Obama Invades Uganda, Targets Christians

Page 6 of 8 [ 118 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

23 Oct 2011, 12:18 am

JakobVirgil wrote:

Vigilans wrote:

JakobVirgil wrote:

Vigilans wrote:

Inuyasha wrote:

Jacoby wrote:

The LRA is an evil group, Rush is stupid for not knowing that. However they are not a threat US domestic security in the slightest so our troops should not be in Uganda. It's not our responsibility.

I would also point out the governments in the region are just as evil as LRA, so Rush might be referring to that point. The only difference one can see between the two sides is religious affiliation.

The local governments are not good, but I ask you to demonstrate how they are "just as evil" as the LRA

While I disagree with the "morality" that has lead the "conservatives" to the opinion that we should not interfere here
I agree that we should not have a military presence in Uganda or in any other country.

The United States and its allies have the potential to do a lot of good in some places in the world. Imagine had the US intervened in Rwanda the hundreds of thousands of lives that would have been saved. Human Rights Watch even welcomed the deployment.

In any case we're talking about 100 military advisers with authorization to provide training and to defend themselves. That is hardly a large military presence. The US has thousands of troops in South Korea and elsewhere doing very little other than existing as an "army in being" to scare local baddies; and I don't hear anyone crying about them

I support the Ugandan Advisers if we close the 30 odd installations in Korea.

South Korea is a national security issue because we get a lot of software from South Korea. Furthermore there is a clear cut difference between the South Korean Government and the North Korean one.

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

23 Oct 2011, 12:20 am

JakobVirgil wrote:

I support the Ugandan Advisers if we close the 30 odd installations in Korea.

I am somewhat on the fence with withdrawing troops from South Korea and the other bases in the region. On one hand, South Korea & Japan are both well equipped to deal with a North Korean threat. North Korean war materiel is aging and decrepit. On the other hand, the forces there give the People's Republic of China pause. As I said, an "Army in Being". This concept is incredibly useful in geopolitical chess. Right now though we're looking at withdrawal from Iraq which had significantly more than South Korea. I think its safe to say that putting 100 special forces advisers into Uganda is not stretching the limits of US military resources

Another thing that occurs to me: Inuyasha you keep talking about how the local governments are worse than the LRA. Well in one case, the Sudanese government of Khartoum; they actually funded the LRA. The US will not be helping Sudan if that is what you think. Rather, the newly created nation of South Sudan, which, considering its youth, you cannot really lay much at its feet (less than a year old!). So the "worst" national government you refer to is not actually going to be getting any help...

_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

23 Oct 2011, 12:23 am

Vigilans wrote:

JakobVirgil wrote:

I support the Ugandan Advisers if we close the 30 odd installations in Korea.

If the LRA is being supported by the government of Sudan, why aren't we going after them? LRA would be severely crippled if they lose their supplier of weapons, assuming what you said is accurate.

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

23 Oct 2011, 12:41 am

Inuyasha wrote:

If the LRA is being supported by the government of Sudan, why aren't we going after them? LRA would be severely crippled if they lose their supplier of weapons, assuming what you said is accurate.

That's a good question. But stability in the region is something I think is attainable at this point. South Sudan's secession was a good thing, taking a lot of the oil away from Sudan, which had dominated and enforced its will on the South for generations, especially after the discovery of oil...

Vigilans wrote:

No oil involved so why bother?

I forgot, there actually is oil involved. Silly me. Anyway...

Its probably a lot more difficult for Sudan to get anything down to help the LRA now that they would have to cross South Sudanese territory. This country will benefit as much as Uganda with the end of the LRA. It is very young and removing this threat will give it a much more secure beginning on the path to sufficiency and eventually, prosperity.

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

23 Oct 2011, 1:08 am

Vigilans wrote:

Rather, the newly created nation of South Sudan, which, considering its youth, you cannot really lay much at its feet (less than a year old!

The SPLA (which was critical in ensuring that South Sudan get founded) has done some pretty shady things.

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2011/04/19/s ... le-clashes

I think they'll be massive amounts of violence against Muslims in South Sudan in the upcoming years.

_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

23 Oct 2011, 1:10 am

Master_Pedant wrote:

Vigilans wrote:

Rather, the newly created nation of South Sudan, which, considering its youth, you cannot really lay much at its feet (less than a year old!

So you agree with me that there is really no point for us to be involved...

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

23 Oct 2011, 1:19 am

Inuyasha wrote:

So you agree with me that there is really no point for us to be involved...

How the hell did you infer that? Saying that South Sudan isn't saintly doesn't necessarily imply that I'm against the very soft military intervention in Uganda to help local forces deal with the LRA thugs. But, as a matter of fact, I'm rather ambivalent on the operation at the moment, but increasingly leaning in it's favour as I find more out about it.

_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

23 Oct 2011, 1:30 am

It's f*cking amazing that Boss Limbaugh still has this piece of crap up on his site.

_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

23 Oct 2011, 1:33 am

Master_Pedant wrote:

It's f*cking amazing that Boss Limbaugh still has this piece of crap up on his site.

If this aired on a Friday, I actually know what's going on and it kinda paints you guys in a bad light.

