-
Restrain the Abusive Administative State
May 22, 2013 | 24 comments
-
Delivering Serbs to the Wolves
May 21, 2013 | 29 comments
-
The Perils of Intervention in Syria
May 7, 2013 | 37 comments
-
America on Welfare
April 25, 2013 | 46 comments
-
Thursday Is Tax Freedom Day
April 17, 2013 | 5 comments
Another Perspective
Obama’s New War in Uganda
How to explain his formation of his own Afrika Korps?
(Page 2 of 2)
Alas, none of these steps have had much effect.
The latest move might still count as mere “aid” for someone else’s intervention if the mission was only intelligence sharing. But the administration is sending combat-ready forces to the front line. The claim that they will only fight in self-defense is meaningless: Americans will be on the spot aiding Ugandan forces taking offensive action. The LRA could not help but see the U.S. as just another enemy.
Ugandan President Museveni understands that Americans are likely to end up in combat. With obvious embarrassment he protested too much: “I cannot accept foreign troops to come and fight for us. We have the capacity to fight our wars.” Museveni added: “Better to call them U.S. personnel, not troops.”
As always, humanitarianism provides an emotional appeal for going to war. But if Uganda is the standard, is there anywhere American forces may not now be sent?
The LRA’s record is appalling, but the organization is a shadow of its former self. Total deaths caused by the guerrillas over the last three years are estimated to run around 2,500 to 3,000. Horrible though that is, such a casualty toll is a rounding error in the conflicts that typically attract outside involvement.
Humanitarian intervention usually is advanced to stop genocide and mass murder. Even then there are persuasive arguments against intervening, but at least the number of cases is few. However, hundreds and thousands of people routinely die in civil strife around the world. Now there no longer is any meaningful threshold before Washington is ready to go to war. Max Fisher of the Atlantic correctly called this deployment “a small but important shift in how, when, and why the U.S. uses military force.”
Moreover, the mission has no obvious endpoint. Administration officials have said the operation is expected to last “months.” Objectives range from capturing Kony to building local “capacity.” Kenneth Roth of Human Rights Watch even has advocated using U.S. forces “to arrest” Kony and other LRA commanders for presentation to the International Criminal Court.
Providing combat advisers also is a predictable precursor to deploying troops, as in Vietnam. Thankfully the LRA is not the Viet Cong, but administration officials told a congressional hearing that the Americans troops will be “equipped for combat.” Any casualties would create pressure for escalation, since, it would be charged, Washington would lose credibility if it backed down. One can imagine the immediate chorus for full-scale war.
Worse, the fact that the Ugandan government has not been able to defeat the LRA suggests that not all is well with Washington’s latest military ally. Gerson endorsed aiding America’s “friends,” but is Museveni really a friend?
The LRA grew out of years of civil war in Uganda: Acholi tribesmen in the north distrusted Museveni, who displaced Idi Amin as dictator in 1979 only to establish his own (admittedly softer) dictatorship. Justine Labeja, who represented the LRA in unsuccessful peace talks five years ago, contended: “You can cut off the head of Kony and kill the commanders, but that won’t help the people of northern Uganda, marginalized over so many years.”
Perhaps the question should not be, why is there violent opposition to the government, but why is there not more violent opposition to the government? President Museveni was reelected earlier this year in a dubious vote; Amnesty International cited reports of “numerous instances of electoral violence and human rights abuses.”
Amnesty added that “law enforcement officials committed human rights violations, including unlawful killings and torture.” Human Rights Watch criticized the illegal prosecution of civilians in military courts. Worse, author Pepe Escobar reported: “Museveni’s government (helped by Washington) has also perpetrated horrendous massacres against civilians,” with at least 20,000 dead.
Even the latest State Department acknowledged: “Serious human rights problems in the country included arbitrary killings; vigilante killings; mob and ethnic violence; torture and abuse of suspects and detainees; harsh prison conditions; official impunity; arbitrary and politically motivated arrest and detention; incommunicado and lengthy pretrial detention; restrictions on the right to a fair trial and on freedom of speech, press, assembly, and association; restrictions on opposition parties; electoral irregularities; official corruption;” and more.
In any case, the LRA mission should not be viewed in isolation. While one deployment of 100 men is but a blip for the Pentagon spending machine, the military budget is made up of a multitude of such interventions, big and small. This is the first combat deployment in Africa since Somalia two decades ago and the first by the U.S. Africa Command. In fact, in defending the current military budget — roughly double the inflation-adjusted level of a decade ago — the administration is warning that Washington might not be able to intervene so often in Africa. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta testified: “[J]ust by virtue of the numbers that we’re dealing with, we will probably have to reduce our presence elsewhere, presence perhaps in Latin America, presence in Africa.”
The president’s new Afrika Korps demonstrates how the “Defense” Department only rarely does defense these days. Most money goes for offense —intervening hither and yon for reasons having nothing to do with protecting America or Americans. With a world filled with various guerrilla bands, separatist factions, and terrorist groups, the potential for more wars is almost infinite.
The world would be a better place if evil was eradicated. But war has proved to be a very poor humanitarian tool. The Obama administration should be pulling U.S. troops out of wars, not intervening in more conflicts.
About the Author
Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. A former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is the author and editor of several books, including The Politics of Plunder: Misgovernment in Washington (Transaction).
Letter to the Editor View all comments (96) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Doug Bandow
More Articles From Another Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/10/31/obamas-new-war-in-uganda
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Richard Baker| 10.31.11 @ 6:50AM
What will probably happen is the "insurgents" will realize there are 100 targets within the borders of Uganda and act accordingly. This sounds so much like Vietnam that I wonder where the future William Westmoreland is presently serving. Our involvement in South Vietnam started with just a few Special Forces acting as trainers for the Army of the Republic of Vietnam(ARVN). I truly hope this doesn't happen but the parallels are striking.
Intelligent Design| 10.31.11 @ 8:21AM
Exactly. Obama has deliberately planted the seed of another quagmire in a place where we have no strategic interest. There is no clear objective, and no exit strategy. It is criminal and immoral to send soldiers to combat under these circumstances. When will the House vote to censure Obama, and hold him in contempt of the American people?
Mike Hawk| 10.31.11 @ 8:26AM
Remote similarities on a few things, no striking parellels. If you think so, you are woefully uninformed about the history of the Vietnam conflict. Uganda is a dumb move with no purpose. It was the home of Idi Amin and vicious tribal conflict and remains so to this day.
JimP| 10.31.11 @ 7:26AM
What ever happened to the lefties' refrain about America having no right to act as the world policeman? Oh yeah, that only applied when we were resisting the lefties' communist brothers overseas. Now it's "bombs away". The megalomaniacal tendencies of lefties, neo-cons, and some Rockefeller Republicans is unnerving. Good column Mr. Bandow!
JimP| 10.31.11 @ 7:55AM
Pardon my incorrect grammar. I should have said "are unnerving" not "is unnerving".
Margie| 10.31.11 @ 10:08AM
I won't pardon you. LOL, just kidding.
But ya know, Jim P., I don't much like you throwing us "Neo-cons" under the bus there, guy, and lumping us in together with the Left.
You guys need to quit with the "Neo-cons are war mongers" stuff. We're the ones who vote against the megalomaniacal Leftists in every single election, and fight with our words and our examples against them by living our own lives, running our own businesses and being as self sufficient as possible apart from government.
Truth be told, the reason you do this is because you are anti-war yourself, am I correct? Possibly of the Ron Paul type of thinking?
That just may place you guys much closer to the Left side of things then us much maligned "Neo-cons", dont'cha think? :^).
JimP| 10.31.11 @ 11:13AM
LOL. No, Margie, I'm not a Ron Paul supporter. Nor am I "anti-war" [Honestly I'm not sure what that means, but I'm pretty sure I'm not anti-war]. In fact I earned my 'pro-war' bona fides in The Great Southeast Asian War Games back in the 60's. My team finished second, but only because the lefties wouldn't let us bomb them back into the stone age. 'Kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out.' has always been my credo, hence my um... disappointment with our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan./sarc
OK, not all neo-cons are war mongers. I stand corrected. Thank you for that clarification.
Best wishes for a great day. I have to go do some work. I'll check in later for further updates.
JimP
JimP| 10.31.11 @ 11:18AM
I should add that I am a believer in the Curtis LeMay School of Diplomacy philosophy.
Margie| 10.31.11 @ 12:22PM
I like your way of thinking, and your response.
"Every soldier thinks something of the moral aspects of what he is doing. But all war is immoral and if you let that bother you, you're not a good soldier."
~Curtis LeMay
Thank you for your excellent service to our country.
I LOVE our fighting men.
Margie| 10.31.11 @ 12:26PM
p.s. Sorry for mistaking you for a Paul-bot.
JimP| 10.31.11 @ 2:10PM
LOL No apology necessary. It will serve as an object lesson for me that anyone would confuse my comments with Ron Paul's foreign policy ideas. I'll take care in the future to be more clear.
Also, thanks for the kind words, Margie. I hope to speak with you again soon.
jr| 10.31.11 @ 5:50PM
Hey JimP, before you get excited read Margie's comments about Catholics.
Skippy| 10.31.11 @ 3:48PM
LeMay!
My hero!
blackwatch| 11.1.11 @ 12:52PM
FYI----"Neo-con" is polite society code for "Jewish."
I doubt that this applies to you...
Occam's Tool| 10.31.11 @ 8:04PM
I'm sorry, but this uber-interventionalist thinks the Uganda intervention is moronic.
A good rule of thumb for knowing when to get involved in a conflict is this: is the enemy worth a nuke if necessary? The Taliban? Yup, by harboring Osama they earned a piece of trinitite. Iraq? By trying to kill George Sr., much less the thousand annoyances he threw our way, Saddam deserved nuking. What was not useful was Nation Building in that worthless country.
Iran? Yup, deserves a 100 megaton punch. But I would put NO boots on the ground and engage in no Nation building. Destroy their nuclear program with plenty of collateral damage---that's sufficient. (You DON'T mess with embassies.)
But Uganda? Why? No flinkin' point. By the way, The Weekly Standard thinks it's a dumbass move as well.
I see your further point, Jim. But really, c'mon. If the most bloodthirsty interventionalist on this site (that would be me, by the way) thinks Uganda is stupid, well, only Lefties support it. It fits everything they like---it wastes money, it serves no US interests, and it gets our kids killed to protect vermin.
blackwatch| 11.1.11 @ 1:02PM
100 mega ton punch? I wouldn't nuke a muslim nation ever--the blowback would be forever--literally.
Much cheaper politcally to send 100,000 AK's with about 1,500,000 rounds and about 5000 IED's to the Green Revolution and let them start a civil war with the mullahs. Then when the mullahs are preoccupied with the battle use some air power ordance against their air force, battle tanks, petroleum reserves, and command and control centers.
Use the "Libyan model" of regime change on steroids.
Bob K.| 10.31.11 @ 7:59AM
There must be OIL in Uganda somewhere.
Mike Hawk| 10.31.11 @ 8:27AM
Yes, but that isn't the issue.
Datou| 10.31.11 @ 10:26AM
Oh yes it is. It has everything to do with Oil and the fact that Soros-backed companies are all over Uganda gaining control of the pipelines that are being built. I forget where I read about this but it was just recently. Too tired of it all to look it up.
SpiralArchitect| 10.31.11 @ 1:41PM
About oil? Sure.
About American interests? Rarely.
Obama is Soros's army. This nation does Soros's bidding upon request.
Under Obama we are a puppet of foreign interests, not even foreign state interests.
America gains nothing but losses plenty with only more at stake.
No one seems willing to hold this treasonous administtration accountable for their wide ranging acts that undermine America & the Constitution.
Appointing czars to lead position (new beurocracies) accountable only to the POTUS & with loyalty to only to him has not been any indication of the direction this nation is heading.
Marxism is a womderful thing for the leaders & as a tool of propaganda.
Al Adab| 10.31.11 @ 4:49PM
Oil? No No, its the coffee and they grow very good stuff in Uganda.
Let's ask though, does the US military exist to attack our enemies or to implement a social justice agenda?
AVCurmudgeon| 11.1.11 @ 12:23AM
The military exists to defend our country at home and our national interests abroad.
When we are compelled to attack it must be for reasons directly and acutely related to our national security. "Humanitarian" missions, or going to war because the other side "are really bad guys" are the worst of all alternatives. The mission is either too amorphous to allow for any clarity (as in Uganda) or a deliberate deception (as in Libya -- and by the way, Doug, it was not just NATO but Obama himself who promoted that deception).
We need a wholesale reconsideration of foreign policy. We need to understand that we cannot go to war at every injustice because injustice never ends. We need to understand that we are under no obligation to lend military support to our allies when there is no actual US security interest at stake. And we need to understand the nature of the real enemy that confronts us.
It would also be of some help if the Nobel Peace Prize Committee would acknowledge that it badly blundered in giving the prize to this consummate warmonger, and ask that he return it.
krb| 10.31.11 @ 3:32PM
http://www.oxfam.org/en/grow/p.....case-study
This article explains much of the interest in Uganda.
Clint| 10.31.11 @ 8:03AM
Dr.Ron Paul,
“Our military is already dangerously extended, and this administration
wants to expand our involvement. When will our bombing in Libya end? Is
President Obama seriously considering military action against Syria? We
are facing $2 trillion dollar deficits, and the American taxpayer cannot
afford any of it.
“Our military’s purpose is to defend our country, not to police the
Middle East."
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here.
Mike Hawk| 10.31.11 @ 8:28AM
Just what does that have to do with Uganda?? Your Rube Paul campaign is getting tiresome. Are you going to support him if he runs third party??
Clint| 10.31.11 @ 9:22AM
Figure It Out.
Oooor, Ask Brit Hume.
You RINO-CINO Faux Conservative Flunkie Stooges Are Gettin' Boring.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here.
Mike Hawk| 10.31.11 @ 9:57AM
IT Figures. Ask a question and get your canned cut and paste Paubot drivel.
Datou| 10.31.11 @ 10:29AM
Meep. Morp. Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul Meep. Morp. Paulbots Rule Tea Partiers Drool Meep. Morp.
Clint| 10.31.11 @ 5:16PM
Tough Shit, Israel Firster Flunlie Stooge, ChickenHawk.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here.
Occam's Tool| 10.31.11 @ 8:07PM
Israel First "Flunkie" Stooge, Clint. Always happy to help the encopretic.
AVCurmudgeon| 11.1.11 @ 12:24AM
Wow. That was all real enlightening.
Occam's Tool| 10.31.11 @ 8:05PM
Uganda is in Africa, not the Middle East. Thanks for playing, Clintster.
Buster Hyman| 10.31.11 @ 8:18AM
Look where Barry prefers deploying US military forces. The Afghanis are heavily into buggering and other perversions, Africa is home to the AIDS virus. With openly homosexual males permitted to serve in our armed forces, he can send them to Uganda where they can catch AIDS easily followed by redeployment to Afghanistan. Eventually our Afghanistan problem will meet its end.
Louis Jenkins| 10.31.11 @ 8:41AM
Yes, but don't forget that Obama is helping out his fellow Muslims. Obama may say he is Christian, but his very actions are a lie. He will bend over backwards, at our expense, to help a Muslim. It's only a hundred now, but just wait.
JimP| 10.31.11 @ 9:01AM
Bar Joke:
A Muslim, an illegal alien and a communist go into a bar.
The bartender says:
"What will you have, Mr. President?"
Margie| 10.31.11 @ 10:10AM
Par excellence!
DRed| 10.31.11 @ 11:18AM
Uh, how does this help the muslims?
Margie| 10.31.11 @ 12:26PM
DRed,
What do you mean, how does this help the Muslims?
DRed| 10.31.11 @ 1:02PM
I mean how does killing or capturing Joseph Kony help the Muslims?
Occam's Tool| 10.31.11 @ 8:06PM
Weakens us by dispersing our military and money to useless places. That's how it helps the Islamics.
DRed| 10.31.11 @ 8:52PM
There are well over a million people on active duty. I don't think sending 100 of them to Africa is going to appreciably weaken our forces against the Islamics.
AVCurmudgeon| 11.1.11 @ 12:26AM
What weakens us against radical Islam is not 100 men sent to Uganda but a President and Secretary of State who applaud the radical Islamic forces when they come to power ("we came, we saw, he died") and dissemble before the American people when it comes to identifying and defining that enemy.
Boar Hunter| 10.31.11 @ 12:11PM
Outstanding sir!
crookedwren| 10.31.11 @ 8:50AM
This article is informative -- but WHY UGANDA? Why, indeed, are we going in there?
Who is this that we're helping?
Melvin| 10.31.11 @ 9:05AM
Obama is no Irwin Rommel.
POST American| 10.31.11 @ 9:39AM
"Understand, Globalism, 'Free Trade'
and EUGENICS are AL:WAYS intertwined.
-----ALWAYS------."
-ALAN WATT
(essential online coverage of the CON)
Interesting, going through some articles
by Globalist of day's yore, the Milner-Rhodes
front man Charles Galton Darwin.
There he is, in 1879, writing in frank, EUGENIST
fashion about how the blacks were 'useless'
regarding the aims of Globalization and
X--speedient efficiency.
He puts forth a long term plan of
're-populating' Africa, eventually, with the
IN--DUST--rious and DILL--IG--ANT
Chinese.
"----That's the trouble with the past
----it isn't even past."
-WILLIAM FAULKNER
(novelist)
-------------------And it isn't. . .
------------HUAC meets NUREMBERG 2012---------
Dan Mathewson| 10.31.11 @ 5:05PM
Wha?
AVCurmudgeon| 11.1.11 @ 12:28AM
Don't ask for an explanation, it will only encourage him.
David W| 10.31.11 @ 9:42AM
So Obama is now supporting another tyrant and dictator. Where is the left to complain about this? Where is Cindy Sheehan to complain about sending our young men to fight useless wars? Why is it only when a Republican does this do the libtards come out of the woodwork?
rongordo | 10.31.11 @ 10:01AM
Considering that the plan was basically ANNOUNCED, and that African rebels have internet capability, I'm guessing that the whole LRA, capture Kony thing is just a facade for something totally different.
Ricco| 10.31.11 @ 10:02AM
"...his own Afrika Korps?"
With an obvious allusion to "The Führer," Mr. Bandow made himself an irrelevant commentator as he finds it necessary to use Reductio ad Hitlerum, thus enacting Godwin's law.
TrueBlue| 10.31.11 @ 1:40PM
Facts > Godwin's Law
They scream and holler when Republican presidents send troops overseas, but are virtually silent when a Democrat does it. Just like when something good happens overseas and a Republican is in office, in the news for half a day, then the story disappears.
JimH| 10.31.11 @ 2:02PM
Should he have referred to Montgomery instead?
JimP| 10.31.11 @ 2:46PM
Lighten up, Ricco. It was a fun and whimsical use of poetic license while at the same time evoking Obama's fascist tendencies. Have you forgotten about Obama's plans for the Obama Youth that would be equally armed and capable with the U.S. military?
Apparently it was to have been an amalgem of Hitler Youth and the Waffen SS updated to fit into America's gangster rap culture and music. No Wagner, but Snoop Dog and Tupak goose stepping their way to the final solution regarding conservative untermenchen./sarc
Enjoyed your Latin though.
DRed| 10.31.11 @ 3:00PM
Derp derp derp.
DRed| 10.31.11 @ 3:02PM
That's Latin for 'you have to be a real moron to believe that'. Look out! The black helicopters are coming to get you!
JimP| 10.31.11 @ 3:06PM
LOL Funny DRed. You must have been doing your R2D2 impressions and missed the reports about Obama Youth at the beginning of his administration.
DRed| 10.31.11 @ 3:18PM
No, I remember them. They were exceptionally stupid at the time, and the fact that anyone still believes them is mind boggling.
JimP| 10.31.11 @ 3:31PM
Looked it up for you R2D2. Click the links if you know how. Observant readers will have noticed that I did not say that this program was in existence/"believed in them" at present. Only that Obama had plans for a "civilian national security force," . Nice attempt to spin your way out of looking like a giant horses @$$, but it's too late. You own it. Before you try to attack someone, and misread their comments, in the future you should get your stuff together & facts straight. I suggest you start by getting therapy for your Star Wars fixation.
