Yeah... "liberating" costs money, but hey if they can pass "universal healthcare" then whats to stop them from making the inevitable fall of the US state and other states even sooner, heck you know what lets go, lets ride this horse off the cliff in a BLAZE OF GLORY!!!
Name:
Anonymous2011-10-05 21:54
>>1
Obama tried to be an alpha male. Hilary suckered him into Libya. He's hiding under the desk until Gaddafi is dead. I don't think he has the balls to do much else with Russia and China dick slapping him like the little boy he is.
Name:
Anonymous2011-10-05 22:32
>>3
He doesn't have the balls, because just like with her husband Hillary keeps them in a little box in her desk.
Name:
Anonymous2011-10-06 14:00
Actual reason: $$$. Massive bank bailouts don't go very easy on the funds you need to make war.
Also, manpower. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have the US holding a wolf by its mouth; it's a dumb thing to do (not to mention how the lacklustre planning made it even worse), but it's not as if you can let go just like that either. The islamotards may have been ousted for now, but move out without proper preparation and they'll move right back in.
Name:
Anonymous2011-10-06 14:15
Oh, and forgot to mention;
Somalia's an even worse mess than Afghanistan infrastructure-wise. Not to mention Somalia has had even less of a government than Afghanistan for the past couple decades. That translates to a fuckton of re(?)building before anyone can start thinking of redrawing.
Another thing Somalia doesn't have: Strategic location. Afghanistan sits between Iraq (oil) and China (potential customers for that oil).
All Somalia can do with their location, is cause trouble with international shipping. And that trouble can be remedied (if not exactly solved) with convoys and armed guards, without any need to set foot on dry Somali land.
Name:
Anonymous2011-10-08 16:04
>>6
Or just do it 18th Century style: arm the merchant vessels and their crews. Execute suspected pirates immediately on the spot whenever and wherever they are captured. Until quite recently all major powers abided by treaties requiring them to do just this, and piracy was unknown. Navies kill pirates and in cases of repeat offenses shell the port towns from which they operate, and this solves the problem.
Then the Davos types got involved, and the Royal Navy is afraid to shoot at some slobbering IQ-55 nigger waving an RPG in a rowboat for fear that the quangoes will sue them for violating his "human rights," nor can they capture them alive because they will then be provided quango lawyers who will coach them to demand political asylum in the UK.
The result is predictable, and intentional.
Name:
Anonymous2011-10-09 1:29
>>7 the Royal Navy is afraid to shoot at some slobbering IQ-55 nigger waving an RPG in a rowboat
Now now.
Name:
Anonymous2011-10-10 0:18
>>7
They could always do what they did with the slavers. BANG! "Oh, my mistake, there don't appear to be any pirates here after all."
Name:
Anonymous2011-10-11 5:59
One could of course complement this with realistic job alternatives to keep them off piracy, but I guess that's just too much work or something...
Name:
Anonymous2011-10-12 13:32
>>10
The West doesn't owe slobbering African IQ-55 niggers "job alternatives" or anything else--except a bullet between the eyes if they interfere with freedom of the seas.
Name:
Anonymous2011-10-13 1:07
>>11
You are just here to say "niggers", arent you?
Well since your rage is impotent, its all harmless fun I suppose.
Name:
Anonymous2011-10-13 1:45
Blackhawk Down.
They didn't want help, so we'll just watch the fires burn.
Name:
Anonymous2011-10-13 3:27
>>10
You're right but this statement is meaningless.
What we call corruption is standard practice in Somalia, a situation where the "strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must" is just how things are, the same way you tolerate a baby crying on the bus Somalians tolerate warlords taking their lion's share and those that do not are just killed and forgotten accomplishing nothing. When Somalia has the security to support large long term investments it will automatically start creating jobs.
Name:
Anonymous2011-10-15 12:04
>>14
Like I said, too much work (for the people in power to actually do it).
Name:
Anonymous2011-10-15 12:47
>>15
We could easily exterminate the people in power in Somalia if we didn't fret over collateral damage or human rights violations. Chairman Mao had no problems bringing order to China, you never hear about Guangxi Clique guerillas, only the cultural revolution which was like an inquisition to exterminate that kind of thing.
Name:
Anonymous2011-10-17 16:59
>>16
>Somalia
>people in power
Last I heard, that place was Anarchy made flesh.
Or do you mean the warlords? Wasn't that what Clinton tried somewhere in the 90's? Y'know, the one with the downed Blackhawk?
Name:
Anonymous2011-10-17 17:05
>2011
>talk about liberating countries by invading them
Name:
Anonymous2011-10-17 23:21
>>18
Maybe Obama will start a war with Iran to make sure he gets re-elected.