[<< "Ceasefire? What ceasefire?"] [Archive Index] [>>"Say 'Top O' The Mornin'' to...."]
04/21/2004 Archived Entry: "Umm, this doesn't sound like a real good idea."
Umm, this doesn't sound like a real good idea.
Nevermind the whole thing is an exercise in double-speak. Peace operations?
Facing a chronic shortage of foreign troops for peacekeeping missions, US President George Bush has decided to launch an international drive to boost the supply of available forces.It calls for the United States to commit about $US660 million ($880 million) over the next five years to train, equip and provide logistical support to forces in nations willing to take part in peace operations.
The Global Peace Operations Initiative will be aimed largely at Africa. It will expand the peacekeeping skills of African forces and encourage international military exercises in the region, where US officials say much of the need exists.
But African forces developed under the program could be used in peace operations anywhere in the world, they said.
Bush has lost his mind, and he wants to drag the entire world into his crazy-hole. What this amounts to is a US-trained army with no ties whatsover to this country, at the beck and call of George W. Bush. Cannon fodder writ large.
Replies: 16 people speak up
On Capitol Hill, a Democratic staff member with a Senate committee predicted the plan would receive broad bipartisan support. Several independent analysts also welcomed the initiative.
Seems you missed the point of the drive. It is not as you say for Bush's beck and call. You missed the words international and peacekeeping.
Nuff Said
Posted by Robin Hacker @ 04/21/2004 07:33 AM NY
Still, the fact is that we don't have enough troops for peace-keeping anymore. Once upon a time, we were the peace-keepers. If there was a problem somewhre, the Marine weren't too far away. But with Afghanistan, Iraq, and any other front in the war on terror, we just can't do it anymore. So now the world just resembles one big dike. We've got one finger in the Afghanistan hole and one in the Iraq hole. What happens when the dike springs another leak?
Posted by sean @ 04/21/2004 09:23 AM NY
The phrase 'arm for peace' doesn't strike you guys as just a little weird?
Orwell would be damn proud.
Posted by editor @ 04/21/2004 09:35 AM NY
Yes, it strikes me as weird. Just like "Clear Skies Initiatve" of "Healthy Forrest Initiative," they like to use newspeak.
Posted by sean @ 04/21/2004 09:38 AM NY
actually, I somewhat disagree with you here e. If the money is for training truly international troops that would go into peacekeeping operations like there are many of in Africa, that is a good thing, with us being stretched so thin (and even without us being stretched it's better to bring more countries than just the traditional western europe, canada and the US into these things)
These types of operations aren't offensive operations, but they do need to be armed to protect against warlords and the type of stuff we saw in somalia, etc.
I agree with most of what you say, but we can't go jumping to conclusions that EVERY single thing Bush does is bad so we must do the opposite. It's that type of thinking by this administration towards Clinton policies that got us in the terror mess we're in today.
Posted by Jason @ 04/21/2004 09:48 AM NY
Justin,
Don't you think this is just a distraction from the fact that we're running out of resources?
Posted by sean @ 04/21/2004 09:57 AM NY
It's Jason, but that's okay.
Yes, I think the way this is being spun/promoted by the white house is a distraction from how thin our military resources are right now. But that doesn't take away from the fact that this plan actually isn't so bad and good be a very good thing if done right. It doens't mean it shouldn't be done.
I just think we need to be careful not to become the knee-jerk 'hate everything Bush does' type people that so many Republicans became due to their hatred of Clinton.
Posted by Jason @ 04/21/2004 11:16 AM NY
Isn't there already an organization called the United Nations which mobilizes international peacekeeping forces when necessary?
Sounds to me like bush just wants his own "united armed nations" working for him.
Posted by skywalker77 @ 04/21/2004 11:26 AM NY
and aren't those peacekeeping forces woefully underfunded and undertrained?
Enough of the conspiracy theories. Bush is an evil man but we won't get anywhere acting like this. We need to focus on the big picture and quit swatting at conspiratorial flies and acting just as 'every single thing they do is evil and must be opposed' as they do toward us.
Posted by Jason @ 04/21/2004 11:40 AM NY
Sorry Jason. My ADD gets in the way of typing sometimes. I agree, we should stay positive. But how do we figure out when to believe Bush if you can't trust him?
Posted by sean @ 04/21/2004 11:45 AM NY
first of all, everything "THEY" do is evil, that is what we have "THEM" for.
sounds like a great idea to me. this way, we can train foriegn terrorists down at the school of the americas, and then when they turn against us (and they always do, we knew they were snakes when we picked them up, we cant be surprised when they bite us), we can train african troops to go kill them for us. perfect plan. my only question is, who do we train to kill them when they turn against us?????
There was an old lady who swallowed a fly.
I dunno why she swallowed that fly,
Perhaps she'll die.
There was an old lady who swallowed a spider,
That wriggled and jiggled and wiggled inside her.
She swallowed the spider to catch the fly.
But I dunno why she swallowed that fly -
Perhaps she'll die.
There was an old lady who swallowed a bird;
How absurd, to swallow a bird!
She swallowed the bird to catch the spider
That wriggled and jiggled and wiggled inside her.
She swallowed the spider to catch the fly.
But I dunno why she swallowed that fly -
Perhaps she'll die
There was an old lady who swallowed a cat.
Imagine that, she swallowed a cat.
She swallowed the cat to catch the bird ...
She swallowed the bird to catch the spider
That wriggled and jiggled and wiggled inside her.
She swallowed the spider to catch the fly.
But I dunno why she swallowed that fly
Perhaps she'll die
There was an old lady who swallowed a dog.
What a hog! To swallow a dog!
She swallowed the dog to catch the cat.
She swallowed the cat to catch the bird ...
She swallowed the bird to catch the spider
That wriggled and jiggled and wiggled inside her.
She swallowed the spider to catch the fly.
But I dunno why she swallowed that fly
Perhaps she'll die.
There was an old lady who swallowed a goat.
Just opened her throat and swallowed a goat!
She swallowed the goat to catch the dog ...
She swallowed the dog to catch the cat.
She swallowed the cat to catch the bird ...
She swallowed the bird to catch the spider
That wriggled and jiggled and wiggled inside her.
She swallowed the spider to catch the fly.
But I dunno why she swallowed that fly
Perhaps she'll die.
There was an old lady who swallowed a horse -
She's dead, of course.
sounds like one great fucking plan to me, worthy of broad bipartisan support. eat up now...
Posted by justin @ 04/21/2004 12:26 PM NY
When the Afghans and the Soviets were going at it, we supplied maney and arms to a great guy named, you got it, OSAMA BIN LADEN! And back when Rummy was working for Bush I and Iranians and Iraqis were killing each other, we were supplying poison gas and other weapons to a terrific guy named, you got it, SADDAM! Yeah, sure, the usual bipartisan support means this is a great idea, because we do such a great job of arming other people. We make such good choices. NOT. Nuff Said.
Posted by Mike @ 04/21/2004 01:15 PM NY
What Mike said. And how about a little campaign attention to the fact that Republicans are LOUSY at foreign policy?
Posted by cgreen @ 04/21/2004 01:28 PM NY
Can you say "'School of the Americas' in Africa"?
Sure you can.
Posted by Sharoney @ 04/21/2004 01:48 PM NY
'School of the Americas,' indeed.
Only difference is these bastards are announcing it and calling it a peace plan instead of a war plan.
Posted by editor @ 04/21/2004 02:27 PM NY
lets just arm everyone. mutually assured destruction was a great idea durring the cold war, why not try it again. besides, if we sell weapons to both sides of every conflict, just imagine how good that would be for the economy...
Posted by justin @ 04/21/2004 03:22 PM NY
