Question on Terrorism

[bolverk]

Jun 5, 2008 16:43:56 GMT -5 @bolverk said:

So basically you are saying that Muammar al-Gaddafi renounced terrorism because Bush asked him too? saunterelle, you are truly amazing. As far as I can tell, and I have been following current events since I joined the military in 1978, only one nation has renounced terrorism, and it was Libya. And no, they did not do it because Bush asked them too.

And yes, the Iraqi people will be better off much sooner if we do not abandon them now that they are no longer living in fear of a genocidal despot by the name of Saddam Hussein. If we do not abandon them, they will surely become a nation much like Turkey, secular. In the long run, it will provide them with a better country, where all can prosper, if we do not abandon them, as Barack Hussein Obama suggests in all his speeches.

And, in this post I named the specific leader who renounce terrorism. Since both countries begin with an L, and are in the same region, it was an easy mistake to make. But, your side of the isle likes to use such mistakes to attack someone's intelligence. Usually because you can not make an intelligent argument of your own.

[saunterelle]

"Actually, this has been proven to be incorrect. In Africa, and I will have to verify which nation it was, a private army was hired to protect the country from militants. It was working very well, with civilian deaths falling and safety increasing, until the UN got involved and said it was illegal to hire a private army. The country has since fallen into chaos."

I wasn't talking about the U.N. I was talking about a coalition of countries pooling their military resources to handle a humanitarian problem like the one in Darfur. The UN doesn't have any authority to decide how its members use their militaries.

[harpman1]

Exactly.

Pop quiz: name all the armed conflicts solved by the UN without the US carrying virtually the entire load since 1949?

[bolverk]

Still not required. And the same applies. The U.N. causes protracted conflicts, not shortens them, as does a coalition of the willing. And, once an action is considered illegal by the U.N. then they have authority to intervene. And, they usually cause the biggest blunders when the blue helmets arrive.

[bolverk]

It was Sierra Leone. Saved by a private military, hired to prevent RUF militants from amputating the arms, legs or lips from civilians in a bid to take over. Remember, Sierra Leone was run by a former UN executive who was democratically elected.

The UN did not get involved until the Privately hired military had things returning to normal. That action caused a resurgence in violence by the RUF, and the country had to weather many storms of violence to get back to the point that the private army got them too.

Fortunately for Sierra Leone, things are finally back to normal again, and they are enjoying a democratically elected government.