Liberia

[(SEALs) one]

I read somewhere that this Liberia conflict was started in the 19th century when the freed American slaves came to Liberia.(At that time the U.S offered some sort of country where free slaves could go.) Anyway, out of all the African Countries only Egypt and South Africa is up to date with most current technologies.  The rest of the countries are either torn by many years of a war, fued, disease, and poverty.There is really no way you can convert all the African nations into modern countries without spending billions on factories,roads,housing,water irrigation, goverment stability, military, etc.  

As for the U.S role around the world, I believe it's part of their duty.  Why?, well because the U.S is the world's sole superpower and they have to maintain it.  Most of the world depends on the U.S economy including Europe and Asia.  The U.S military has to keep the peace around the world, or else everything would fall apart and we'd have another world war.  As for the U.N, the U.N is just a huge alliance of nations who just debate on world conflicts in my opinion.  The only good thing I see in the U.N is it keeps the balance in the world, like not having one country get too much power etc.

Oh well, Thank you very much and good night...*yawn*

[The Ghost of Bondo]

I'm pretty much with tasty on this, military use should be used in only the extreme cases (things that the World Wars would fit into, but not many wars since).  Look how well simply moving peacekeepers in (not many and not Americans) has done.  UN support and regional manpower for keeping peace is all that should be used.  Here's praying Liberia can be an example that peace can happen...peacefully.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

(not many and not Americans)

Some Americans, over 2000 more Americans waiting in the harbor, and not UN Peacekeepers.

The UN wants the US to send in it's forces.  Liberia wants the US to send in it's forces.  Nigeria (the ones that sent in forces) want money from the US (more then the $10 million offered them by the US).  

If you are for UN Peacekeepers, and the UN wants the US to be part of that force, how can you be against the US sending troops.  It doesn't make sense.

"From what I gather, discussions are going on for them (Nigeria) to get some assistance.? Ten million dollars was offered by the United States, which obviously the Nigerians have indicated is not enough.? This is why, in my proposal to the Council, I said they should allow us to support them, and advance money from the budget of UNAMSIL to get them there urgently and sort things out.

As I said, the President indicated to me that the United States would want to help get humanitarian assistance to the Liberians, but, of course, they would not want to stay for a long time, because they are over-committed in other parts of the world.? That is also one of the reasons we are sending in United Nations peacekeepers for the longer-term operation.? But in the meantime it is urgent that we get the troops in to help pacify the situation and ensure that humanitarian assistance will get to the needy." -Kofi Annan

[The Ghost of Bondo]

At this time the US forces are not serving an active role there so that is why I said not Americans...they are ready and waiting but it is the Nigerians like you said that are serving as peacekeepers at the present time.  And I never said the US couldn't deploy PEACEKEEPERS...I make a large distinction between troops meant for keeping peace and those meant for waging war.  

As a long term goal, I think the US should minimize its attack force and instead focus on training larger amounts of people in the skills required in peacekeeping/policing roles and deemphasizing the combat aspects.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

1) There is a US Marine presence there, on the ground, already.  Not many (I've read between 20 and 50) but this is at the same time that there were only a couple hundred Nigerians actually there as well.  I'm not just talking about the ones in the harbor.

2) Don't discount the ones in the harbor being there already as not having an effect on peacekeeping.  Everyone knows they are there and ready, it does have an effect on what's going on.

3) The US military's number one job will always be the Defense of the US.  You have to train for that, just like you would for attack.  And saying that we don't need to worry about it, nobody would ever dare attack us is the same nonsense that was said back in 1940.  

[The Ghost of Bondo]

3) The US military's number one job will always be the Defense of the US.  You have to train for that, just like you would for attack.  And saying that we don't need to worry about it, nobody would ever dare attack us is the same nonsense that was said back in 1940.  

With our precision bombing and missle abilities, we don't need to rely on huge numbers of prepared troops to be safe.  It isn't like another country can just spring a huge attack force on us by surprise...we'd see it coming way ahead of time.  Our technology in tracking enemy movements wasn't around to avoid Pearl Harbour.