Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   The United States is preparing to send troops to a third-world nation in order to support the French army. Nothing like this has ever ended badly before in the history of ever   (foxnews.com) divider line 231
    More: Stupid, French Army, United States, Special Warfare, French forces  
•       •       •

10518 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Jan 2013 at 8:51 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



231 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-01-14 08:19:06 PM  
It's OK, we're just there as advisers.
 
2013-01-14 08:28:49 PM  
well, to be fair, the french sent troops to help liberate what was a third world country from the british about 240 years ago....
 
2013-01-14 08:30:33 PM  
I would think Subby would be happy since this is going after Al-Queda.

The U.S. is considering a range of options to help, including sending cargo aircrafts to lift more French ground troops into Mali, providing air refueling tankers for French air combat patrols, and offering intelligence gleaned from aerial surveillance.


Oh yeah, that's some real close involvement there.
 
2013-01-14 08:31:13 PM  

FlashHarry: well, to be fair, the french sent troops to help liberate what was a third world country from the british about 240 years ago....


Bet Subby forgot all about THAT one.
 
2013-01-14 08:54:59 PM  
Considering the forces the US trained and armed jumped over to the rebel forces this is more Afghanistan wrapped in Vietnam.
 
2013-01-14 08:55:06 PM  
It's about time we invaded. I'm sick of all this Mali coddling.
 
2013-01-14 08:55:11 PM  
Just a "police action". Nothing to see here, move along ..*** whistles and walks away***
 
2013-01-14 08:55:27 PM  
Aircrafts? M-w.com is your friend, arts major.
 
2013-01-14 08:55:38 PM  
Hey, at least it's someplace new.
We Americans need another geography lesson.
 
2013-01-14 08:55:52 PM  
It sounds like the French forces in Mali are...

blogs.guardian.co.uk

Dien Bien pharked
 
2013-01-14 08:55:53 PM  
Well I'm no foreign expert, but I believe it should be spelled Molly, as in "Molly was the singer in the band". Maybe that's what they're fighting about.
 
2013-01-14 08:57:43 PM  

FlashHarry: well, to be fair, the french sent troops to help liberate what was a third world country from the british about 240 years ago....


The New World actually had a higher standard of living than the Old World @ that point in time.

//Also, at least it isn't Asia.  Getting involved in another land war there should be grounds for involuntary commitment.
 
2013-01-14 08:57:55 PM  
International alliances, how do they work?
 
2013-01-14 08:58:06 PM  
Has any of the usual suspects shown up to Obama's 'Nam 'Nam 'Nam this thread yet?
 
2013-01-14 08:59:11 PM  

rogue49: Hey, at least it's someplace new.
We Americans need another geography lesson.


Yeah, Americans might actually learn something about Africa. Can't be all bad.
 
2013-01-14 08:59:15 PM  

Indubitably: Hector Remarkable: Well I'm no foreign expert, but I believe it should be spelled Molly, as in "Molly was the singer in the band". Maybe that's what they're fighting about.

To Lolly?


Sure, why not.
 
2013-01-14 08:59:33 PM  

Al Quaida don't surf!


www.themost10.com

 
2013-01-14 08:59:56 PM  
We do have a democrat in the White House.........

/ I keed, I keed
 
2013-01-14 09:01:04 PM  
The United States is preparing to send troops to a third-world nation in order to support the French army. Nothing like this has ever ended badly before in the history of ever before yet evaar.
 
2013-01-14 09:01:40 PM  

Loucifer: It's about time we invaded. I'm sick of all this Mali coddling.


And...thread.
 
2013-01-14 09:02:16 PM  
Yeah, I've been seeing a lot of facebook-outrage today from folks who are usually quite gung-ho about cheerleading the use of military force.

I guess they don't like the thought of US troops being used to kill blah people.
 
2013-01-14 09:02:21 PM  
Will there be rules this time?

\I don't actually like that movie, but the reference fit.
 
2013-01-14 09:02:30 PM  
How else do we keep these corporations running?
 
2013-01-14 09:03:19 PM  
we're sending troops to Timbuktu and back
 
2013-01-14 09:03:23 PM  
Can't they just send Cajuns and kill two birds with one stone?
 
2013-01-14 09:07:02 PM  
Obama's the worse muslin, sympethizer, socialist, communist, dictator EVER!!
 
2013-01-14 09:07:49 PM  
A very important thing everyone has to remember....it's okay when Obama does it.
 
2013-01-14 09:08:34 PM  
If we don't act decisively, the terrorists will control all that sand!
 
2013-01-14 09:08:42 PM  

miss diminutive: Can't they just send Cajuns and kill two birds with one stone?

How about we send Canadian Indians?
 
2013-01-14 09:08:48 PM  
Meh. This isn't a big deal.
This has me more concerned. Link
 
2013-01-14 09:09:36 PM  
Timbuktu is worth a mass, Henry
 
2013-01-14 09:10:09 PM  
Well, what did you think "global war on terror" meant?
 
2013-01-14 09:10:42 PM  

GAT_00: I would think Subby would be happy since this is going after Al-Queda. Communists


That would make Vietnam cool retrospectively. After all, opposing the Commies in Vietnam was as vital to national security as opposing Al Qaida in Outer Absurdia is today. We all know what would have become of our freedoms had the Reds taken over in 'Nam. And, of course, we can be sure that our government today is being as honest with the nation every time they cry "Al Qaida!" in order to justify intervention as they were 50 years ago when the cry was "Communists!"
 
2013-01-14 09:11:24 PM  

ferretman: A very important thing everyone has to remember....it's okay when Obama does it.


Because Obama does it right. Like HW Bush and Clinton did. Dubya was a massive farkup.
 
2013-01-14 09:11:50 PM  
Has Canada sent a laundry ship yet?
They could also ship the french half of quebec there too in order to translate something.
 
2013-01-14 09:11:51 PM  

FlashHarry: well, to be fair, the french sent troops to help liberate what was a third world country from the british about 240 years ago....


From certain points of view ( Native American ), that ended badly too...
 
2013-01-14 09:11:57 PM  
We killed tend tens of thousands of Libyans, which sent most of its arms streaming into Mali. Now we must kill the people of Mali!
 
2013-01-14 09:12:55 PM  

ferretman: A very important thing everyone has to remember....it's okay when Obama does it.


Indeed; if the god-king-messiah decrees it.

His will must be obeyed.

/ if you don't; you're a racist, loon and possibly full retarded

// I keed, I keed
 
2013-01-14 09:15:28 PM  
Sam Kinnison said it best here (pops; NSFW audio).
 
2013-01-14 09:15:39 PM  
So now, as a direct result of our intervention in Libya, we have to fight in Mali, against people armed and trained by the US.

Go USA!
 
2013-01-14 09:15:59 PM  
Sat Queda.
 
2013-01-14 09:16:06 PM  
I kinda wish we'd fight with a second-world nation once in a while, just to keep us on our toes.
 
2013-01-14 09:16:16 PM  
Those almost look like a shorter version of pants
 
2013-01-14 09:16:28 PM  
Jesus that article. Any chance to get a soundbite of any half credible source shiatting on Obama into the discourse, I guess.

As for Aid to Mali, we did kinda break that country by forcing all the shiat out of Libya. It's like Jihadist whack-a-mole over there.
 
2013-01-14 09:17:48 PM  
Hector Remarkable: Maybe that's what they're fighting about.

Oil in north Mali, gold and uranium in southwest Mali. And a backup plan for Halliburton, KBR and that crowd just in case Afghanistan peters out. Yeah, beware the military industrial complex.
 
2013-01-14 09:18:53 PM  

fusillade762: It's OK, we're just there as advisers.


There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on - [pauses] - shame on you. Fool me - [pauses] - You can't get fooled again.
, ), in which the president confused a centuries-old proverb ("Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.")I guess this is Obama's Vietnam. (Runs for Canada. Oh, wait, I'm already in Canada.)
 
2013-01-14 09:19:46 PM  
Been to Mali. Nice place, interesting people, food was infact great. Hot as hell and dry. That was 20 yrs ago.
I say spec ops on the ground with US drone and French air and ground. Get those bastards out! They have no claim. And it is just one more place they want to control.
 
2013-01-14 09:21:52 PM  
Well, if we just filibuster long enough, the French will eventually surrender and that'll be the end of that.
 
2013-01-14 09:22:09 PM  

Loucifer: It's about time we invaded. I'm sick of all this Mali coddling.


You sir, have won the internets for today.
 
2013-01-14 09:22:30 PM  

8Fingers: Been to Mali. Nice place, interesting people, food was infact great. Hot as hell and dry. That was 20 yrs ago.
I say spec ops on the ground with US drone and French air and ground. Get those bastards out! They have no claim. And it is just one more place they want to control.


Because that's worked very well in Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia. Well, I'm sure it will work this time in Mali with no negative repercussions.
 
2013-01-14 09:22:55 PM  
Trust the French.
 
2013-01-14 09:23:14 PM  
Let's try that again without the automated link:

There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on (pauses) shame on you. Fool me (pauses) You can't get fooled again. -- President Bush

I guess this is Obama's Vietnam. (Runs for Canada. Oh, wait, I'm already in Canada.)
 
2013-01-14 09:23:34 PM  

Tell Me How My Blog Tastes: FlashHarry: well, to be fair, the french sent troops to help liberate what was a third world country from the british about 240 years ago....

The New World actually had a higher standard of living than the Old World @ that point in time.

//Also, at least it isn't Asia.  Getting involved in another land war there should be grounds for involuntary commitment.


chrisabraham.com

/agrees
 
2013-01-14 09:24:02 PM  

plewis: Jesus that article. Any chance to get a soundbite of any half credible source shiatting on Obama into the discourse, I guess.

As for Aid to Mali, we did kinda break that country by forcing all the shiat out of Libya. It's like Jihadist whack-a-mole over there.


For a better article Google mali french military and check the BBC article.
 
2013-01-14 09:24:34 PM  

GAT_00: I would think Subby would be happy since this is going after Al-Queda.

The U.S. is considering a range of options to help, including sending cargo aircrafts to lift more French ground troops into Mali, providing air refueling tankers for French air combat patrols, and offering intelligence gleaned from aerial surveillance.


Oh yeah, that's some real close involvement there.


That is how our involvement in Nam started.

"In November 1951, the US provided the French with an initial supply of 20 C-27s which would build to 116 by war's end in 1954. USAF crews delivered the aircraft, usually flying them in to Nha Trang, Vietnam from Clark AB, Philippines. These would be for tactical airlift. But France lacked the pilots and maintenance crews.

