to anything in Africa?
bclarkie wrote:Do you realize that this type of stuff happens pretty regularly in the African countries that I just named? i.e.:Which is exactly my point.
bbarsh wrote:Also, the U.S. does not use its nukes to leverage piece of crap nations like Iran.
bclarkie wrote:So when are we planning to go into African nations such as the Sudan, the Congo and Somalia?
Tharizdun wrote:My bad Jason! You guys were independent since 1931... so Canada was part of all of Britains Imperial deals up until 1931 then
Badmike wrote: If you study the history of Congo...I don't even know where we would start. Mike B.
Badmike wrote:If you thought Afghanistan is a quagmire......The sad truth is it will never be politically expedient to invade an African nation. Besides the inevitable racial issue, there are many of the same problems facing any military intervention (tribal alliances and grudges going back centuries, etc). Somalia was a FUBAR from the word go. If you study the history of Congo...I don't even know where we would start. Sadly I feel many nations of the world have written off Africa. I dont know how much good the billions and billions of dollars pumped into the continent the last few decades has helped....I doubt military intervention would help much either, especially when there isn't a "side" worth choosing.Mike B.
jasonw1239 wrote:The US is known internationally for "dealing with the devil" if it makes them money.
Tharizdun wrote:The problem with "Evil Dictators" might be that once in awhile they're actually beneficial in the grand scheme of things... hence it's beneficial to have them in some places and not in other places.