Q: UN/US Intervening in Africa

[Cdubneeddeal]

What I've noticed is that the UN and the U.S. seem to intervene in some countries and not others - namely the African ones. What is it about Africa that keeps the U.S. from helping their people? Lack of governments, genocide, famine, etc but nothing or very little seems to be done. Yet, we spend a lot of time on the Middle East and Korea. Do you think it's because Africa has very little to offer the U.S.? Aren't we in it to help people or does it ring true that we're in it for ourselves?

 

[ProfJohn]

Lack of political interests.

Plus it is hard for us to take action in many African countries due to their locations.

 

[chucky2]

Africa has a populace that's even more mind F'd than the ME...hard to win hearts and minds when the mind controls the heart, and the mind cannot comprehend the opportunity at hand - same as the ME, just, worse.

However, you are wrong on one thing:

The UN is in Africa. They are, and have been, showing the US how to bring peace and stability to Sudan. Well, after they got the massive sum of 24 helicopters they needed. And, well, after hundreds of thousands were butchered while the UN sat on it's @ss talking, instead of doing (cough, 14 meaningless UN resolutions in Iraq, cough).

You can see the action of the UN sans US/UK....don't you like the results of these superior people?

Chuck

 

[SammyJr]

We shouldn't be intervening anywhere. We have enough of our own problems to deal with.

 

[Nitemare]

No oil

and DeBeers already has the blood diamonds in their pockets

 

[Jeff7]

*cough* oil

And what ProfJohn said - there's no political interest.




Edit: Damn you, Nitemare!

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: chucky2
Africa has a populace that's even more mind F'd than the ME...hard to win hearts and minds when the mind controls the heart, and the mind cannot comprehend the opportunity at hand - same as the ME, just, worse.

However, you are wrong on one thing:

The UN is in Africa. They are, and have been, showing the US how to bring peace and stability to Sudan. Well, after they got the massive sum of 24 helicopters they needed. And, well, after hundreds of thousands were butchered while the UN sat on it's @ss talking, instead of doing (cough, 14 meaningless UN resolutions in Iraq, cough).

You can see the action of the UN sans US/UK....don't you like the results of these superior people?

Chuck

as usual your interpretation of what the Un is doing in the Sudan is bogus!!

 

[Cdubneeddeal]

Originally posted by: SammyJr
We shouldn't be intervening anywhere. We have enough of our own problems to deal with.

I agree. I was reading somewhere someone made a comment just like that. Seems we have a habit of meddling in other people's business. Sometimes it's for the good and so far, for the most part, history paved the way for moderate peace in this world. At least in my opinion.

It's too bad that our intentions are not focused on people rather on what can we get out of it.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Lack of political interests.

Plus it is hard for us to take action in many African countries due to their locations.

WTF? You mean because they're located in Africa?
We freakin invaded Afghanistan, a land locked country, when no country would let us pass our troops thru overland.
And most African countries actually border the ocean.

So basically, where do you MAKE THIS STUFF UP?

 

[OCGuy]

Its China's job.


Also, unless you have a money tree, we are broke.

 

[Double Trouble]

In summary, there simply aren't very many geopolitical implications when things happen in most African countries. No critical resources (like oil) that could impact our economy, no allies (like Israel) to help defend against potential threats etc. Basically, human compassion and humanitarianism are the only reason we'd go into any country in Africa to do much of anything. There's always lots of talk about humanitarian intentions, but the reality is that without a geopolitical or economic threat, nobody really cares enough to do much.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: Double Trouble
In summary, there simply aren't very many geopolitical implications when things happen in most African countries. No critical resources (like oil) that could impact our economy, no allies (like Israel) to help defend against potential threats etc. Basically, human compassion and humanitarianism are the only reason we'd go into any country in Africa to do much of anything. There's always lots of talk about humanitarian intentions, but the reality is that without a geopolitical or economic threat, nobody really cares enough to do much.

Not to mention they are black.

 

[CanOWorms]

Africa has been left to become Europe's playground of genocide.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Double Trouble
In summary, there simply aren't very many geopolitical implications when things happen in most African countries. No critical resources (like oil) that could impact our economy, no allies (like Israel) to help defend against potential threats etc. Basically, human compassion and humanitarianism are the only reason we'd go into any country in Africa to do much of anything. There's always lots of talk about humanitarian intentions, but the reality is that without a geopolitical or economic threat, nobody really cares enough to do much.

