US to send troops to Uganda to help fight LRA rebels

Gerald · 10-14-11, 05:22 PM

There are many problems with sending troops, even if it seems innocuous on paper ... it could easily be more, and then it will be conflicts and problems,

these kinds of auctions should be solved in another way.

Jimbuna · 10-14-11, 05:40 PM

Someone found oil there?

Gerald · 10-14-11, 05:51 PM

They have gold and other minerals.

Tchocky · 10-14-11, 06:01 PM

Troops for oil costs more than it's worth. We've all seen that with Iraq, whether you believe that was the motive or not. I don't think the math works out.

It's always a good idea to fight against something like the LRA. Whether it works with your countrys foreign policy or internal politics is a different matter. Also whether the role of the troops is what you say it is - well that's another matter again.

MothBalls · 10-14-11, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Someone found oil there?

There's oil there?

BOMB THEM!

yubba · 10-14-11, 06:07 PM

Yet they said that about Vietnam, Iraq, Lybia, Yemen, I feel that I'm missing some one, hate to think they find oil in Mexico.

magicstix · 10-14-11, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yubba

Yet they said that about Vietnam, Iraq, Lybia, Yemen, I feel that I'm missing some one, hate to think they find oil in Mexico.

Uhm, Mexico has a *lot* of oil, actually... So does Canada... So do we for that matter...

Oberon · 10-14-11, 06:40 PM

Poor sods, getting caught up in another African mess. Still, I guess they're making their presence felt before China buys up the rest of Africa and its oil.

yubba · 10-14-11, 06:45 PM

I guess that it's better to drop off our troops into far away $&*t holes to die for a barrel of oil, for it is too far for them to walk home.

CaptainHaplo · 10-14-11, 06:52 PM

Cmon people - consistency here....

People screamed about how Bush sent troops into Iraq and those on the right wanted to justify it because it saved Iraqi's from genocide.
Now, the right is yelling "WHY ARE WE DOING THIS" - uhm - to try and save lives....

Why is that answer good enough to justify Iraq, but not good enough for this? Especially considering the very limited forces used.

The LRA has been at their work for what, 20+ years now? How many times did we hear people talk about "why isn't Obama doing something about it" after he got elected. The same question was asked about Bush.

Now something is getting done. Late - absolutely. But at least there is action.

I don't like the vast majority of the President's policies, but this is a good move.

Platapus · 10-14-11, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by magicstix

Uhm, Mexico has a *lot* of oil, actually... So does Canada... So do we for that matter...

The two largest suppliers of foreign oil to the United States are Canada and Mexico.

10-14-11, 05:22 PM	#1
Gerald SUBSIM Newsman Join Date: May 2008 Location: Close to sea Posts: 24,254 Downloads: 553 Uploads: 0	There are many problems with sending troops, even if it seems innocuous on paper ... it could easily be more, and then it will be conflicts and problems, these kinds of auctions should be solved in another way. __________________ Nothing in life is to be feard,it is only to be understood. Marie Curie

10-14-11, 05:40 PM	#2
Jimbuna Chief of the Boat Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 250 metres below the surface Posts: 190,992 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 13	Someone found oil there? __________________ Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something. Oh my God, not again!!

10-14-11, 05:51 PM	#3
Gerald SUBSIM Newsman Join Date: May 2008 Location: Close to sea Posts: 24,254 Downloads: 553 Uploads: 0	They have gold and other minerals. __________________ Nothing in life is to be feard,it is only to be understood. Marie Curie

10-14-11, 06:01 PM	#4
Tchocky Navy Seal Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 5,874 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	Troops for oil costs more than it's worth. We've all seen that with Iraq, whether you believe that was the motive or not. I don't think the math works out. It's always a good idea to fight against something like the LRA. Whether it works with your countrys foreign policy or internal politics is a different matter. Also whether the role of the troops is what you say it is - well that's another matter again. __________________ [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

10-14-11, 06:52 PM	#10
CaptainHaplo Silent Hunter Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 4,404 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 0	Cmon people - consistency here.... People screamed about how Bush sent troops into Iraq and those on the right wanted to justify it because it saved Iraqi's from genocide. Now, the right is yelling "WHY ARE WE DOING THIS" - uhm - to try and save lives.... Why is that answer good enough to justify Iraq, but not good enough for this? Especially considering the very limited forces used. The LRA has been at their work for what, 20+ years now? How many times did we hear people talk about "why isn't Obama doing something about it" after he got elected. The same question was asked about Bush. Now something is getting done. Late - absolutely. But at least there is action. I don't like the vast majority of the President's policies, but this is a good move. __________________ Good Hunting! Captain Haplo

10-14-11, 06:07 PM	#6
yubba Admiral Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: in a neighborhood near you Posts: 2,478 Downloads: 293 Uploads: 2	Yet they said that about Vietnam, Iraq, Lybia, Yemen, I feel that I'm missing some one, hate to think they find oil in Mexico.

10-14-11, 06:40 PM	#8
Oberon Lucky Jack Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 25,976 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 20	Poor sods, getting caught up in another African mess. Still, I guess they're making their presence felt before China buys up the rest of Africa and its oil.

10-14-11, 06:45 PM	#9
yubba Admiral Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: in a neighborhood near you Posts: 2,478 Downloads: 293 Uploads: 2	I guess that it's better to drop off our troops into far away $&*t holes to die for a barrel of oil, for it is too far for them to walk home.