Liberia or bust!

[philly]

So here we have an interesting turn of events, the French and the UN (how ironic) along with Britian have asked that the US to take a lead role in resolving the conflict in Liberia through financial or military means or possibly both.

As you may or may not know Liberia has for the longest time been a bit of a step-child for the US. Originally founded by freed slaves during the late 1800's it has been supplimented and supported by the US in many was (as has many countries throughout the world) but its now in a crisis situation due to voilent clashes between government and rebel soldiers on a daily basis.

I'm sure theres more to the story, but I'm not here to right its history but to pose some simple questions.

Considering the US current state of foreign affairs and military deployment, should the US commit finances and troops to help stabalize this region?

Should the US take this opportunity to rebuke the French and the UN by hesitating to help and thus throwing the resolution of this issue back onto the UN and the french?

Can the US afford to deploy forces to and finance another foreign country in conflict in order to "help its oppressed peoples"?

[Thrash]

I am certainly not the most knowledgeable of world politics but is it just me that the UN consists of U.S. and a bunch of other countries that tag along to cause us problems. I mean "You want to blow up that country USA? No, we protest' "Here you can solve this problem for us though"

I just pulled an all nighter so my mind is not very sharp, but please feel free to correct me or whatever.

[VeeKaChu]

Speaking about our recent occupation- only yesterday- our glorious leader made this comment...

Bush characterized the war as a military victory, saying in a speech to veterans in Washington that U.S. forces had “liberated Iraq as promised.”
LINK (http://www.msnbc.com/news/933766.asp?0dm=N12ON)

Now doesn't that seem like we're in the business of liberating oppressed people? Looks that way to me, so I'm not the least surprised that the UN would come to us to help out some more of the billions of down-trodden, internet-deprived masses. Africa is burning, and they need our freedom.

I guess the Prez would say to all of you who oppose liberating the dark continent- or anyone languishing under the heel of a dictator, for that matter- "you hate our freedom".

[othell]

I'm not surprised that this is being asked of the US... We should actually be honored and proud that this is being asked of us.

But then again... Can we commit the resources (financial and military) to this endeavor so soon after Iraq? I am doubtful of this.

So since the Iraq war was not agreed upon by the UN and certain nations in Europe calling for US support in Liberia... How much of their resources are they willing to provide now? If this is worthy of their approval, should we not expect them to provide resources as well?

[philly]

hmmmm othell' reply sorta turned on a light in my brain basket. Since the UN and the the boys are asking for the US to assist in the "liberating of the dark continent" (made me laugh :D) wouldn't it be fair play (and in the best interests of the US and Iraq) to request UN and French military/financial assistance in the Iraqi restabalization? I personally would rather a UN peace keeping force in Iraq along with US/Britian rather than alone. Seems the US could use the help about now...

[othell]

I think the US and Britain have, and are continuing, to object to any UN peace keeping role in Iraq. Both countries committed extensive resource to the war in Iraq and they want the say in how Iraq is rebuilt and which companies get to do the actual rebuilding.

Along with this, the US and Britain new that they would be required to have a military presence in Iraq for a number of years after defeating Saddam. So what we see now should not be unexpected (but for some reason it is). This is only the beginning and the road to rebuilding Iraq will not be easy, but I'm guessing that it will get better (although not anytime soon).

So I do not think its very likely that the US and Britain would want any real assistance in rebuilding, or keeping order within, Iraq.

Now... I would like to see France and Germany or just the UN in general do something about Liberia. If this means some US military involvment, then so be it... As we are a member of the UN; but it should not be expected that the US take up the majority of said mission... Nor even half. Although we could probably do it... I do not believe it would be very wise financially for the US.

[Rupt]

I read this topic and didn't know we had any big news with liberia right now so I decided to start reading on some info about it and at first I was like I donno we have done Iraq and Afghanistan so recently we don't need another but one image made me highly reconsider.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/02/international/02CND-LIBER.html?ex=1057809600?en=b488018e76c03b0d&ei=5058&partner=IWON

Scroll down to the 2nd picture on the right. The kid on the left just seems so happy that he might be saved.