Not to mention they are black.

Yes, but we're not talking about why you hate them. This is about the whole US.

 

[chucky2]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: chucky2
Africa has a populace that's even more mind F'd than the ME...hard to win hearts and minds when the mind controls the heart, and the mind cannot comprehend the opportunity at hand - same as the ME, just, worse.

However, you are wrong on one thing:

The UN is in Africa. They are, and have been, showing the US how to bring peace and stability to Sudan. Well, after they got the massive sum of 24 helicopters they needed. And, well, after hundreds of thousands were butchered while the UN sat on it's @ss talking, instead of doing (cough, 14 meaningless UN resolutions in Iraq, cough).

You can see the action of the UN sans US/UK....don't you like the results of these superior people?

Chuck

as usual your interpretation of what the Un is doing in the Sudan is bogus!!

The only interpretation I need to have is that EU sat idly by watching reports of hundreds of thousands of people being exterminated, all the while b1tching about the US overthrowing Sadam & Co.

Then, when there wasn't too many left to slaughter, the UN decided it was safe enough for them, and finally found a pair of rusty dusty nuts, gave'em a weak blow, and "went" in.

But wait!!!!!

They allegedly couldn't do their job there effectively because the whole of the UN, minus US and UK who were already fighting a WoT (on behalf of the rest of the UN), couldn't muster 24 F'ing helicopters between themselves.

I know some people have a UN/EU love affair going, but, I cannot imagine in respect to Darfur, how anyone could not look at the UN/EU as anything else but a total and complete failure. Worse, the UN/EU had no problems shooting their mouths off at the US for invading and occupying Iraq, ending Sadam's oppressive regime (only to watch Muslim brother on brother ((and sister)) violence tear their own country up).

The UN/EU is a F'ing joke. Period.

Chuck

 

[SunSamurai]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: chucky2
Africa has a populace that's even more mind F'd than the ME...hard to win hearts and minds when the mind controls the heart, and the mind cannot comprehend the opportunity at hand - same as the ME, just, worse.

However, you are wrong on one thing:

The UN is in Africa. They are, and have been, showing the US how to bring peace and stability to Sudan. Well, after they got the massive sum of 24 helicopters they needed. And, well, after hundreds of thousands were butchered while the UN sat on it's @ss talking, instead of doing (cough, 14 meaningless UN resolutions in Iraq, cough).

You can see the action of the UN sans US/UK....don't you like the results of these superior people?

Chuck

as usual your interpretation of what the Un is doing in the Sudan is bogus!!

I like how you went on to point out why its bogus. What was the point of your post?

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Lack of political interests.

Plus it is hard for us to take action in many African countries due to their locations.

WTF? You mean because they're located in Africa?
We freakin invaded Afghanistan, a land locked country, when no country would let us pass our troops thru overland.
And most African countries actually border the ocean.

So basically, where do you MAKE THIS STUFF UP?

We did not invade Afghanistan you dumb ass.

It was mostly the northern alliance that did the hard work with a little support from our special forces units.

Afterwards we moved more troops in via airfields we had captured. But there was no mass invasion of the country.

 

[spittledip]

Originally posted by: Cdubneeddeal
What I've noticed is that the UN and the U.S. seem to intervene in some countries and not others - namely the African ones. What is it about Africa that keeps the U.S. from helping their people? Lack of governments, genocide, famine, etc but nothing or very little seems to be done. Yet, we spend a lot of time on the Middle East and Korea. Do you think it's because Africa has very little to offer the U.S.? Aren't we in it to help people or does it ring true that we're in it for ourselves?

Answer is bolded

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: SammyJr
We shouldn't be intervening anywhere. We have enough of our own problems to deal with.

:thumbsup:

 

[Pocatello]

Africa has a lot of natural resources as valuable as oil to keep the modern world running. But Dick Cheney and the gangs are in the oil business, not copper nor diamond.

 

[al981]

Originally posted by: SammyJr
We shouldn't be intervening anywhere. We have enough of our own problems to deal with.

no oil? then no american coups to overthrow democratically elected governments.