Since the French were short on pilots, the US turned to CAT, which by 1952, was owned by the CIA lock, stock and barrel. CAT pilots began flying a heavy schedule of transport missions for the French. These were combat missions flown by American civilians in every sense of the word. They routinely flew into combat zones, dropped supplies to the French, and dropped French paratroopers. They took their share of hostile fire.

The French also lacked the strategic airlift needed to get their troops form France to Vietnam. In April, the USAF's 62nd Troop Carrier Wing (TCW) flew French forces from France to Indochina aboard C-124 Globemaster IIs."

Link
 
2013-01-14 09:27:03 PM  
The French are perfectly capable of surrendering on their own.
 
2013-01-14 09:27:09 PM  
Is this a scandal yet?

encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
 
2013-01-14 09:28:54 PM  

Tell Me How My Blog Tastes: FlashHarry: well, to be fair, the french sent troops to help liberate what was a third world country from the british about 240 years ago....

The New World actually had a higher standard of living than the Old World @ that point in time.

//Also, at least it isn't Asia.  Getting involved in another land war there should be grounds for involuntary commitment.


FARKING THIS.

/Getting involved in  any war anywhere should be grounds for involuntary commitment if I had my way...
//Money does not grow on farking trees.
 
2013-01-14 09:31:11 PM  

WTF Indeed: Considering the forces the US trained and armed jumped over to the rebel forces this is more Afghanistan wrapped in Vietnam.


Not that I doubt it, but you got a citation for that?
 
2013-01-14 09:32:18 PM  
smhttp.13422.nexcesscdn.net

Ooh, double whammy! (Heart of Darkness was actually set in the Congo {ie Mali}, but got moved to Vietnam for the movie based on it: Apocalypse Now)
 
2013-01-14 09:32:34 PM  
He will win who has the military capacity and is not interfered with by the sovereign. - Sun Tzu
 
2013-01-14 09:34:14 PM  

PsiChick: /Getting involved in any war anywhere should be grounds for involuntary commitment if I had my way...
//Money does not grow on farking trees.



Unless we're talking about social spending.
 
2013-01-14 09:35:52 PM  
Less than 500 troops on the ground? I won't be surprised if we spend half a billion on this skirmish.
 
2013-01-14 09:36:17 PM  

theknuckler_33: Not that I doubt it, but you got a citation for that?


Link
 
2013-01-14 09:36:27 PM  

g4lt: [smhttp.13422.nexcesscdn.net image 201x300]

Ooh, double whammy! (Heart of Darkness was actually set in the Congo {ie Mali}, but got moved to Vietnam for the movie based on it: Apocalypse Now)


Mali is far from the congo
 
2013-01-14 09:37:19 PM  

PsiChick: Tell Me How My Blog Tastes: FlashHarry: well, to be fair, the french sent troops to help liberate what was a third world country from the british about 240 years ago....

The New World actually had a higher standard of living than the Old World @ that point in time.

//Also, at least it isn't Asia.  Getting involved in another land war there should be grounds for involuntary commitment.

FARKING THIS.

/Getting involved in  any war anywhere should be grounds for involuntary commitment if I had my way...
//Money does not grow on farking trees.


But the progressives have been chanting how government is not a profit making orgnaizaton and debt/eficit do not really matter-Which really makes it hard to justify raising taxes like they want to.

I see a repeat of the1990s shrinking dfense budgets in search of a "peace dividend" while our military was deployed more than ever because ther really was no peace.
 
2013-01-14 09:38:02 PM  

g4lt: (Heart of Darkness was actually set in the Congo {ie Mali},


The Congo is NOWHERE NEAR Mali. Even using the whole damn river basin as your definition, it only goes as far north as Cameroon and Central African Republic and you're still two countries away from Mali.
 
2013-01-14 09:38:52 PM  

FlashHarry: well, to be fair, the french sent troops to help liberate what was a third world country from the british about 240 years ago....


wasn't practically everything a 3rd world country back then?
 
2013-01-14 09:39:26 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: g4lt: [smhttp.13422.nexcesscdn.net image 201x300]

Ooh, double whammy! (Heart of Darkness was actually set in the Congo {ie Mali}, but got moved to Vietnam for the movie based on it: Apocalypse Now)

Mali is far from the congo


closer'n Vietnam is, didn't stop Coppola...
 
2013-01-14 09:39:33 PM  
If W did it, the Fark commies would be calling for his head.
You can all eat shiat and die now.
 
2013-01-14 09:40:29 PM  
On the phone app, haven't been able to read any articles - have the French said who they sent? Paras? Legion?
 
2013-01-14 09:41:06 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: If W did it, the Fark commies would be calling for his head.
You can all eat shiat and die now.


Awww, someone is upset that the black guy has killed more terrorists than W ever did.
 
2013-01-14 09:42:52 PM  

g4lt: [smhttp.13422.nexcesscdn.net image 201x300]

Ooh, double whammy! (Heart of Darkness was actually set in the Congo {ie Mali}, but got moved to Vietnam for the movie based on it: Apocalypse Now)


At what point should we sell the house, sell the kids, and never come back?
 
2013-01-14 09:43:25 PM  
Vietnam was the only time we've been involved in French business in the third world?

Rwanda bet?

/not Romneytasticmitter
 
2013-01-14 09:43:56 PM  

david_gaithersburg: We killed tend tens of thousands of Libyans, which sent most of its arms streaming into Mali. Now we must kill the people of Mali!


At least fence the place in and toss the keys.
 
2013-01-14 09:44:51 PM  
0.tqn.com

Just Saying.....
 
2013-01-14 09:45:17 PM  

hasty ambush: PsiChick: Tell Me How My Blog Tastes: FlashHarry: well, to be fair, the french sent troops to help liberate what was a third world country from the british about 240 years ago....

The New World actually had a higher standard of living than the Old World @ that point in time.

//Also, at least it isn't Asia.  Getting involved in another land war there should be grounds for involuntary commitment.

FARKING THIS.

/Getting involved in  any war anywhere should be grounds for involuntary commitment if I had my way...
//Money does not grow on farking trees.

But the progressives have been chanting how government is not a profit making orgnaizaton and debt/eficit do not really matter-Which really makes it hard to justify raising taxes like they want to.

I see a repeat of the1990s shrinking dfense budgets in search of a "peace dividend" while our military was deployed more than ever because ther really was no peace.


Um, I don't know what the progressives in your  head say, but out here in reality it's more 'why the fark are we spending this much on the military when we have rampant poverty and homelessness in our country, and why is some jackass on TV comparing the economics of a megacorporation to a nation?'.

BigNumber12: PsiChick: /Getting involved in any war anywhere should be grounds for involuntary commitment if I had my way...
//Money does not grow on farking trees.


Unless we're talking about social spending.


You've seen some of our defense budget, right? Spent on things like a parking lot full of tanks the Army actually said they don't want and nuclear weapons we do not need in the slightest? Money doesn't have to grow on trees. We just need to stop trying to overfund the military.
 
2013-01-14 09:45:24 PM  
I don't care, so long as we don't put boots on the ground. Fark that. Let the French handle it, North Africa's supposed to be in their "sphere" isn't it?
 
2013-01-14 09:45:54 PM  

legion_of_doo: Vietnam was the only time we've been involved in French business in the third world?

Rwanda bet?

/not Romneytasticmitter


you were just angoling for a shot at that pun, weren't you?
 
2013-01-14 09:46:47 PM  
So, we're going to take our exhausted military and send them to yet another place to fight.

Let the French fight their own war, we have our own to deal with.
 
2013-01-14 09:47:56 PM  
Send these guys, they took out a Panther with a Ma Deuce!

www.bigredhair.com
 
2013-01-14 09:48:22 PM  
img.cdandlp.com

/Things are going great
//And they're only getting better.
 
2013-01-14 09:49:56 PM  
Heck, we flew US aircraft into a sovereign country this weekend to support French specials forces in a gunfight.......and it wasn't Mali.

We supported the French failed hostage recovery that ended in the hostage getting dead....and two of the french special forces.

The WhiteHouse had no problem with this. Sending planes to help support FRENCH special operations on the ground. Against the rules of the soveriegn nation

Hmmmm. that concept sounds so familiar??? When recently would it have been handy for the US to do that ????? Support special ops team under fire ???

Damm, can't think of it
 
2013-01-14 09:51:11 PM  

miss diminutive: Can't they just send Cajuns and kill two birds with one stone?


But who would make our gumbo?
 
2013-01-14 09:51:55 PM  

FlashHarry: well, to be fair, the french sent troops to help liberate what was a third world country from the british about 240 years ago....


How is it possible for the USA to be third world, regardless of how poor or rich ?

All US + NATO countries == First world
All Warsaw and Soviet/Russian == Second world
All Non Aligned == Third world

Switzerland was third world throughout, at least officially.
 
2013-01-14 09:53:06 PM  

kvinesknows: miss diminutive: Can't they just send Cajuns and kill two birds with one stone?How about we send Canadian Indians?


But who would harvest our maple syrup?
 
2013-01-14 09:55:17 PM  
Listen up people: We've always been at war with West Africa.
 
2013-01-14 09:57:25 PM  
1. The French were long gone from Indochina when the Americans showed up in South Vietnam.
2. WTF is Barry sending troops/planes to Mali when his chimp Panetta is getting ready to make massive cuts to the defense budget?
3. Yeah, yeah al Qaeda :-P
 
2013-01-14 09:57:26 PM  
oh hell, if it weren't for the French navy the American terrorists would have lost their little anti-government uprising against the Crown.

Remember, kids, the French are the reason you don't speak English today. So thank them!
 
2013-01-14 10:01:50 PM  
The curent situation in Mali with the Islamist forces is in large part blowback from Libya. So much for that intervention. And the Islamist/Al Qaeda threat is just an excuse to intervene in Mali and West Africa. It's really all about natural resources. France relies greatly upon nuclear power and French companies operate uranium mines in Mali and Niger. They can't risk losing control of these deposit. Another major benefactor of this intervention will be China who has invested $billions in this region in order to gain access to the resources. But just like Afghanistan the American public will have their fears of terrorism stoked in order to accede to the desires of imperialistic gain.
 
2013-01-14 10:04:36 PM  

ShannonKW: GAT_00: I would think Subby would be happy since this is going after Al-Queda. Communists

That would make Vietnam cool retrospectively. After all, opposing the Commies in Vietnam was as vital to national security as opposing Al Qaida in Outer Absurdia is today. We all know what would have become of our freedoms had the Reds taken over in 'Nam. And, of course, we can be sure that our government today is being as honest with the nation every time they cry "Al Qaida!" in order to justify intervention as they were 50 years ago when the cry was "Communists!"


HEY - You stop trying to confuse people with your 'facts' right now!
 
2013-01-14 10:05:24 PM  

Kanemano: we're sending troops to Timbuktu and back


Me and Tim are going campin in a pop up tent.
 
2013-01-14 10:09:05 PM  

bmeade73: Just Saying.....


Maybe actually google it and have a read...
 
2013-01-14 10:11:25 PM  

ShannonKW: GAT_00: I would think Subby would be happy since this is going after Al-Queda. Communists

That would make Vietnam cool retrospectively. After all, opposing the Commies in Vietnam was as vital to national security as opposing Al Qaida in Outer Absurdia is today. We all know what would have become of our freedoms had the Reds taken over in 'Nam. And, of course, we can be sure that our government today is being as honest with the nation every time they cry "Al Qaida!" in order to justify intervention as they were 50 years ago when the cry was "Communists!"


I think there's a difference between The Taliban: Redux and a bunch of commies trying to change the economic and political leadership of their country. That difference being that the former is an atrocity in itself and the latter is just unfortunate.
 
2013-01-14 10:11:44 PM  
The more you play with a tar baby....
 
rka
2013-01-14 10:13:17 PM  

FlashHarry: well, to be fair, the french sent troops to help liberate what was a third world country from the british about 240 years ago....


If we were sending troops to France you'd have a point.
If we hadn't already assisted France in multiple other wars, you'd have a point.

Besides, it was the French king and aristocracy that helped the American colonists. They lost their heads for the trouble a few years later. The US may have had a continuous form of government since the late 1700's and you could point to some lingering legacy and continuity but the French certainly have not.
 
2013-01-14 10:17:45 PM  

pstudent12: FlashHarry: well, to be fair, the french sent troops to help liberate what was a third world country from the british about 240 years ago....

How is it possible for the USA to be third world, regardless of how poor or rich ?

All US + NATO countries == First world


NATO didn't have the same influence 240 years ago.
 
2013-01-14 10:18:42 PM  
Our Peace Prize winning president can beat up your Peace Prize winning president!
 
2013-01-14 10:21:37 PM  
I doubt the Bamako hookers are as good as those in Saigon.
 
2013-01-14 10:24:46 PM  

rogue49: Hey, at least it's someplace new.
We Americans need another geography lesson.


I'm willing to wager a can of Duff Beer that the average Homer is still unable to locate either Afghanistan or Iraq on a world map. Or spell them correctly.
 
2013-01-14 10:25:20 PM  
France is wishing they had about 10 Reapers and a JSTARS about now.

But hey, budget cutbacks.
 
2013-01-14 10:27:51 PM  

kvinesknows: miss diminutive: Can't they just send Cajuns and kill two birds with one stone?How about we send Canadian Indians?


Cajuns and Quebecois wouldn't be much use. People in Mali speak real French.
 
2013-01-14 10:28:32 PM  

Hector Remarkable: Well I'm no foreign expert, but I believe it should be spelled Molly, as in "Molly was the singer in the band". Maybe that's what they're fighting about.


But you know if we spelled it Molly, all the liberals would just be raving about and there would be more reprimands about political correctness, proper spelling, and geography than you could shake a glowstick at.
 
2013-01-14 10:29:52 PM  

hasty ambush: GAT_00: I would think Subby would be happy since this is going after Al-Queda.

The U.S. is considering a range of options to help, including sending cargo aircrafts to lift more French ground troops into Mali, providing air refueling tankers for French air combat patrols, and offering intelligence gleaned from aerial surveillance.


Oh yeah, that's some real close involvement there.

That is how our involvement in Nam started.

"In November 1951, the US provided the French with an initial supply of 20 C-27s which would build to 116 by war's end in 1954. USAF crews delivered the aircraft, usually flying them in to Nha Trang, Vietnam from Clark AB, Philippines. These would be for tactical airlift. But France lacked the pilots and maintenance crews.

Since the French were short on pilots, the US turned to CAT, which by 1952, was owned by the CIA lock, stock and barrel. CAT pilots began flying a heavy schedule of transport missions for the French. These were combat missions flown by American civilians in every sense of the word. They routinely flew into combat zones, dropped supplies to the French, and dropped French paratroopers. They took their share of hostile fire.

The French also lacked the strategic airlift needed to get their troops form France to Vietnam. In April, the USAF's 62nd Troop Carrier Wing (TCW) flew French forces from France to Indochina aboard C-124 Globemaster IIs."

Link


Yep.

Even without the CIA hyperbole and domino theory nonsense that was prevalent back in 1952...the idea was that we were helping our allies in a bad situation and it couldn't POSSIBLY turn out badly because all we were doing was assisting the French fight an insurgency that had ties to Red China (nevermind that Ho Chi Minh's fighters helped us against the Japanese) and all we were doing was giving them a little support. And some advisors. Well, and some artillery and planes. Oh, and some extra personnel. And some backup to evacuate their wounded later on. And then...

No no, there's nothing that could go wrong in the same way here.
 
2013-01-14 10:32:39 PM  
I guess this will be Obama's payback for slavery?
 
2013-01-14 10:41:05 PM  
I thought it was pretty typical for NATO allies to help each other out?
 
2013-01-14 10:42:32 PM  

sweet-daddy-2: kvinesknows: miss diminutive: Can't they just send Cajuns and kill two birds with one stone?How about we send Canadian Indians?

But who would harvest our maple syrup?


the quebec frenchies of course
 
2013-01-14 10:44:02 PM  

runwiz: The curent situation in Mali with the Islamist forces is in large part blowback from Libya. So much for that intervention. And the Islamist/Al Qaeda threat is just an excuse to intervene in Mali and West Africa. It's really all about natural resources. France relies greatly upon nuclear power and French companies operate uranium mines in Mali and Niger. They can't risk losing control of these deposit. Another major benefactor of this intervention will be China who has invested $billions in this region in order to gain access to the resources. But just like Afghanistan the American public will have their fears of terrorism stoked in order to accede to the desires of imperialistic gain.


Niger Please
 
2013-01-14 10:44:59 PM  

BATMANATEE: kvinesknows: miss diminutive: Can't they just send Cajuns and kill two birds with one stone?How about we send Canadian Indians?

Cajuns and Quebecois wouldn't be much use. People in Mali speak real French.


I want the canadian indians to go and get slaughtered.. not help
 
rka
2013-01-14 10:46:04 PM  

zzrhardy: I thought it was pretty typical for NATO allies to help each other out?


Yeah, if and when the Soviet Union attacks France.

Pick up the Batphone if that happens.
 
2013-01-14 10:56:53 PM  
No Hue, dude!
 
2013-01-14 10:58:23 PM  

pstudent12: How is it possible for the USA to be third world, regardless of how poor or rich ?


Back then, the North American continent was inhabited by savages and rebel terrorists.
 
2013-01-14 10:58:26 PM  

zzrhardy: I thought it was pretty typical for NATO allies to help each other out?


France doesn't belong to NATO anymore. This is however sanctioned by the UN Security Council.
 
2013-01-14 11:01:15 PM  

Mike_1962: France doesn't belong to NATO anymore.


They rejoined in 2009.
 
2013-01-14 11:01:48 PM  

Wayne 985: I think there's a difference between The Taliban: Redux and a bunch of commies trying to change the economic and political leadership of their country. That difference being that the former is an atrocity in itself and the latter is just unfortunate.


That's odd. I think there's a difference between the two also, and the difference is that in point of atrocity Al Qaida doesn't even approach the Communists. Perhaps this is too far in the past to win your appreciation, the millions of people stripped of their possessions and sent trudging into oblivion to die of hunger or exposure or to be worked to death in labor camps. The works of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and their ilk put Bin Ladin's in the shade. Communism embodied a threat incomparably beyond the bumbling, ignorant religious freaks that so frighten the fat, comfortable Westerners of today. Al Qaida commands a primitive rabble with improvised explosives. The Commies together fielded the largest military force the world has seen, including nuclear subs, ICBMs, and the hydrogen bomb.

Yes, there is a difference in the magnitude of the threat. There is no difference in the willingness of certain people to menace the public with it in order to win support for their adventures. Neither is there any difference in the naive credulity of people who accept that such adventures are necessary (or even helpful) in gaining safety from the threat.
 
2013-01-14 11:02:19 PM  

Mike_1962: zzrhardy: I thought it was pretty typical for NATO allies to help each other out?

France doesn't belong to NATO anymore. This is however sanctioned by the UN Security Council.


Oops, sorry. Temporary brain failure. They rejoined a few years ago. My apologies.
 
2013-01-14 11:03:48 PM  

YouPeopleAreCrazy: Mike_1962: France doesn't belong to NATO anymore.

They rejoined in 2009.


Yeah, I remembered just after I clicked add. My bad.
 
2013-01-14 11:03:58 PM  

bmeade73: Just Saying.....


Napolean? Charlemagne? Charles "The Hammer" Martel?
 
2013-01-14 11:05:23 PM  

hdhale: 1. The French were long gone from Indochina when the Americans showed up in South Vietnam.


You have a very odd definition of long.
 
2013-01-14 11:07:50 PM  
Not saying it's going to turn out like Vietnam, just that the last time we went into a third world country in support of the French to defeat a common enemy, it turned out badly.

Last French troops left Vietnam in 1956, the US was putting advisors in, in 1955

"History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce." Here's hoping we're not at farce.

I'm all for neutralizing Al Qaeda, but perhaps, like the Communists, we should start looking into containment instead of trying to nation-build every failed state out there.
 
2013-01-14 11:08:55 PM  
America how is that debt ceiling going?

Please stop stirring up shiat and going broke sending armies into areas where your spy service should be.
 
2013-01-14 11:09:58 PM  
Al Qaeda needs to be stopped at all costs. I would gladly volunteer for front line action except I'm technically disabled from the army for previous war time injuries. Al Qaeda is a threat to all mankind. Even liberals.
 
2013-01-14 11:11:17 PM  

revrendjim: bmeade73: Just Saying.....

Napolean? Charlemagne? Charles "The Hammer" Martel?


Not French
 
2013-01-14 11:17:34 PM  
a57.foxnews.com

Well, if Al Qaeda gets entrenched in the southern tropical areas, it will be a nasty, nasty police action.

Drones over triple canopy? We'll see if we got our money's worth. Otherwise, it's volunteers on the ground and defoliants in the air.

Plus, another landlocked country. Logistics. Fark it.
 
2013-01-14 11:20:48 PM  

Hector Remarkable: Well I'm no foreign expert, but I believe it should be spelled Molly, as in "Molly was the singer in the band". Maybe that's what they're fighting about.


As long as they're just fighting Molly and not flogging her....
 
2013-01-14 11:21:39 PM  
Lets not forget that the Tuareg people were denied their ancestral homelands by a bunch of French beauracrats who didn't bother to really draw lines because they were just districts if French Africa, the same colonial government over them all. Then when they left, they failed to set up an independent Tuareg nation, and that bungling has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuareg_people
 
2013-01-14 11:24:21 PM  

hdhale: 1. The French were long gone from Indochina when the Americans showed up in South Vietnam.
2. WTF is Barry sending troops/planes to Mali when his chimp Panetta is getting ready to make massive cuts to the defense budget?
3. Yeah, yeah al Qaeda :-P


Don't troll me bro...
 
2013-01-14 11:24:32 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: revrendjim: bmeade73: Just Saying.....

Napolean? Charlemagne? Charles "The Hammer" Martel?

Not French


Well, Carlemagne was Frankish and king of the Lombards, but I take your point. At that point in history, there were no French, Germans, etc. It could be argued a number of ways I suppose. And Napolean was Corsican. But that speaks to a great general who did lead the French.
 
2013-01-14 11:26:10 PM  
So does this mean we can go on a holiday in Guinea?
 
2013-01-14 11:26:14 PM  

Tell Me How My Blog Tastes: FlashHarry: well, to be fair, the french sent troops to help liberate what was a third world country from the british about 240 years ago....

The New World actually had a higher standard of living than the Old World @ that point in time.

//Also, at least it isn't Asia.  Getting involved in another land war there should be grounds for involuntary commitment.


content6.flixster.com
As would be going against a Sicilian.
 
2013-01-14 11:27:53 PM  

Indubitably: Hector Remarkable: Well I'm no foreign expert, but I believe it should be spelled Molly, as in "Molly was the singer in the band". Maybe that's what they're fighting about.

To Lolly?


You forgot to get your adverbs.
 
2013-01-14 11:29:44 PM  

Wulfman: I kinda wish we'd fight with a second-world nation once in a while, just to keep us on our toes.


I'm waiting for the invasion of the 4th world.
 
2013-01-14 11:31:27 PM  
Also regarding containment, the Islamists are ferocious and can take over several countries and institute Sharia. But they're an anti-technology, anti-science, anti-woman philosophy. They're crippling their societies as a result. It is the height of irony that a female CIA analyst was the one who found and fixed Bin Laden.

Yes, they might get a nuke from the Russkies. And if they have a country, that's certainly a problem. But if they have a country, their assets might be easier to monitor and destroy. And once they get some ground and assets they're trying to defend, and consolidate their leaders into palaces, they might be easier to decapitate and destroy the weapons.

Reality is that we're our own worst enemy. It's kind of clever how we're printing money (have the US Central Bank (the Federal Reserve) buy US government debt), and it'll work for a while. But if we don't get our finances in order, debt and money printing will not increase the level of wealth in our society. We've taken half of Keynes prescription - we're happy to deficit spend, but we're totally unwilling to pay down the debt in the good years.
 
2013-01-14 11:31:39 PM  
Whoever hatched this Mali plan was flirtin with disaster.
 
2013-01-14 11:32:42 PM  

Mike_1962: Lionel Mandrake: revrendjim: bmeade73: Just Saying.....

Napolean? Charlemagne? Charles "The Hammer" Martel?

Not French

Well, Carlemagne was Frankish and king of the Lombards, but I take your point. At that point in history, there were no French, Germans, etc. It could be argued a number of ways I suppose. And Napolean was Corsican. But that speaks to a great general who did lead the French.


I was being snarky but, yeah, Karl der Große (as others prefer to call him :) and Martel were both Franks and culturally/linguistically Germanic.  Parts of what's now France were inhabited by Gallo-Romans who were speaking something resembling French, but the ones in charge were Germanic (kinda sorta like the English nobility who didn't speak English for a while)

Napoleon was born right arounf the time Corsica became Frech - right before or right after.  off to wiki, I guessspoke something closer to Italian as a Mother Tongue.
 
2013-01-14 11:32:45 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: revrendjim: bmeade73: Just Saying.....

Napolean? Charlemagne? Charles "The Hammer" Martel?

Not French


Okay, how about William of Normandy.
 
2013-01-14 11:34:15 PM  

bmeade73: [0.tqn.com image 425x320]

Just Saying.....


It's funny, I'm reading War and Peace with a couple friends (not my choice for first bookclub pick) and in the early 19th century everyone was bagging on the Germans for being useless at war and how the French were pretty much invincible. Oh how the wheels turn.
 
2013-01-14 11:35:10 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: hdhale: 1. The French were long gone from Indochina when the Americans showed up in South Vietnam.

You have a very odd definition of long.


Long, as in far. They were a long ways away, miles in fact.
 
2013-01-14 11:39:40 PM  

12349876: g4lt: (Heart of Darkness was actually set in the Congo {ie Mali},

The Congo is NOWHERE NEAR Mali. Even using the whole damn river basin as your definition, it only goes as far north as Cameroon and Central African Republic and you're still two countries away from Mali.


Well, to be fair, Africa is a big country. It's easy to get confused.
 
2013-01-14 11:41:06 PM  

revrendjim: Okay, how about William of Normandy.


Clearly a Viking.

Look, France has its heroes too, you just have to dig a bit deeper. Louis XIV? If not Napoleon, then many of his generals were tactically brilliant and quite French. I seem to remember a couple standouts in the Thirty Years' war as well, but my history fails me there. Charles the Bold had the ball rolling for a while, too, before he got cocky.
 
2013-01-14 11:41:21 PM  

fusillade762: It's OK, we're just there as advisers.


See: White Star MAAG Mission, ca. 1950. Eisenhower, FFS.
 
2013-01-14 11:42:31 PM  

netcentric: France is wishing they had about 10 Reapers and a JSTARS about now.

But hey, budget cutbacks.


images.wikia.com

Even one Reaper is pretty expensive.
 
2013-01-14 11:44:24 PM  
Frankie Hollande sure is turning out to be a bust. He can't even keep the French in support of gay marriage! The French!
 
2013-01-14 11:44:37 PM  

Dylan and Eric: International alliances, how do they work?


to the benefit of politicians and industrialists?
 
2013-01-14 11:47:06 PM  
I just want to know how this balances the budget, that's all. That's the most important thing in the entire world, according to the amount of airtime all the mouth breathers in Washington give it.

We need a new debt ceiling every year. I can't remember the last time we weren't in a pointless war, and yes, I attended them right there in the gulf where they could insult me for being female while I was at it.

Bet they raise some new taxes for this.
 
2013-01-14 11:54:36 PM  
Why are the Frogs in Hawaii?

/sorry - read that as "Maui"
 
2013-01-14 11:56:36 PM  

revrendjim: Lionel Mandrake: revrendjim: bmeade73: Just Saying.....

Napolean? Charlemagne? Charles "The Hammer" Martel?

Not French

Okay, how about William of Normandy.


Norman.  Close enough

Big, viking-like guy, but talked like a sissy
 
2013-01-14 11:58:00 PM  
i486.photobucket.com
NOOOOOOOOO!
 
2013-01-15 12:05:29 AM  

PsiChick: Tell Me How My Blog Tastes: FlashHarry: well, to be fair, the french sent troops to help liberate what was a third world country from the british about 240 years ago....

The New World actually had a higher standard of living than the Old World @ that point in time.

//Also, at least it isn't Asia.  Getting involved in another land war there should be grounds for involuntary commitment.

FARKING THIS.

/Getting involved in  any war anywhere should be grounds for involuntary commitment if I had my way...
//Money does not grow on farking trees.


That's why we have to wage war for markets and resources. Unfortunately, we are leveraged to the hilt and have to pay our debts with our hard earned spoils.
 
2013-01-15 12:11:07 AM  
there aren't rules there. That's why we have to mark the rebel's numbers to zero.
 
2013-01-15 12:20:28 AM  

Great Janitor: So, we're going to take our exhausted military and send them to yet another place to fight.

Let the French fight their own war, we have our own to deal with.


Pssst. It's the same war.
 
2013-01-15 12:22:53 AM  

Johnny_Canuck: America how is that debt ceiling going?

Please stop stirring up shiat and going broke sending armies into areas where your spy service should be.


How's that "keep peace with the natives" working for your northerners, or did you give up on caring now that Hockey's back on?
 
2013-01-15 12:28:22 AM  
Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.
 
2013-01-15 12:29:18 AM  
I see the warmongers are out in full force
 
2013-01-15 12:31:11 AM  

Wayne 985: ShannonKW: GAT_00: I would think Subby would be happy since this is going after Al-Queda. Communists

That would make Vietnam cool retrospectively. After all, opposing the Commies in Vietnam was as vital to national security as opposing Al Qaida in Outer Absurdia is today. We all know what would have become of our freedoms had the Reds taken over in 'Nam. And, of course, we can be sure that our government today is being as honest with the nation every time they cry "Al Qaida!" in order to justify intervention as they were 50 years ago when the cry was "Communists!"

I think there's a difference between The Taliban: Redux and a bunch of commies trying to change the economic and political leadership of their country. That difference being that the former is an atrocity in itself and the latter is just unfortunate.


You would be wrong. Changing the ecenomic and political leadership of these countries is exactly what the Islamic extremists are attempting. Religion is just the mechanism.
 
2013-01-15 12:32:04 AM  

Maul555: Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.


and Pick your battles...
 
2013-01-15 12:45:20 AM  
Well we can't have NO wars, now can we? What did you think this was, the 70s?
 
2013-01-15 12:51:06 AM  

Maul555: Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.


Well... sort of. People have a right to organize their societies how they see fit. Some of the stuff they do might seem grotesque or idiotic to us. However, we wouldn't appreciate it if they imposed their will and values on us. And they don't appreciate it when we do the same to them.

Some people insist that it's racist or bigoted to suggest that not every place in the world can be Vermont or Switzerland. On the other hand, if they don't want to be Vermont or Switzerland, and they're not f--king with us, we should let 'em be. F--king with them is very expensive in blood and treasure. Especially if there's no point to it.

We need to look at the lessons we have learned in Iraq and Afghanistan.
 
2013-01-15 12:56:59 AM  

iheartscotch: We do have a democrat in the White House.........

/ I keed, I keed


And most of our wars have been started with a Dem in the WH.
 
2013-01-15 12:58:30 AM  

ferretman: A very important thing everyone has to remember....it's okay when Obama does it.


USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! .......
 
2013-01-15 01:00:33 AM  

12349876: ferretman: A very important thing everyone has to remember....it's okay when Obama does it.

Because Obama does it right. Like HW Bush and Clinton did. Dubya was a massive farkup.


So..... you're OK with invading sovereign states and killing brown people if it's done right?
 
2013-01-15 01:03:18 AM  

Tell Me How My Blog Tastes: FlashHarry: well, to be fair, the french sent troops to help liberate what was a third world country from the british about 240 years ago....

The New World actually had a higher standard of living than the Old World @ that point in time.

//Also, at least it isn't Asia.  Getting involved in another land war there should be grounds for involuntary commitment.


img.photobucket.com
 
2013-01-15 01:05:23 AM  

varmitydog: Hector Remarkable: Maybe that's what they're fighting about.

Oil in north Mali, gold and uranium in southwest Mali. And a backup plan for Halliburton, KBR and that crowd just in case Afghanistan peters out. Yeah, beware the military industrial complex.


Wait wait wait! Why isn't Obama stopping this?
 
2013-01-15 01:07:35 AM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: So..... you're OK with invading sovereign states and killing brown people if it's done right?


Everyone, including the recognized government of the country in question, agreed it was the right thing to do.
Collective legitimization isn't perfect, but it's a good medium between an interventionist free-for-all and totally giving up the offensive to the assholes of the world.
 
2013-01-15 01:10:07 AM  

JungleBoogie: they're not f--king with us, we should let 'em be.


"they're not f--king with us, we should let 'em be."

I wouldn't really put Al Queda in the "not farking with us" camp. If you do, then why are we (and France) in Afghanistan getting killed along with you?
 
2013-01-15 01:13:17 AM  

WTF Indeed: jehovahs witness protection: If W did it, the Fark commies would be calling for his head.
You can all eat shiat and die now.

Awww, someone is upset that the black guy has killed more terrorists than W ever did.


errrr..... was his statement factual? or not?

and don't you have anything other than name calling (implying racism)?
 
rka
2013-01-15 01:17:12 AM  

Johnny_Canuck: America how is that debt ceiling going?

Please stop stirring up shiat and going broke sending armies into areas where your spy service should be.


Well, we tried to depend on the Canadian spy service but that just led us to invade some poor ice floe in the middle of the Arctic. The only we found was a very confused seal, so we clubbed it to death.

Yet another reason against this.

The farking Canadians get confused as to who actually is stirring up shiat and blame it on the US.

New rule, the US only contributes up to, but not exceeding, the absolute dollar amount Canada contributes. And no, I don't give a crap about "per capita".

Let's see who can out cheap the other.
 
2013-01-15 01:17:46 AM  

Seth'n'Spectrum: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: So..... you're OK with invading sovereign states and killing brown people if it's done right?

Everyone, including the recognized government of the country in question, agreed it was the right thing to do.
Collective legitimization isn't perfect, but it's a good medium between an interventionist free-for-all and totally giving up the offensive to the assholes of the world.


You give great nuance!
 
2013-01-15 01:20:50 AM  

zzrhardy: JungleBoogie: they're not f--king with us, we should let 'em be.

"they're not f--king with us, we should let 'em be."

I wouldn't really put Al Queda in the "not farking with us" camp. If you do, then why are we (and France) in Afghanistan getting killed along with you?


Geo-strategic positioning.
 
2013-01-15 01:21:43 AM  

Indubitably: To French


This was my favorite short post of yours.
 
rka
2013-01-15 01:23:51 AM  

zzrhardy: If you do, then why are we (and France) in Afghanistan getting killed along with you?


Obsequience?
 
2013-01-15 01:25:56 AM  

ShannonKW: Wayne 985: I think there's a difference between The Taliban: Redux and a bunch of commies trying to change the economic and political leadership of their country. That difference being that the former is an atrocity in itself and the latter is just unfortunate.

That's odd. I think there's a difference between the two also, and the difference is that in point of atrocity Al Qaida doesn't even approach the Communists. Perhaps this is too far in the past to win your appreciation, the millions of people stripped of their possessions and sent trudging into oblivion to die of hunger or exposure or to be worked to death in labor camps. The works of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and their ilk put Bin Ladin's in the shade. Communism embodied a threat incomparably beyond the bumbling, ignorant religious freaks that so frighten the fat, comfortable Westerners of today. Al Qaida commands a primitive rabble with improvised explosives. The Commies together fielded the largest military force the world has seen, including nuclear subs, ICBMs, and the hydrogen bomb.

Yes, there is a difference in the magnitude of the threat. There is no difference in the willingness of certain people to menace the public with it in order to win support for their adventures. Neither is there any difference in the naive credulity of people who accept that such adventures are necessary (or even helpful) in gaining safety from the threat.


Stalin killed more than Hitler. Which was worth fighting? Vietnam is still a communist country and they're pretty milquetoast. The Taliban, by contrast...

This may not make us safer, but there's a fundamental moral obligation to try and stop people who mutilate and murder girls for going to school and publicly execute people for being gay or Jewish. When they try and form a government, that sh-- has to be nipped in the bud.
 
2013-01-15 01:26:31 AM  

spacelord321: Wayne 985: ShannonKW: GAT_00: I would think Subby would be happy since this is going after Al-Queda. Communists

That would make Vietnam cool retrospectively. After all, opposing the Commies in Vietnam was as vital to national security as opposing Al Qaida in Outer Absurdia is today. We all know what would have become of our freedoms had the Reds taken over in 'Nam. And, of course, we can be sure that our government today is being as honest with the nation every time they cry "Al Qaida!" in order to justify intervention as they were 50 years ago when the cry was "Communists!"

I think there's a difference between The Taliban: Redux and a bunch of commies trying to change the economic and political leadership of their country. That difference being that the former is an atrocity in itself and the latter is just unfortunate.

You would be wrong. Changing the ecenomic and political leadership of these countries is exactly what the Islamic extremists are attempting. Religion is just the mechanism.


That's all they care about. They're fanatics whose primary goal is theocracy. The rest is largely incidental.
 
2013-01-15 01:30:05 AM  

Gyrfalcon: hasty ambush: GAT_00: I would think Subby would be happy since this is going after Al-Queda.

The U.S. is considering a range of options to help, including sending cargo aircrafts to lift more French ground troops into Mali, providing air refueling tankers for French air combat patrols, and offering intelligence gleaned from aerial surveillance.


Oh yeah, that's some real close involvement there.

That is how our involvement in Nam started.

"In November 1951, the US provided the French with an initial supply of 20 C-27s which would build to 116 by war's end in 1954. USAF crews delivered the aircraft, usually flying them in to Nha Trang, Vietnam from Clark AB, Philippines. These would be for tactical airlift. But France lacked the pilots and maintenance crews.

Since the French were short on pilots, the US turned to CAT, which by 1952, was owned by the CIA lock, stock and barrel. CAT pilots began flying a heavy schedule of transport missions for the French. These were combat missions flown by American civilians in every sense of the word. They routinely flew into combat zones, dropped supplies to the French, and dropped French paratroopers. They took their share of hostile fire.

The French also lacked the strategic airlift needed to get their troops form France to Vietnam. In April, the USAF's 62nd Troop Carrier Wing (TCW) flew French forces from France to Indochina aboard C-124 Globemaster IIs."

Link

Yep.

Even without the CIA hyperbole and domino theory nonsense that was prevalent back in 1952...the idea was that we were helping our allies in a bad situation and it couldn't POSSIBLY turn out badly because all we were doing was assisting the French fight an insurgency that had ties to Red China (nevermind that Ho Chi Minh's fighters helped us against the Japanese) and all we were doing was giving them a little support. And some advisors. Well, and some artillery and planes. Oh, and some extra personnel. And some backup to evacuate their wounded later on. And th ...


Sadly, getting sucked into the Vietnam conflict is an example of the slippery slope fallacy.

Dan Carlin Red Scare Podcast

It's hard to see how things would have gone differently. Eisenhower didn't want to screw it up, nor did Kennedy. We have a mythology that we wouldn't have gone to war if he wasn't assassinated, but I don't see how American involvement wouldn't have escalated in any case.
 
2013-01-15 01:35:44 AM  

Wulfman: I kinda wish we'd fight with a second-world nation once in a while, just to keep us on our toes.


Is this a joke? Because if it is, I got it.
 
2013-01-15 01:57:26 AM  
WTF Indeed


jehovahs witness protection: If W did it, the Fark commies would be calling for his head.
You can all eat shiat and die now.

Awww, someone is upset that the black guy has killed more terrorists than W ever did.


Actually Americans are glad PBO followed Bush's policies once he got in.
 
2013-01-15 01:59:39 AM  
"JJ (unregistered) January 14, 2013, 15:44 quote
+9

France can't wait to steal Mali's Gold, for the Zionist New World Order, and
the IMF. Mali is the 3rd largest gold producer in Africa not to mention they
have Uranium Mines to loot too. France can't wait to steal it all. The UK will
be in there soon to steal what the French don't
And you know Zionists run the UK, that's common knowledge they have for
a long time"

http://rt.com/news/france-bombs-mali-intervention-954/comments/

Read the TRUTH! @ RT

/not really
//love the comments there
 
2013-01-15 02:04:21 AM  

Wulfman: I kinda wish we'd fight with a second-world nation once in a while, just to keep us on our toes.


Eh we just do that through proxy now. If we had ejected Romney on the other hand
 
2013-01-15 02:14:46 AM  
Oil in north Mali, gold and uranium in southwest Mali. And a backup plan for Halliburton, KBR and that crowd just in case Afghanistan peters out. Yeah, beware the military industrial complex.
Just Another OC Homeless Guy :
Wait wait wait! Why isn't Obama stopping this?

Why did Obama expand the occupation of Afghanistan and keep Cheney's hand chosen puppet Karzai in power? You could explain it away that he went along with what was going on to get re-elected. But now this. Looks like there isn't much real difference between the political parties when it comes to foreign policy. They're both owned by somebody, and it's not the citizens of the USA, the vast majority of whom are against crapola like this. Especially after Iraq and Afghanistan.
 
2013-01-15 03:03:20 AM  
To contrast with my liberal fellows here, the actions in Mali are absolutely essential.

Deconstruct a bit here: an avowed Socialist government is waging war against a communist-terrorist revolutionary movement.

If the good guys lose here, we all lose what little progress we have made in Africa. We can't lose this one. We just can't.
 
2013-01-15 03:34:47 AM  

jehovahs witness protection: If W did it, the Fark commies would be calling for his head.
You can all eat shiat and die now.


One of the many, many problems with invading Iraq was that Saddam, despite his later financial support for Muslim terrorists in Israel, actually killed more Muslim fundamentalists than all the neocon wetdream hardliners on the planet combined.

/exploit that Shia/Sunni split, get 'em to kill each other
//unless you can point to something useful Islam has done in the last few centuries
 
2013-01-15 03:43:49 AM  

jehovahs witness protection: If W did it, the Fark commies would be calling for his head.
You can all eat shiat and die now.


You really went off the deep end after the election, didn't you?
 
2013-01-15 04:09:45 AM  

Wayne 985: jehovahs witness protection: If W did it, the Fark commies would be calling for his head.
You can all eat shiat and die now.

You really went off the deep end after the election, didn't you?


The Obamabots did. Keep on killing them brown people you used to pretend to care so much about.
 
2013-01-15 04:14:43 AM  

PunGent: jehovahs witness protection: If W did it, the Fark commies would be calling for his head.
You can all eat shiat and die now.

One of the many, many problems with invading Iraq was that Saddam, despite his later financial support for Muslim terrorists in Israel, actually killed more Muslim fundamentalists than all the neocon wetdream hardliners on the planet combined.

/exploit that Shia/Sunni split, get 'em to kill each other
//unless you can point to something useful Islam has done in the last few centuries


Libs just can't get enough killing.
 
2013-01-15 04:53:49 AM  

casual disregard: Deconstruct a bit here: an avowed Socialist government is waging war against a communist-terrorist revolutionary movement.

If the good guys lose here, we all lose what little progress we have made in Africa. We can't lose this one. We just can't.


As far as I know the "revolutionary movement" is just a bunch of radical Islamic fundamentalists.
The communists were more or less sidelined by the Islamists and "put down arms" not in the sense of de-militancy but cutting strategic losses.
And there are no "good guys:". There's imperialist powers using fighting terrorism as a casus belli to intervene and regain control of valuable resources fighting a bunch of deluded farkers killing people on behalf of fairy tails. I suppose a good unintended side effect would be a more secular society in the long run, but even then we're more likely to face radicalization and blowback.
But then again I'm not an "American liberal" (Democrat/conservative) or even a normal liberal. I'm a libertarian socialist.
 
2013-01-15 05:58:25 AM  
FTFA: Earlier Monday, Canada announced its intent to send a C-17 military transport plane to assist with the French campaign. The Canadians were careful to say their role will not include direct involvement in the conflict and that the aircraft is on loan for one week.

That's cute, Canada wants to be involved in foreign affairs. It's such a sweet ickle aid provider, isn't it?
 
2013-01-15 07:13:41 AM  
Why in the f*ck are we spending money on this sh*t?
 
2013-01-15 07:19:03 AM  
It's insane how quickly people on this site can become experts in north African politics and security. Smart bunch here.
 
2013-01-15 07:20:54 AM  
Is there nothing Obama doesn't believe is his business, and no horrible policy of W's he won't expand?
 
2013-01-15 07:53:58 AM  
right on!
babies and civilians to kill!

oil up your rifle and get in there brainwashed morans!
you're a re a patriot!
 
2013-01-15 08:09:28 AM  
Mali was once part of three famed West African empires which controlled trans-Saharan trade in gold, salt, slaves, and other precious commodities.[
 
2013-01-15 08:22:38 AM  

fusillade762: It's OK, we're just there as advisers.


And its a democrat sending the advisors.... whoops, just like last time.
 
2013-01-15 08:25:37 AM  

varmitydog: Oil in north Mali, gold and uranium in southwest Mali. And a backup plan for Halliburton, KBR and that crowd just in case Afghanistan peters out. Yeah, beware the military industrial complex.
Just Another OC Homeless Guy :
Wait wait wait! Why isn't Obama stopping this?

Why did Obama expand the occupation of Afghanistan and keep Cheney's hand chosen puppet Karzai in power? You could explain it away that he went along with what was going on to get re-elected. But now this. Looks like there isn't much real difference between the political parties when it comes to foreign policy. They're both owned by somebody, and it's not the citizens of the USA, the vast majority of whom are against crapola like this. Especially after Iraq and Afghanistan.


Let me guess, the Jews own both parties right?
 
2013-01-15 08:29:18 AM  

ferretman: A very important thing everyone has to remember....it's okay when Obama does it.


And Europe.

Notice it's never a huge moral problem when European nations preemptively strike nations because they might maybe be a threat someday in the future. But America is the debil if we invade after already being attacked.
 
2013-01-15 08:41:50 AM  

Indubitably: This is Faux News...


Just because the agency has a political agenda doesn't mean that there aren't actual journalists there too. Most of what they do is just report the news. Most of what the company gets paid for is another story.
 
2013-01-15 08:53:23 AM  

revrendjim: bmeade73: Just Saying.....

Napolean? Charlemagne? Charles "The Hammer" Martel?


Don't bother with these clowns they all think they are comical geniuses because they regurgitate the same meme over and over again...

/My ignore list is now so long...
 
2013-01-15 09:20:15 AM  

sweet-daddy-2: miss diminutive: Can't they just send Cajuns and kill two birds with one stone?

But who would make our gumbo?


Wouldn't sending Cajuns just be another form of gumbo diplomacy?
 
2013-01-15 09:25:15 AM  

PsiChick: You've seen some of our defense budget, right? Spent on things like a parking lot full of tanks the Army actually said they don't want and nuclear weapons we do not need in the slightest? Money doesn't have to grow on trees. We just need to stop trying to overfund the military.


Have you seen social spending. Only 30% of means tested welfare spending reaches the recipients 70% goes toward overhead (admin and regulating) Not to mention welfare money used in strip joints and to buy booze . Combined means tested welfare spending in 2012 (State+Federal) was almost $1 trillion dollars. MEDICARE (not means tested but should be) admits to loosing between $50 billion to $80 billion a year to waste fraud and abuse. But we must not reform any of those programs because it means starving people or some such nonsense according to some.

Snvieling about defense spending would be more credible if it was done in conjuction with all inefficient government spending.,
 
2013-01-15 09:25:40 AM  

Deep Contact: Mali was once part of three famed West African empires which controlled trans-Saharan trade in gold, salt, slaves, and other precious commodities.[


thanks Cliff
 
2013-01-15 09:28:38 AM  

Wayne 985: spacelord321: Wayne 985: ShannonKW: GAT_00: I would think Subby would be happy since this is going after Al-Queda. Communists

That would make Vietnam cool retrospectively. After all, opposing the Commies in Vietnam was as vital to national security as opposing Al Qaida in Outer Absurdia is today. We all know what would have become of our freedoms had the Reds taken over in 'Nam. And, of course, we can be sure that our government today is being as honest with the nation every time they cry "Al Qaida!" in order to justify intervention as they were 50 years ago when the cry was "Communists!"

I think there's a difference between The Taliban: Redux and a bunch of commies trying to change the economic and political leadership of their country. That difference being that the former is an atrocity in itself and the latter is just unfortunate.

You would be wrong. Changing the ecenomic and political leadership of these countries is exactly what the Islamic extremists are attempting. Religion is just the mechanism.

That's all they care about. They're fanatics whose primary goal is theocracy. The rest is largely incidental.


What is a theocracy, if not a form of economic and political leadership bound together by religion? Do not underestimate your fellow humans by declaring crazy those with motivations you do not understand.
 
2013-01-15 09:39:02 AM  

varmitydog: Oil in north Mali, gold and uranium in southwest Mali. And a backup plan for Halliburton, KBR and that crowd just in case Afghanistan peters out. Yeah, beware the military industrial complex.
Just Another OC Homeless Guy :
Wait wait wait! Why isn't Obama stopping this?

Why did Obama expand the occupation of Afghanistan and keep Cheney's hand chosen puppet Karzai in power? You could explain it away that he went along with what was going on to get re-elected. But now this. Looks like there isn't much real difference between the political parties when it comes to foreign policy. They're both owned by somebody, and it's not the citizens of the USA, the vast majority of whom are against crapola like this. Especially after Iraq and Afghanistan.


Ya think? Gosh, wouldn't the American People see that?

durbanvilleproperties.co.za

Actually, I could have several possible responses to your post. Which ones do you think would be most PC and in keeping with the visual issues faced by this poor little dog? I was gonna suggest "Do you think it might be the Jews?" but I see this has already been covered by one of our meme-spouting, stereotype-loving Fark Liberals.
 
2013-01-15 09:55:55 AM  
See? SEE?

You let Mansa Munsa be a friend early game because, hey, he's no Montezuma! But then all that money starts rolling into his coffers and he keeps there quite-like.. So when you are busy with that frakkin' war with frikkin' Suryvarman suddenly BAM! You hear that horn sound and Mansa's placid kindly face pops up all angry and you are at War. Next thing you know your lightly defended city 'far away' from the fronline is up to its ass with a stack of knights and trebuchets.

Farkin' Malis! We should NEVER have signed an Open Borders with you!
 
2013-01-15 09:57:51 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Why in the f*ck are we spending money on this sh*t?


Because you need to save me. America come protect me. What have I ever done to you?
 
2013-01-15 10:02:09 AM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: varmitydog: Oil in north Mali, gold and uranium in southwest Mali. And a backup plan for Halliburton, KBR and that crowd just in case Afghanistan peters out. Yeah, beware the military industrial complex.
Just Another OC Homeless Guy :
Wait wait wait! Why isn't Obama stopping this?

Why did Obama expand the occupation of Afghanistan and keep Cheney's hand chosen puppet Karzai in power? You could explain it away that he went along with what was going on to get re-elected. But now this. Looks like there isn't much real difference between the political parties when it comes to foreign policy. They're both owned by somebody, and it's not the citizens of the USA, the vast majority of whom are against crapola like this. Especially after Iraq and Afghanistan.

Ya think? Gosh, wouldn't the American People see that?

[durbanvilleproperties.co.za image 250x199]

Actually, I could have several possible responses to your post. Which ones do you think would be most PC and in keeping with the visual issues faced by this poor little dog? I was gonna suggest "Do you think it might be the Jews?" but I see this has already been covered by one of our meme-spouting, stereotype-loving Fark Liberals.


Joe Blowme is a Liberal?
 
2013-01-15 10:07:23 AM  

Koman Coulibaly: Tat'dGreaser: Why in the f*ck are we spending money on this sh*t?

Because you need to save me. America come protect me. What have I ever done to you?


"Ask not what you have done to America, ask what America can make you do for it."
 
2013-01-15 10:12:35 AM  

cynicalbastard: sweet-daddy-2: miss diminutive: Can't they just send Cajuns and kill two birds with one stone?

But who would make our gumbo?

Wouldn't sending Cajuns just be another form of gumbo diplomacy?



media.tumblr.com
 
2013-01-15 10:14:34 AM  

spacelord321: Koman Coulibaly: Tat'dGreaser: Why in the f*ck are we spending money on this sh*t?

Because you need to save me. America come protect me. What have I ever done to you?

"Ask not what you have done to America, ask what America can make you do for it."


OK. OK. Next time I'll swallow the whistle.

/though it was an obvious call.
 
2013-01-15 10:20:24 AM  

spacelord321: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: varmitydog: Oil in north Mali, gold and uranium in southwest Mali. And a backup plan for Halliburton, KBR and that crowd just in case Afghanistan peters out. Yeah, beware the military industrial complex.
Just Another OC Homeless Guy :
Wait wait wait! Why isn't Obama stopping this?

Why did Obama expand the occupation of Afghanistan and keep Cheney's hand chosen puppet Karzai in power? You could explain it away that he went along with what was going on to get re-elected. But now this. Looks like there isn't much real difference between the political parties when it comes to foreign policy. They're both owned by somebody, and it's not the citizens of the USA, the vast majority of whom are against crapola like this. Especially after Iraq and Afghanistan.

Ya think? Gosh, wouldn't the American People see that?

[durbanvilleproperties.co.za image 250x199]

Actually, I could have several possible responses to your post. Which ones do you think would be most PC and in keeping with the visual issues faced by this poor little dog? I was gonna suggest "Do you think it might be the Jews?" but I see this has already been covered by one of our meme-spouting, stereotype-loving Fark Liberals.

Joe Blowme is a Liberal?


I assumed so, since his "Let me guess, the Jews own both parties right?" seemed to be a shot at the normal hate-filled fascist kkkonservative obsession that Teh Jooooz are at fault for everything bad in the world.
 
2013-01-15 10:25:39 AM  

Joe Blowme: fusillade762: It's OK, we're just there as advisers.

And its a democrat sending the advisors.... whoops, just like last time.


I had no problem with going to war in Iraq, Afghanistan or even Vietnam . Killing commies , Islamic facists or brutal dicators is never a bad thing even if not the primary reason. My complaint was not in fighting the wars but how they were fought.

Vietnam we played prevent defense. Did not try to win but only tried not to lose. Our military was forced to fight with one hand behind its back.

He will win who has the military capacity and is not interfered with by the sovereign. - Sun Tzu

Afghanistan - Should have stuck with what worked in 2001.. Use Special Ops and Marines (who have good history with this sort of thing) working with/paying off the various tribes to fight the Taliban. The concept of Afghanistan as a modern nation is stupid. Should have installed the monarchy and paid the various wraloads and tribal leaders to remain loyal (cheaper in the long run). The surge was a stupid idea. Afghanistan is not Iraq on so many levels to apply a similar solution to both speaks of a high degree of miiltary incompetence for my money.

Iraq, Should have gone for partioning inot Kurdish , Shia and Sunni nations. These people cannot play well together.  Or just handed the whole thing over to theTurks who have way of keeping Arabs under control.
 
2013-01-15 10:43:08 AM  
img856.imageshack.us

/Just saying...
 
2013-01-15 10:50:20 AM  

Koman Coulibaly: spacelord321: Koman Coulibaly: Tat'dGreaser: Why in the f*ck are we spending money on this sh*t?

Because you need to save me. America come protect me. What have I ever done to you?

"Ask not what you have done to America, ask what America can make you do for it."

OK. OK. Next time I'll swallow the whistle.

/though it was an obvious call.


I hope you and yours are far removed from the fighting. From one human to another, good luck.

That said, any veiwpoints you wish to share about this would be appreciated by myself, and likely others.
 
2013-01-15 11:42:21 AM  

Seth'n'Spectrum: revrendjim: Okay, how about William of Normandy.

Clearly a Viking.

Look, France has its heroes too, you just have to dig a bit deeper. Louis XIV? If not Napoleon, then many of his generals were tactically brilliant and quite French. I seem to remember a couple standouts in the Thirty Years' war as well, but my history fails me there. Charles the Bold had the ball rolling for a while, too, before he got cocky.


Marshal Ney.

/ American ( & British) ignorance about this stuff is very irritating
 
2013-01-15 11:42:38 AM  

hasty ambush: PsiChick: You've seen some of our defense budget, right? Spent on things like a parking lot full of tanks the Army actually said they don't want and nuclear weapons we do not need in the slightest? Money doesn't have to grow on trees. We just need to stop trying to overfund the military.

Have you seen social spending. Only 30% of means tested welfare spending reaches the recipients 70% goes toward overhead (admin and regulating) Not to mention welfare money used in strip joints and to buy booze . Combined means tested welfare spending in 2012 (State+Federal) was almost $1 trillion dollars. MEDICARE (not means tested but should be) admits to loosing between $50 billion to $80 billion a year to waste fraud and abuse. But we must not reform any of those programs because it means starving people or some such nonsense according to some.

Snvieling about defense spending would be more credible if it was done in conjuction with all inefficient government spending.,


citationneeded.jpeg
 
2013-01-15 12:14:50 PM  

MinkeyMan: [img856.imageshack.us image 610x448]

/Just saying...



It's hard to believe that, if that guy were to open his mouth, French would probably come out.
 
2013-01-15 12:59:42 PM  
The United States is preparing to send troops

Where does it say that, subby?
 
2013-01-15 01:28:43 PM  
Fine, whatever.
If you asshats insist on funding a supremely bloated military, then you damn well better use it.

The only thing worse than paying for a suspersized military we don't need, is paying for one we don't need and isn't doing anything.

So sure, invade whatever. Kill whatever. If you won't let me stop paying for it, then at least give me some value for my money.

\Serious
\\American, so I don't have to care about other countries.
 
2013-01-15 01:44:03 PM  

PsiChick: hasty ambush: PsiChick: You've seen some of our defense budget, right? Spent on things like a parking lot full of tanks the Army actually said they don't want and nuclear weapons we do not need in the slightest? Money doesn't have to grow on trees. We just need to stop trying to overfund the military.

Have you seen social spending. Only 30% of means tested welfare spending reaches the recipients 70% goes toward overhead (admin and regulating) Not to mention welfare money used in strip joints and to buy booze . Combined means tested welfare spending in 2012 (State+Federal) was almost $1 trillion dollars. MEDICARE (not means tested but should be) admits to loosing between $50 billion to $80 billion a year to waste fraud and abuse. But we must not reform any of those programs because it means starving people or some such nonsense according to some.

Snvieling about defense spending would be more credible if it was done in conjuction with all inefficient government spending.,

citationneeded.jpeg



"In FY 2011, federal spending on means-tested welfare came to $717 billion. State contributions into federal programs added another $201 billion, and independent state programs contributed around $9 billion. Total spending from all sources reached $927 billion.

$927 billion amounts to $19,082 for each American defined as "poor" by the Census Bureau. However, since some means-tested assistance goes to individuals who are low-income but not poor, a more meaningful figure is that total means-tested aid equals $9,040 for each lower-income American (i.e., persons in the lowest-income third of the population).

If converted to cash, means-tested welfare spending is more than sufficient to bring the income of every lower-income American to 200 percent of the federal poverty level, roughly $44,000 per year for a family of four. (This calculation combines potential welfare aid with non-welfare income currently received by the poor.)

However, this simple calculation can be misleading because many persons with incomes above the official poverty levels also receive means-tested aid. Although programs vary, most means-tested aid is targeted to persons in the lowest-income third of the population. Thus, a more accurate sense of average total welfare spending per recipient can be obtained if total welfare aid is divided among all persons within this larger group. Dividing total means-tested aid by all persons in the bottom third of the income distribution results in average welfare spending of $9,040 per person in 2011, or around $36,000 for a family of four

79 Assistance Programs

The 79 means-tested programs operated by the federal government provide a wide variety of benefits. The federal welfare state includes:

12 programs providing food aid;
12 programs funding social services;
12 educational assistance programs;
11 housing assistance programs;
10 programs providing cash assistance;
9 vocational training programs;
7 medical assistance programs;
3 energy and utility assistance programs; and,
3 child care and child development programs.

Welfare Spending: The Fastest Growing Component of Government Spending

For the past two decades, means-tested welfare or aid to the poor has been the fastest growing component of government spending, outstripping the combined growth of Medicare and Social Security spending, as well as the growth in education and defense spending. Over the 20-year period between FY 1989 and FY 2008, total means-tested spending increased by 292 percent over the period. The increase in combined Social Security and Medicare spending was 213 percent over the same period.

Means-tested spending on cash, food, and housing increased more rapidly (196 percent) than Social Security (174 percent). The growth in means-tested medical spending (448 percent) exceeded the growth in Medicare (376 percent).[2] The growth in means-tested aid greatly exceeded the growth in government spending on education (143 percent) and defense (126 percent).

Another way of examining spending levels is to look at welfare spending on families with children. In FY 2011, total means-tested spending was $927 billion. About half of this spending ($462 billion) will go to families with children. (Around one-third of this spending went to medical care.)

If the $462 billion in welfare spending were divided equally among the lowest-income one-third of families with children (around 14 million families), the result would be around $33,000 per low-income family with children"

" 70 cents of each dollar budgeted for government assistance goes not to the
poor, but to the members of the welfare bureaucracy and others serving
the poor. Michael Tanner (1996, p. 136 n. 18) cites regional studies
supporting this 70/30 split.

In contrast, administrative and other operating costs in private
charities absorb, on average, only one-third or less of each dollar
donated, leaving the other two-thirds (or more) to be delivered to
recipients. Charity Navigator (www.charitynavigator.org), the
newest of several private sector organizations that rate charities by
various criteria and supply that information to the public on their
web sites, found that, as of 2004, 70 percent of charities they rated
spent at least 75 percent of their budgets on the programs and services
they exist to provide, and 90 percent spent at least 65 percent.
The median administrative expense among all charities in their sample
was only 10.3 percent.

Link

Link
 
2013-01-15 01:57:00 PM  

hasty ambush: PsiChick: hasty ambush: PsiChick: You've seen some of our defense budget, right? Spent on things like a parking lot full of tanks the Army actually said they don't want and nuclear weapons we do not need in the slightest? Money doesn't have to grow on trees. We just need to stop trying to overfund the military.

Have you seen social spending. Only 30% of means tested welfare spending reaches the recipients 70% goes toward overhead (admin and regulating) Not to mention welfare money used in strip joints and to buy booze . Combined means tested welfare spending in 2012 (State+Federal) was almost $1 trillion dollars. MEDICARE (not means tested but should be) admits to loosing between $50 billion to $80 billion a year to waste fraud and abuse. But we must not reform any of those programs because it means starving people or some such nonsense according to some.

Snvieling about defense spending would be more credible if it was done in conjuction with all inefficient government spending.,

citationneeded.jpeg


long-ass quotes ...


The Heritage Foundation is a conservative think-tank, not an actual research group, and their information therefore cannot be counted as up to the standards of a legitimate research group. I linked to the wiki, but I'm sure you can find that out by clicking on their homepage.

I'm not even going to bother explaining why a  self-titled Journal of  Libertarian Studies has the same problem, since it should be damn well self-explanatory.

Perhaps I should have said  validcitationneeded.jpeg.
 
2013-01-15 01:59:17 PM  

ACallForPeace: casual disregard: Deconstruct a bit here: an avowed Socialist government is waging war against a communist-terrorist revolutionary movement.

If the good guys lose here, we all lose what little progress we have made in Africa. We can't lose this one. We just can't.

As far as I know the "revolutionary movement" is just a bunch of radical Islamic fundamentalists.
The communists were more or less sidelined by the Islamists and "put down arms" not in the sense of de-militancy but cutting strategic losses.
And there are no "good guys:". There's imperialist powers using fighting terrorism as a casus belli to intervene and regain control of valuable resources fighting a bunch of deluded farkers killing people on behalf of fairy tails. I suppose a good unintended side effect would be a more secular society in the long run, but even then we're more likely to face radicalization and blowback.
But then again I'm not an "American liberal" (Democrat/conservative) or even a normal liberal. I'm a libertarian socialist.


Awesome. I'm a progressive minarchist. I wonder what the overlap is.
 
2013-01-15 02:00:59 PM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: spacelord321: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: varmitydog: Oil in north Mali, gold and uranium in southwest Mali. And a backup plan for Halliburton, KBR and that crowd just in case Afghanistan peters out. Yeah, beware the military industrial complex.
Just Another OC Homeless Guy :
Wait wait wait! Why isn't Obama stopping this?

Why did Obama expand the occupation of Afghanistan and keep Cheney's hand chosen puppet Karzai in power? You could explain it away that he went along with what was going on to get re-elected. But now this. Looks like there isn't much real difference between the political parties when it comes to foreign policy. They're both owned by somebody, and it's not the citizens of the USA, the vast majority of whom are against crapola like this. Especially after Iraq and Afghanistan.

Ya think? Gosh, wouldn't the American People see that?

[durbanvilleproperties.co.za image 250x199]

Actually, I could have several possible responses to your post. Which ones do you think would be most PC and in keeping with the visual issues faced by this poor little dog? I was gonna suggest "Do you think it might be the Jews?" but I see this has already been covered by one of our meme-spouting, stereotype-loving Fark Liberals.

Joe Blowme is a Liberal?

I assumed so, since his "Let me guess, the Jews own both parties right?" seemed to be a shot at the normal hate-filled fascist kkkonservative obsession that Teh Jooooz are at fault for everything bad in the world.


I know him as a "glass parking lot" kinda guy, not normaly a liberal stance. I'm sure there is more to him than that, but he presents that mentality often.
 
2013-01-15 02:43:56 PM  

MinkeyMan: [img856.imageshack.us image 610x448]

/Just saying...


DIdn't realize The Rock was French.

/though the lack of Emma Watson in the pic made him hard to identify.
 
2013-01-15 03:41:37 PM  

varmitydog: Oil in north Mali, gold and uranium in southwest Mali. And a backup plan for Halliburton, KBR and that crowd just in case Afghanistan peters out. Yeah, beware the military industrial complex.
Just Another OC Homeless Guy :
Wait wait wait! Why isn't Obama stopping this?

Why did Obama expand the occupation of Afghanistan and keep Cheney's hand chosen puppet Karzai in power?


Obama pretty much HAD to keep Kharzai, the same way Nixon pretty much had to keep whatever schmuck Johnson had propped up in 'Nam.

Not saying it was a good call, just that perhaps it was the least-shiatty call possible.

Personally I think the nation-building is a waste of time and money, no matter which party is in charge, so you're right to that extent, certainly.
 
2013-01-15 03:53:06 PM  

spacelord321: Wayne 985: spacelord321: Wayne 985: ShannonKW: GAT_00: I would think Subby would be happy since this is going after Al-Queda. Communists

That would make Vietnam cool retrospectively. After all, opposing the Commies in Vietnam was as vital to national security as opposing Al Qaida in Outer Absurdia is today. We all know what would have become of our freedoms had the Reds taken over in 'Nam. And, of course, we can be sure that our government today is being as honest with the nation every time they cry "Al Qaida!" in order to justify intervention as they were 50 years ago when the cry was "Communists!"

I think there's a difference between The Taliban: Redux and a bunch of commies trying to change the economic and political leadership of their country. That difference being that the former is an atrocity in itself and the latter is just unfortunate.

You would be wrong. Changing the ecenomic and political leadership of these countries is exactly what the Islamic extremists are attempting. Religion is just the mechanism.

That's all they care about. They're fanatics whose primary goal is theocracy. The rest is largely incidental.

What is a theocracy, if not a form of economic and political leadership bound together by religion? Do not underestimate your fellow humans by declaring crazy those with motivations you do not understand.


They're not clinically insane, but their logic is fundamentally absent. Demanding monetary equality is a far cry from believing that a sky bully has commanded you to bury a woman up to her neck in sand and stone her to death for showing too much leg.
 
2013-01-15 04:09:18 PM  

Wayne 985: spacelord321: Wayne 985: spacelord321: Wayne 985: ShannonKW: GAT_00: I would think Subby would be happy since this is going after Al-Queda. Communists

That would make Vietnam cool retrospectively. After all, opposing the Commies in Vietnam was as vital to national security as opposing Al Qaida in Outer Absurdia is today. We all know what would have become of our freedoms had the Reds taken over in 'Nam. And, of course, we can be sure that our government today is being as honest with the nation every time they cry "Al Qaida!" in order to justify intervention as they were 50 years ago when the cry was "Communists!"

I think there's a difference between The Taliban: Redux and a bunch of commies trying to change the economic and political leadership of their country. That difference being that the former is an atrocity in itself and the latter is just unfortunate.

You would be wrong. Changing the ecenomic and political leadership of these countries is exactly what the Islamic extremists are attempting. Religion is just the mechanism.

That's all they care about. They're fanatics whose primary goal is theocracy. The rest is largely incidental.

What is a theocracy, if not a form of economic and political leadership bound together by religion? Do not underestimate your fellow humans by declaring crazy those with motivations you do not understand.

They're not clinically insane, but their logic is fundamentally absent. Demanding monetary equality is a far cry from believing that a sky bully has commanded you to bury a woman up to her neck in sand and stone her to death for showing too much leg.


I think the point is that they haven't killed tens of millions of people in a matter of decades like certain other groups. Killing tens of millions of people for non-compliance to arbitrary rules that change within days is scarier to me than killing a few thousand people for not following rules that are centuries (or admittedly even sometimes only decades) old.
 
2013-01-15 11:36:18 PM  
So much outrage over training some French troops.
 
2013-01-16 12:51:57 AM  

Wangiss: I think the point is that they haven't killed tens of millions of people in a matter of decades like certain other groups. Killing tens of millions of people for non-compliance to arbitrary rules that change within days is scarier to me than killing a few thousand people for not following rules that are centuries (or admittedly even sometimes only decades) old.


The Viet Cong killed "tens of millions of people"? When? The comparison people made was to Vietnam, which was asinine.
 
2013-01-16 10:46:06 AM  

Wayne 985: Wangiss: I think the point is that they haven't killed tens of millions of people in a matter of decades like certain other groups. Killing tens of millions of people for non-compliance to arbitrary rules that change within days is scarier to me than killing a few thousand people for not following rules that are centuries (or admittedly even sometimes only decades) old.

The Viet Cong killed "tens of millions of people"? When? The comparison people made was to Vietnam, which was asinine.


The Viet Cong were puppets for the people who killed tens of millions. You can do this thinking thing; I have faith in you.
 
2013-01-17 12:12:47 PM  

Wangiss: The Viet Cong were puppets for the people who killed tens of millions. You can do this thinking thing; I have faith in you.


Invading Vietnam was stopping Red China and the Soviet Union from starving people? This is the stupidest thing I've seen in recent memory, and I read Fark daily.
 
2013-01-17 12:26:07 PM  

Wayne 985: Wangiss: The Viet Cong were puppets for the people who killed tens of millions. You can do this thinking thing; I have faith in you.

Invading Vietnam was stopping Red China and the Soviet Union from starving people? This is the stupidest thing I've seen in recent memory, and I read Fark daily.


Well, congratulations, because you wrote it, not me.
 
2013-01-17 12:37:09 PM  

Wangiss: Well, congratulations, because you wrote it, not me.


You have no point, friend. You've moved the goal posts and changed the comparison a few times over.
 
2013-01-18 01:52:03 AM  

Wayne 985: Wangiss: Well, congratulations, because you wrote it, not me.

You have no point, friend. You've moved the goal posts and changed the comparison a few times over.


Man! And I was trying to change the world with Fark! I guess I'll have go back to Sunrider.
 
Displayed 231 of 231 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report