56 replies to this topic

[MKopack]

Uganda, South Sudan, the Central African Republic and Congo. I'll bet that's a fun deployment...

I'm sure that there's a strategic political "big picture" reason that this makes sense, but somehow I see more "bad things" than "good things" coming from this.

Quote

U.S. sends troops to Uganda to help fight Lord's Resistance Army

REPORTING FROM WASHINGTON AND JOHANNESBURG, SOUTH AFRICA -- President Obama is deploying about 100 special operations troops to Africa to help target the leadership of the Lord’s Resistance Army, a notorious rebel group that has been entrenched in a stalemate with the government of Uganda for more than two decades.

In a letter notifying Congress on Friday, Obama said the first small team of U.S. “combat-equipped” advisors arrived in Uganda on Wednesday.

Over the next month, the remaining U.S. troops will be sent to surrounding countries, including South Sudan, the Central African Republic and Congo.

The goal of the U.S. mission is to assist regional African forces in removing Lord’s Resistance Army leader Joseph Kony and other commanders of the group “from the battlefield,” the letter says.

On the good side though:



Bet that's some good stuff.

[Vertigo]

There's a collective facepalm going on over at the Nobel prize selection committee.

[Rokke]

MKopack, on 14 October 2011 - 05:37 PM, said:

I'm sure that there's a strategic political "big picture" reason that this makes sense...

According to our CiC...

"I have directed this deployment, which is in the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States, pursuant to my constitutional authority to conduct US foreign relations and as commander-in-chief and chief executive."

So I guess the strategic political "big picture" is that the LRA in Uganda is a threat to our national security. I found this quote about them on Wikipedia (so it must be true...) ""the LRA remains one of the least understood rebel movements in the world, and its ideology, as far as it has one, is difficult to understand." That actually makes them very similar to the Occupy Wall Street movement. Probably time to deploy SEAL team 6 to Wall Street.

[nsplayr]

SOF guys going around the planet killing people who are assholes...man, who knew...

[BitteEinBit]

Ah yes, the beginning of "even more with less"...Good luck gents...we're all counting on you!

[pawnman]

So...when does Code Pink start protesting Obama for starting new wars? I mean, they didn't even wait until the invasion of Iraq to start protesting Bush.

[PapaJu]

They know we've had military in Africa doing things that don't make the front page of the NY Times for some time now, right?

[Cooter]

I think USAFRICOM is starting to get its legs under it so I would expect more of this in the near future...probably a lot more.

Cooter

[gearpig]

We should keep sending Spec Ops into every shithole country we perceive a threat in until the whole world loves us.

[GrndPndr]

gearpig, on 16 October 2011 - 05:37 AM, said:

We should keep sending Spec Ops into every shithole country we perceive a threat in until the whole world loves us.

"2"
Or, loves Obama.

Let's make a list!

[tac airlifter]

CAVEMAN, on 16 October 2011 - 04:02 AM, said:

Terrorism in Africa is real. There has been about 4 bombings in Nigeria in the last year or so and this is considered one of the stable countries in the Western Region(parts of the country practice Sharia Law by the way). The attacks are believed to be the hands of a new breed of terrorist in Africa. The US fears the alliance of this African breed of terrorist with Al Qaeda which could make a volatile scenario in the continent we least understand.

The whole Mogadishu thing still scares people even till today but we need to step-in early enough and now is the time.

There is more on SIPR for those remotely interested.

Terrorism is real in several places, but western africa is not at the top of our list. Nigeria I see the possible connection, but Uganda? It's a waste of resources. Additionally, the group specifically named is the LRA; they practice a mystic brand of animism & christianity. Not at all in danger of linking w/ AQAP and certainly no threat to the US.

[Learjetter]

There's oil in South Sudan and Uganda--perhaps enough for us to let go of the Saudi teat...which means....see you boyz there!

[Royal]

gearpig, on 16 October 2011 - 05:37 AM, said:

We should keep sending Spec Ops into every shithole country we perceive a threat in until the whole world loves us.

To include, but not limited to, every U.S. city that has an "Occupy Wall Street" style gathering.

[nsplayr]

tac airlifter, on 16 October 2011 - 10:54 AM, said:

Terrorism is real in several places, but western africa is not at the top of our list. Nigeria I see the possible connection, but Uganda? It's a waste of resources. Additionally, the group specifically named is the LRA; they practice a mystic brand of animism & christianity. Not at all in danger of linking w/ AQAP and certainly no threat to the US.

