Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 83

Thread: Armed and ready for Ivorian intervention?

  1. #11
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,714

    Re: rmed and ready for Ivorian intervention?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    What you imagine "The Left" believed about Bush has no relevance to Cote D'Ivoire or when military intervention is or isn't called for. If you can't think of anything intelligent to say, I'm done talking to you. Bye bye then.
    Nothing I can say to or about you that you havent already said yourself.

  2. #12
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:31 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: rmed and ready for Ivorian intervention?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    It would cost us virtually nothing, in dollars or in manpower. We would have the air of legitimacy since we were assisting a democratically-elected government instead of imposing one. And the risk would be very low since we would already have someone to hand the keys of the country. If we intervened in Cote D'Ivoire, the Gbagbo government would quickly collapse and the legitimate government could take power...probably within hours.

    It is sad that all military actions anywhere in the world are now viewed through the prism of the war in Iraq...
    There are already 10,000 UN Peacekeepers there, which have maintained a presence for six years. They have a budget this year of almost half a trillion dollars. What makes you think that all they need is a handful of "virtually free" US soldiers to effect a quick, within a few hours collapse?

    Maybe you're suggesting we call in the superfriends?

  3. #13
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,518

    Re: rmed and ready for Ivorian intervention?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    The United States should send troops into Cote D'Ivoire if necessary. It would cost us virtually nothing, the troops wouldn't have to be there more than a couple months, and they would have a clear mission: to help establish the legitimately elected government. This is exactly the kind of situation where we should be more willing to deploy our military.
    Why? So we can kick one asshole out and let another asshole in and in ten years we hear about how it's alllllllllll America's fault that this last asshole grabbed power?

    I'm opposed to any future conflicts, where our people are deployed to a free fire zone.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  4. #14
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,518

    Re: rmed and ready for Ivorian intervention?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Many of the poorest nations in the world are stuck in a trap of constant coups (or the threat of coups). Staging coups and/or stealing elections would become a lot less attractive, if the coup-stagers and election-stealers routinely faced the prospect of being deposed by the US and turned over to the legitimate government for prosecution. This would allow African nations to spend less on their militaries and more on important social priorities.

    It would cost us virtually nothing, in dollars or in manpower. We would have the air of legitimacy since we were assisting a democratically-elected government instead of imposing one. And the risk would be very low since we would already have someone to hand the keys of the country. If we intervened in Cote D'Ivoire, the Gbagbo government would quickly collapse and the legitimate government could take power...probably within hours.

    It is sad that all military actions anywhere in the world are now viewed through the prism of the war in Iraq...


    Before Iraq, American military intervention was viewed through the prism of Somalia. I'll take the Iraq one
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  5. #15
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: rmed and ready for Ivorian intervention?

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    There are already 10,000 UN Peacekeepers there, which have maintained a presence for six years. They have a budget this year of almost half a trillion dollars. What makes you think that all they need is a handful of "virtually free" US soldiers to effect a quick, within a few hours collapse?

    Maybe you're suggesting we call in the superfriends?
    I'm suggesting we call in some soldiers who are willing to fire and take casualties if necessary, instead of 10,000 UN peacekeepers with orders to do nothing.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  6. #16
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: rmed and ready for Ivorian intervention?

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Why? So we can kick one asshole out and let another asshole in and in ten years we hear about how it's alllllllllll America's fault that this last asshole grabbed power?
    Cote D'Ivoire has a democratically-elected president-elect, who has been recognized by virtually every country in the world and the Ivorian people. It's not like we'd be imposing a leader on them.

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst
    I'm opposed to any future conflicts, where our people are deployed to a free fire zone.
    Abidjan is not Baghdad.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  7. #17
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,518

    Re: rmed and ready for Ivorian intervention?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Cote D'Ivoire has a democratically-elected president-elect, who has been recognized by virtually every country in the world and the Ivorian people. It's not like we'd be imposing a leader on them.
    The dickweed that won't vacate the big house was democratically elected, too. Wasn't he?

    We'll be helping the Ivoronians, until this new cats nuts, then it's all our fault.

    I think the USA's new policy should be a totally hands off approach, when it comes to these little jerk water countries. People have been bitching all this time that America has caused all the problems in the world? I say we let them try and get along without us for a few years.



    Abidjan is not Baghdad.
    My opinion is, we never again send soldiers into a potentially dangerous situation, where they have any rule of engagment than, "enage any and all targets of oppurtunity".
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  8. #18
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,518

    Re: rmed and ready for Ivorian intervention?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    I'm suggesting we call in some soldiers who are willing to fire and take casualties if necessary, instead of 10,000 UN peacekeepers with orders to do nothing.
    You sure are brave with other people's lives. It's never necessary to take casualties.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  9. #19
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: rmed and ready for Ivorian intervention?

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Before Iraq, American military intervention was viewed through the prism of Somalia. I'll take the Iraq one
    No, actually it was viewed through no prism in particular, which is the way it should be. The war in Iraq has had the effect of making many conservatives oppose any military action in which they imagine that the US might get some frowns from the rest of the world (intervening in Cote D'Ivoire wouldn't...but many just assume that it would). And it's had the effect of making many liberals **** themselves at the very mention of military intervention in which they imagine that the US might sustain a heavy number of casualties or a prolonged campaign (intervening in Cote D'Ivoire wouldn't...but many just assume that it would).

    I think that we should evaluate when we should intervene on a case-by-case basis. Cote D'Ivoire seems like an excellent candidate for American military intervention, if Gbagbo won't stand down. It would have the effect of giving the Ivorian people their legitimate government, helping to end a poverty trap in Africa, and discouraging other would-be despots from stealing elections or staging coups of their own. A robust American military presence would help encourage the development not just of Cote D'Ivoire, but of other countries under threat of coup where the US could make a credible promise to intervene if necessary.

    I agree with economist Paul Collier. Countries stuck in poverty traps will remain poor until they can break free of those traps. It could take decades for them to do it on their own, but American help could speed up the process.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  10. #20
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: rmed and ready for Ivorian intervention?

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The dickweed that won't vacate the big house was democratically elected, too. Wasn't he?
    Yeah, ten years ago. I'm certainly not suggesting that this will be the only time we'll need to intervene. I'm OK with the US playing an active role in Africa to protect democrats.

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst
    We'll be helping the Ivoronians, until this new cats nuts, then it's all our fault.
    No, you're just viewing this through the prism of the war in Iraq. The people of Cote D'Ivoire elected a new president, we wouldn't be installing one.

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst
    I think the USA's new policy should be a totally hands off approach, when it comes to these little jerk water countries. People have been bitching all this time that America has caused all the problems in the world? I say we let them try and get along without us for a few years.
    To what "people" are you referring? Certainly not the people of Cote D'Ivoire, where the United States has a 94% favorability rating...the highest in the entire world, in fact.
    Sub-Saharan Africa Leads World in U.S. Approval

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst
    My opinion is, we never again send soldiers into a potentially dangerous situation, where they have any rule of engagment than, "enage any and all targets of oppurtunity".
    I don't think we need to intentionally escalate conflicts in a situation like this, but US soldiers should be willing to engage if necessary. 1,000 US soldiers who were willing to fire could impose order a lot faster than 10,000 UN peacekeepers that were not.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •