Some might say this should be posted in the military affairs section, but this is as much political as it is military. The missions mentioned in this article are not the only ongoing American military missions in Africa.
In my mind, this drives along a very fine line of need for secrecy with issues of transparency to the American Public. For the safety of our troops, the prior is essential, yet I believe this is unprecedented.
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/...BB-11-7&utm_term=Editorial - Early Bird Brief
It's an interesting read. Opinions will be varied and different.
Sounds to me like we're attempting to create Police States in the African Nations we are occupying. It's always easier to deal directly with a dictator than a democracy, eh?
/
Some might say this should be posted in the military affairs section, but this is as much political as it is military. The missions mentioned in this article are not the only ongoing American military missions in Africa.
In my mind, this drives along a very fine line of need for secrecy with issues of transparency to the American Public. For the safety of our troops, the prior is essential, yet I believe this is unprecedented.
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/...BB-11-7&utm_term=Editorial - Early Bird Brief
It's an interesting read. Opinions will be varied and different.
Which African Nations is the US Military occupying?
Sounds to me like we're attempting to create Police States in the African Nations we are occupying. It's always easier to deal directly with a dictator than a democracy, eh?
/
Adding to a never ending 'war on terror', like the never ending 'war on drugs', is hard to square as necessary for the defense of the US homeland. It may enhance US overseas business interests, or help keep those 'in charge' of a (friendly?) foreign nation from losing power, but it is quite a stretch to say that it is necessary for our national defense. If nation X attacks the US or supports/harbors those that do so (like Iran?) then military action may be warranted but simply asserting that unspecified 'classified' reasons exist to believe that 'instability' in region (nation?) X means that our military must 'nip it in the bud' is a step too far, IMHO.
None, which is the problem - that is mission impossible for any small military force. When the mission is to deal with 'classified problems' inside 'certain parts of' region/nation X (Afghanistan?) then there is no way to determine, much less achieve, success (victory?). When the most powerful and expensive military on the planet cannot defeat in over a decade an enemy that lacks air power, naval power and has a rag tag, at best, army then a very poor 'battle plan' has been used.
Which African Nations is the US Military occupying?
The USA has 10,000 military bases in 155 Nations. Pick one.
/
This is what was said about Afghanistan prior to 9/11. With a stateless war on our hands, all previous rules of engagement and determinations of who is dangerous are out the window for understanding threat to our security as a nation. Our military has been prepared to win a repeat of WWII, but this is a different animal. Iran is a sideshow, best resolved with economic warfare to defeat the ruling class by the actions of its people in response to what they are not enjoying.
A military base in a country is not the same as "occupying".....Germany had a fighter training base in New Mexico for 20 years, and many other Nations have had bases in the US.....is the US "occupied"?
What African Nation are we "occupying"?
Lessee now. There's OIL in Libya, Syria, Sudan, Nigeria, etc. and you can be sure we're occuping those Nations. Diamonds, minerals, etc and you can be sure we're occupying those. Each Nation will get a USA supported dictator to request USA military to hep' him out, don't ya' know, and help him rape the resources of that Nation, all very proper and legal on paper. Sorta' like our deal with those scumbags from Saudi Arabia and we help them kill helpless Yemenis, Syrians, Libyans, etc. We just so good-hearted, don't ya' know, or don't want to know?
/
ThankYou for posting this. I was hoping President Trump had a decent response to Marawi and what could happen to other hot spots like it.Some might say this should be posted in the military affairs section, but this is as much political as it is military. The missions mentioned in this article are not the only ongoing American military missions in Africa.
In my mind, this drives along a very fine line of need for secrecy with issues of transparency to the American Public. For the safety of our troops, the prior is essential, yet I believe this is unprecedented.
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/...BB-11-7&utm_term=Editorial - Early Bird Brief
It's an interesting read. Opinions will be varied and different.
You didn't answer the question....which African Nation are we occupying?
We have a presence all over the world.....again, not the same as an occupation.
This is what was said about Afghanistan prior to 9/11. With a stateless war on our hands, all previous rules of engagement and determinations of who is dangerous are out the window for understanding threat to our security as a nation. Our military has been prepared to win a repeat of WWII, but this is a different animal. Iran is a sideshow, best resolved with economic warfare to defeat the ruling class by the actions of its people in response to what they are not enjoying.
Clue: WWII has been over since 1945 and we still occupy Germany. Have you noticed any USA activity in Libya? Have you noticed any USA activity in Syria? Wait, wait, wait, it's coming to me now. An epiphany, don't ya' know? We jus' heppin' 'em out by bringing chaos, poverty, destruction, and death to those overpopulated sh**hole Nations. We be the good guys????
/
My only difference of thought is to replace "very poor" with inappropriate. We still need to learn more about our stateless enemy to determine appropriate actions.
Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, etc. demonstrate the excellent Marketing Arm of the MIC. If you want those weapons businesses to boom, you've got to create markets and that is the very exxence of Capitalism/Corporatism. When your currency is not backed by something of intrinsic value, Nations back it with their Military. You mimic great fluency with the propaganda agenda of the NeoCons and MIC and Banks that profit handsomely from wars and need to keep the populace completely misinformed. As regards Iran, I have never met an Iranian that I liked, but they have not invaded anyone, especially Lebanon, Syria or Yemen. Smoke and mirrors from your propaganda minders.
/
Lessee now. There's OIL in Libya, Syria, Sudan, Nigeria, etc. and you can be sure we're occuping those Nations. Diamonds, minerals, etc and you can be sure we're occupying those. Each Nation will get a USA supported dictator to request USA military to hep' him out, don't ya' know, and help him rape the resources of that Nation, all very proper and legal on paper. Sorta' like our deal with those scumbags from Saudi Arabia and we help them kill helpless Yemenis, Syrians, Libyans, etc. We just so good-hearted, don't ya' know, or don't want to know?
/
The USA has 10,000 military bases in 155 Nations. Pick one.
/
Clue: WWII has been over since 1945 and we still occupy Germany. Have you noticed any USA activity in Libya? Have you noticed any USA activity in Syria? Wait, wait, wait, it's coming to me now. An epiphany, don't ya' know? We jus' heppin' 'em out by bringing chaos, poverty, destruction, and death to those overpopulated sh**hole Nations. We be the good guys????
/
If a defeating "state sponsor of terrorism" is not a suitable military mission then what is?
If your only tool is a hammer then you must address all problems as if they were nails.
I don't know. I wish I were smart enough to know or devise a better solution. Iran is a state that promotes terrorism, yet we don't commit our military forces to bring about change. Instead we are relying on the potential success of economic sanctions to force change. It is the smarter move, but takes more patience.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?