What?? Nigeria is sort of in western Africa, where terrorism is a problem, and the LRA operates in Uganda South Sudan & CAR, all of which are in central and eastern Africa, where terrorism is also a problem...which of these is unimportant again? Does the LRAs non-Islamic ideology somehow make them any less terrorist-y than other groups?

Edited by nsplayr, 16 October 2011 - 04:08 PM.

[ThreeHoler]

He's saying that since their ideology doesn't link up that they're not likely to work together. Something about radical Christianity and radical Islam being like oil and water...

[nsplayr]

Yea, that checks, but what I'm asking is that does that make them any less dangerous? Does that make them any less deserving of an ass kicking?

[tac airlifter]

nsplayr, on 16 October 2011 - 03:56 PM, said:

What?? Nigeria is sort of in western Africa, where terrorism is a problem, and the LRA operates in Uganda South Sudan & CAR, all of which are in central and eastern Africa, where terrorism is also a problem...which of these is unimportant again? Does the LRAs non-Islamic ideology somehow make them any less terrorist-y than other groups?

Copy, Nigeria is sort of western Africa. Hence "Nigeria I see a possible connection." As for the LRA, the group specifically named in and around Uganda-- there's no connection to AQAP, and I'm qualified to make that statement. And since we're no longer in a "global war on terrorism" per POTUS direction, it seems odd to me we'd start some shit with a terrorist group which has never been a threat to us. If we're going to get into a brawl with every terrorist group out there just for being terrorist assholes (which I'm fine with BTW) then let's continue the Bush policy and I'll call it the GWOT again.

If you think they are a threat or may be in the future ergo they should be struck now, then by all means let's have POTUS explain why we should implement preemptive war and I'll bask in the irony. If we want to focus our limited resources on the threat, lets go kill al shabab in Somalia and finish off AQAP/AQEA... you know I'm game. I'm all for killing people bad guys simply because they're bad, once we can afford to divert our resources and attention away from dudes actually trying to kill my wife and kids.

Edited by tac airlifter, 16 October 2011 - 06:48 PM.

[nsplayr]

AQAP wasn't he point of sending troops here since they, ya know, operate on a different continent. AQEA is obviously a threat we have on our radar, but apparently the LRA is worthy of it's own group of dudes to hunt them down.

To me, this pretty much falls into the same category as SF dudes helping out with the fight against the FARC, our efforts in the Philippines, etc. There are a bunch of groups out there that aren't exactly knocking at our door but that still threaten our interests. And if you think the GWOT is over, come on man, that change was made for political reasons and we all know it. I don't think there's any doubt about the current administrations intentions WRT counterterrorism ops in various sunny locales around the globe.

Edited by nsplayr, 16 October 2011 - 07:17 PM.

[tac airlifter]

nsplayr, on 16 October 2011 - 07:16 PM, said:

AQAP wasn't he point of sending troops here since they, ya know, operate on a different continent.

You're smarter than this response indicates. I know AQAP wasn't the point of sending troops to Uganda. My point exactly. We should be utilizing scant resources to win fights with enemies intent on doing us harm before we start some shit with a random group indifferent to our national interests.

nsplayr, on 16 October 2011 - 07:16 PM, said:

apparently the LRA is worthy of it's own group of dudes to hunt them down.

Apparently that isn't apparent to me, hence the disagreeing nature of my response.

nsplayr, on 16 October 2011 - 07:16 PM, said:

To me, this pretty much falls into the same category as SF dudes helping out with the fight against the FARC, our efforts in the Philippines, etc. There are a bunch of groups out there that aren't exactly knocking at our door but that still threaten our interests.

Copy, although the PI ops are in fact happening ISO fighting an AQ offshoot so not the best example. If the LRA in Uganda is threatening our interests, please explain how.

nsplayr, on 16 October 2011 - 07:16 PM, said:

And if you think the GWOT is over, come on man, that change was made for political reasons and we all know it.

You got me there. I saw an opportunity to point out the absurdity of the GWOT--> OCO name change and took it. Nothing has changed except the acronym on my OPR. You can support POTUS policies while still joining in my amusement at the irony of our Nobel Peace prize winning CINC who ran on a "change" platform who has, in fact, changed nothing but the name of our wars.

Edited by tac airlifter, 16 October 2011 - 08:06 PM.