The US invasion of Africa that nobody is talking about.....
- Thread starter HawktimusPrime
- Start date
I think you should just stick to writing mediocre Hawkeye blogs and drinking beer. Your sarcastic tone isn't a knock on anyone but yourself Torbee. Of course you've been in the safe world of Iowa and college athletics and you don't have the experience working internationally with matters such as these as I have.
Leave it to the adults buddy.
Indeed, that one statement is much more enlightening than ANYTHING you have ever posted Joel.
We're dealing with some seriously informed, reasonable, and intelligent folks here Strumm. Notice all their counter arguments, and their ability to disprove what was written in the articles supplied.
There ought to be a law ...
That says any soldier deployed overseas without a declared war is entitled to a million dollar bonus for each year they serve outside of the U.S. Payable upon the end of their enlistment. It would stimulate the economy and/or bring our soldiers home. Either is fine with me.
That says any soldier deployed overseas without a declared war is entitled to a million dollar bonus for each year they serve outside of the U.S. Payable upon the end of their enlistment. It would stimulate the economy and/or bring our soldiers home. Either is fine with me.
Last edited:
We need to get in there. This is about the first smart thing Obama has done.
I read an interesting article in the Economist about the number of Chinese peacekeepers in Africa. For decades China refused to engage with the UN, now they have 3000 troops alone in the South Sudan acting as UN peacekeepers, and thousands more spread around the continent.
So this is all about keeping peace? Do you really believe that? Isn't that the same argument they were making for going over into the Middle East?
Not sure I buy the 'peace-keeping' explanation. Especially with our history. Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 99,211
- 208,170
- 113
We can't all fix the world by anonomously posting conspiracy theories on sports message boards.
Keep making the world safe for democracy, lol.
Well, China is going in, we're losing the Middle East to Russia and extremist Muslims. It's a potential Muslim terrorist haven. Are those enough reasons for you?
So is America, but we're being "invaded". You want to be China's lap dog?
We already are in many ways. Invading, or setting up military occupations/operations in other sovereign countries is, to me, a very bad idea. It creates enemies and other unintended consequences which have proven to be undermining and having terrible backlash as evidenced in our involvement in the Middle East over the last 50+ years. By all means, keep making the same mistakes over and over.
Maybe Obama is looking for an easier part of the world to take over. Middle East is pretty tough, Russia is flexing a little muscle, China is building islands, South America is too close, Cuba is our friend, so that does not leave a lot of options.
Noticed you ignored my questions. I'd like to know what exactly you take issue with and what it is you offer as a counter argument against the claims in this thread. Do you disagree with the news articles as well?TIA
I'm not trying to defend our military presence in Africa, I'm just saying that it's not an invasion. I'll admit I didn't read every article you posted, but has any legitimate government objected to our presence?
See if you can guess.
Hint: It has nothing to do with Syria or the Middle East. Probably not a lot to do with Russia, either.
I want to see your answer first. I already have a good idea on what that answer will be, but I would like you to tell me first, if you don't mind.
People like you are the reason we are in the situation we are. Perpetual war, corporatism, NSA spying on us. Get your head outta your ass, kid.
I haven't been here for very long, but I do not think that is ever going to happen. I've never seen anyone dodge discussion like this one does. The country is full of people like this, and they are among the worst problems we have. I just don't understand the lemming like mentality of some of our fellow Americans.
I firmly believe the guy is absolutely fine with those things being in place. I'm not embellishing or joking at all. In his case, I would be shocked if he didn't have a multitude of justifications for why we NEED them!
They're much more preoccupied being offended by Redskins and a Rebel Flag. Because, we all know how those two things are keeping all of us from enjoying life. You can actually choose to ignore those things. That sh*t you listed is locked-in and not optional at all.
There is a very real and very difficult to understand problem with the mental stability of many Americans in this country. So many people just want to be comfortable. Anything that disrupts that comfortable line, is automatically attacked. For they do not care nor wish to care or know how or where that comfortable type of living comes from.
For some reason, actual problems are ignored for problems that aren't nearly as bad as they seem, and would likely figure themselves out in time. It is also a need for control and to keep that control. Fear is where most of these things derive from.
So many people with their personal opinions, yet so little common sense and proof of those opinions. It's troubling, because it seems that most people just want to have an opinion, without any sort of actual action to support it.
Well said. Extra points for leaving out expletives and insults to point-out truths. I enjoy your posts. I hope you don't restrict sharing your opinions to sports message boards.
I find that if you keep the discussion reasonable, you can expect reasonable responses. Most of the time of course. I come from HOL, and it's the very definition of unreasonable at times. Thank you. I also enjoy reading your posts. You are someone who 'gets it'.
1) Uranium ore
2) Rare earth metals/minerals
Both are untapped resources, which require infrastructure and local government stability to realize.
Right now, China has a virtual stranglehold on rare earth materials sources. Africa may provide many alternative sources of those. China would love to be able to control the resources in Africa as well as its own; the US and other countries would prefer competition, as well as the lower risk of those resources being in a single region or conflict zone.
And when we say 'Africa', we are not referring to a single entity; that continent is widespread and many areas are not easily traversed or controllable from a central location. The resources are available in many of the countries, so to secure them, you want footprints in a lot of places, none of which have any military or logistic value to the Middle East.
Middle East is about energy/oil. Africa is not (although there are oil/energy resources there).
The people that run this show do NOT invest time, effort, resources and man-power unless there is some profit motive. They sell it under the guise of altruism, or some other flag-wrapped BS crusade.
Excellent summarization, we are in agreement then. So you do understand then that the ME stability and control does in fact relate to Africa in a future sense? More than you think you do at least. Or present tense, if you want to be more accurate. There is method to this madness that we see.
Having a land path into a country is important due to transportation needs. Once we have gained control of those resources, either by trade agreement or ownership through the purchasing of companies, we can then distribute the resources into the ME, Russia, China, Europe, etc. without only having boats used to move the resources, which will still be needed as we distribute them to ourselves and our neighboring countries. Think of the advantage that gives us. It keeps us positioned to also police, whomever may try to come in via land, and 'protect' Africa from incoming invaders, such as terrorists, Russians, whoever else.
It's a double win on our part, but at the same time, it won't happen without getting our hands dirty. If there is a region that opposes us, but at the same time isn't threatening us, we will do the same old routine. Cause dissention, watch a conflict for control commence, make an enemy out of one side, take action, prop up new leadership, and there we have it.
Completely wrong.
There IS NO LAND PATH from Africa (or where most of those resources are) to the Middle East. It's all about shipping lanes and naval power. No matter how much you want to claim our Middle East involvement is related to Africa, it is not. Nor are those rare-earth materials (which are mainly used for the tech industry) of any use in the Middle East. They are used in the heavily industrialized countries. And those resources are most economically moved by boat, not land (because there are NO MAJOR ROADWAYS around Africa or from Africa to the Middle East.
You guys truly have no idea what you are talking about, attempting to claim our issues with ISIS have anything to do with Africa.
I'm starting to wonder how many people he has in there arguing with one another, because they cannot seem to come up with a coherent thought....let alone a coherent argument.
Perfectly stated and why I have such a disdain for that aspect of government. It's such blatant deception and corruption. It's shameful.
Isn't this pretty much what I'd already stated with my 'Lather. Rinse. Repeat.' comment in the other thread?
Good to see people are figuring this out finally...
Yes, but you are stuck on the fact that there isn't a process going on here. You deny the fact that that each step taken is part of a plan, a higher goal if you will. It's not like we necessarily disagree at the nature of the design, it's that we disagree how it operates.