Every Friday, it is "Open Line" Friday where callers can talk about anything they want and it's entirely impromptu.

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

23 Oct 2011, 1:39 am

Master_Pedant wrote:

Vigilans wrote:

Rather, the newly created nation of South Sudan, which, considering its youth, you cannot really lay much at its feet (less than a year old!

That's true, and South Sudan certainly doesn't rate very high on any scale of development. But I still think it should be given a chance to grow as a new country; the LRA is definitely an impediment to this

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

23 Oct 2011, 2:02 am

Inuyasha wrote:

Master_Pedant wrote:

It's f*cking amazing that Boss Limbaugh still has this piece of crap up on his site.

Wow, thanks for the info. I'm so much less critical of Limbaugh now that I know he's willing give millions of people his opinions on matters he knows next to nothing about impromptu. And I suppose the "impromptu" nature of the whole affair explains why he posted the transcript on his website with the title "Obama Invades Uganda, Targets Christians" without a note on the top exclaiming "upon due diligence, we've found out this group really is bad" or anything of the sort.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2011/ ... christians

Regardless, talking out of your ass impromptu on foreign policy is not less a vice than talking out of your ass with time to prepare. Limbaugh was obviously overconfident (especially given that he's claiming that the POTUS is targeting Christians) given the little information he had.

_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/

Last edited by Master_Pedant on 23 Oct 2011, 2:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

23 Oct 2011, 2:02 am

Vigilans wrote:

JakobVirgil wrote:

Vigilans wrote:

Inuyasha wrote:

Jacoby wrote:

The LRA is an evil group, Rush is stupid for not knowing that. However they are not a threat US domestic security in the slightest so our troops should not be in Uganda. It's not our responsibility.

I would also point out the governments in the region are just as evil as LRA, so Rush might be referring to that point. The only difference one can see between the two sides is religious affiliation.

The local governments are not good, but I ask you to demonstrate how they are "just as evil" as the LRA

An initial 100 special forces to Uganda and possibly Sudan, D.R. Congo and the Central African Republic is a significant deployment imo, one that should require specific congressional approval. They may not suppose to be directly engaging the LRA but they "combat-equipped" and we all know how strictly we stick to our official missions.

Let ask ourselves, why are we going after the LRA now? The peak of their violence has long past so what is the motivation of this? Could it be that South Sudan and Uganda have significant new oil interests now? It couldn't be that South Sudan and Uganda are both planning massive oil pipelines in through Kenya could it? It's funny how we become humanitarians when oil is involved.

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

23 Oct 2011, 2:04 am

While I've listened to Limbaugh's crap before, this is the first time I've viewed his website. What a f*cking lunatic asylum it is!

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/

_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

23 Oct 2011, 2:40 am

Jacoby wrote:

Vigilans wrote:

JakobVirgil wrote:

Vigilans wrote:

Inuyasha wrote:

Jacoby wrote:

The LRA is an evil group, Rush is stupid for not knowing that. However they are not a threat US domestic security in the slightest so our troops should not be in Uganda. It's not our responsibility.

I would also point out the governments in the region are just as evil as LRA, so Rush might be referring to that point. The only difference one can see between the two sides is religious affiliation.

The local governments are not good, but I ask you to demonstrate how they are "just as evil" as the LRA

That's true. Oil no doubt plays a large part in this. I don't completely think its a cynical thing though. Oil is a resource required to lubricate the gears of our civilization. It should be no surprise that our governments are willing to effort to maintain a smooth transition of this resource. I think it is somewhat suspect that they did not intervene earlier, but on the other hand, the creation of South Sudan no doubt played a part. US intervention against Sudan would probably have angered many Muslim nations. Since Sudan is effectively out of the picture the US has much more of a free hand to set things in this area straight. The oil will help the economies of these countries recover from the insurgency and other regional wars.

Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

23 Oct 2011, 7:03 am

Inuyasha wrote:

Master_Pedant wrote:

Inuyasha wrote:

I'm against it because there is no side that is morally better than the other here.

The Lord's Resistance Army is probably one of the evilest organizations on the planet.

I can think of more evil Organizations on the planet, such as the Syrian Government...

I can say the syrian government is pretty bad, but I can say that the LRA is more evil than the Syrian Government, and I am not kidding. The LRA are slaughterers that make Al-Qaeda look somewhat civilized in comparison. I am not joking either. LRA soldiers cut children's noses off and leave them like that. It;'s horrific.

Last edited by Gedrene on 23 Oct 2011, 7:09 am, edited 1 time in total.

Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

23 Oct 2011, 7:07 am

Inuyasha wrote:

Master_Pedant wrote:

It's f*cking amazing that Boss Limbaugh still has this piece of crap up on his site.

Except apparently Rush Limbaugh has screens on his callers so it isn't open line at all. Furthermore nothing about what Rush Limbaugh says is painting any of 'us guys' in a bad light;. If you didn't notice I don't care who does something, all I care is that they do it right. And Rush Limbaugh is a self-righteous liar who censured Obama for dealing with the most evil Christian terrorist organization on the planet.

Page 6 of 8 [ 118 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Jump to:

Obama Invades Uganda, Targets Christians Post Reply New Topic

Obama Invades Uganda, Targets Christians