[othell]

A problem that we would have to face, unfortunately, is the thousands of kids his age or younger who have been forced to partake in the fighting...

Such a fucked up situation from any way you look at it really.

[SithDrummer]

lol I read the title as "Libria or bust" and thought of the setting of Equilibrium, I was bracing myself for another Patriot Act thread...

[Summer]

Originally posted by VeeKaChu

Now doesn't that seem like we're in the business of liberating oppressed people? Looks that way to me, so I'm not the least surprised that the UN would come to us to help out some more of the billions of down-trodden, internet-deprived masses. Africa is burning, and they need our freedom.

Considering your stance on these views and recent events, I'm surprised you haven't used the word Afganistan yet.

[Halfbreed]

Thats because the USA is the only country left with the required assets to defend freedom and carryout liberation around the world.

1) Money
2) Technology
3) Massive capable military made up of some of the most talented and brave people.

[snaggle]

Sure why not? While we're at it, why don't we level a couple African countries too. We'd be doing them and the world a favor by blowing them back to the stone...wait...they're already there...never mind.

[ElevatioN]

Snaggle, your ignorance is outstanding. Infact, many of the people in this thread seem to know little to nothing about this situation. Comparing to iraq is almost completely invalid. We have over 150,000 troops there as opposed to 1,000 that we are planning on sending to Liberia. We wont get involved in the fighting, but rather will try and keep the peace. I'm in favor of it, although i was first met with the intial "wtf" when i heard France was asking us for a favor. But thats a good thing when you think about it, because it will mend diplomatic problems, and lead to the stability of the UN, which seemed to be waivering.

[snaggle]

I wasn't being ignorant. I was merely commenting on how our more liberal friends believe we should play world policeman in every country that could use our help, and apply extreme situational variables as a general rule of thumb. I could care less about Liberia or any other country out there for that matter. I'm all for our return to isolationism, or something like it. Let the world deal with the their own problems. We've got issues on the homefront that could use attention instead of some petty squabble half-way around the world.

[Rupt]

Snaggle, we r still waiting for you to say how your earlier statements arent ignorant...

Working together and caring for others is what keeps humanity alive. I'm sure your local police could care less about your safety, but they know how to keep you safe and they are caring so they do. I'm sure your parents could lock u in a closet and let you rot, but they are caring and know how to take care of you so they do. The list can go on. These countries we need to help have HUMANS who are suffering. We have what it takes to help them so why shouldn't we? While it would make sense to strive for an end to global suffering we aren't even trying to do that. This will only be the 3rd country within the last few years we send troops into and as someone said earlier it would not be a large scale invasion, simply peace keepers.

[snaggle]

Uh...it's called sarcasm...I'm pretty sure that's still allowed in here.

[Rupt]

Well maybe you need to realize 1. you suck at sarcasm and 2. the acadamy isn't a bright place to use it, this place is for serious discussions.

[Rupt]

BTW, we knew you were using sarcasm in the first one and we were saying the point you were trying to make is ignorant. Going against sending troops somewhere just because people will die is ignorant. The police kill people, why not get rid of them? Sometimes force is necesary to stop bad people, obviously the end result is a good one.

[snaggle]

Where did I say not to send troops because they'd die? Nowhere. Stop putting your words in my mouth.

[Rupt]

Then stop using sarcasm to make points and just say your points.

[snaggle]

How about no.

[othell]

Originally posted by Rupt
Then stop using sarcasm to make points and just say your points.

That doesn't mean words should be put in his mouth... Something that is not part of "serious discussions."

If he wants to use sarcasm let him. It can be very effective at times. It just has to be used properly and be very evident, especially through a medium such as this message board.

Whether he wants to use sarcasm or not is his choice. If he cannot make his point well with it then that is his problem, but there is more than just oen way to make a point. So get off his chops for doing it his way; you have no right to tell him how he should do anything.