Seig Heil. LOL
http://www.americanthinker.com.....secur.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdPSqL9_mfM
JimP| 10.31.11 @ 3:31PM
Here's another link for you, brainiac.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related
DRed| 10.31.11 @ 3:51PM
"And we’re going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy. We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
What a difference an additional sentence makes, no? Obama's not talking about a domestic force analogous to the Hitler Youth. He's talking about using soft power diplomacy to achieve foreign policy objectives. Duh.
JimP| 10.31.11 @ 3:56PM
Nonsense. Nice try though. You must rate high on the administrations useful tool list. I look forward to your next attempt to save face. Au revoir.
JimP| 10.31.11 @ 4:05PM
And yet another link for you, R2.
http://hypsithermal.wordpress......-congress/
DRed| 10.31.11 @ 4:05PM
Nonsense? That's actually what Obama said. Foreign service . . .consulates. . .peace corps . . .diplomacy. Guess what those things have in common? They're not domestic. These are clues that Obama's not talking about a domestic issue.
DRed| 10.31.11 @ 4:09PM
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/.....c-service/
Derp derp derp.
JimP| 10.31.11 @ 4:13PM
ROTFL! Click the links, R2. Especially the last one. You are minimizing Obama's plans. Anyone who does not see the direct relations with Hitler's Germany is either not thorougly knowledgeable on his plans, and doesn't know history, or is a shill for the administration. In your case I think you fall into the ignorant category. That combined with your immature smart@$$ attitude exposed you and now you are trying to walk it back. But like I said, it's too late. Click the links and read, watch and listen. Then maybe you'll wise up.
JimP| 10.31.11 @ 4:13PM
ROTFL! Click the links, R2. Especially the last one. You are minimizing Obama's plans. Anyone who does not see the direct relations with Hitler's Germany is either not thorougly knowledgeable on his plans, and doesn't know history, or is a shill for the administration. In your case I think you fall into the ignorant category. That combined with your immature smart@$$ attitude exposed you and now you are trying to walk it back. But like I said, it's too late. Click the links and read, watch and listen. Then maybe you'll wise up.
DRed| 10.31.11 @ 4:22PM
His non-existent plans? You're right-I don't take those very seriously. I'm not trying to walk anything back. Believing Obama is trying to set up the second coming of the Hitler Youth is a really, really stupid belief that's supported by no evidence. If you want to be taken seriously, don't talk nonsense.
albert constantine jr| 10.31.11 @ 8:34PM
A question, DRed. Do you pronounce your handle as one syllable "Dread", or is it an unpunctuated "Doctor Ed"?
DRed| 10.31.11 @ 9:52PM
ha, I'd never realized anyone would mistake me for a Doctor. I'm certainly not. I pronounce it D Red.
Dr. X| 10.31.11 @ 10:06AM
The Ugandan and Libyan interventions are easily explained (along with the support for overthrowing Mubarak).
U.S. interests in Uganda and Libya are absolutely ZERO. However, the U.N. and "international human rights" busybodies at Harvard and elsewhere in academe are absolutely obsessed with Africa (while they despise U.S. interests). Obama is one of these people and has spent his entire life with them. His mother, who abandoned the U.S. for the Third World and wrote a 1,000 page dissertation on "Peasant Blacksmithing in Indonesia" while abandoning Barry to his white grandparents, is one of them.
Also, Obama is acting on his black racial consciousness. Obama wants Africa to be important to the U.S. simply because he is black and Africans are, in the words of his Attorney General, "my people." You doubt that? Read his book. His while life story is about acquiring a racial consciousness. The subtitle is "A Story of RACE and Inheritance," and it's all about getting in touch with his African-ness.
Kingofthenet| 10.31.11 @ 11:33AM
I give it six months before the President adds Joseph Kony's name to his 'Done' List, I expect MUCH Conservative Tears for this Madman's Death.
Drunken Sailor| 10.31.11 @ 4:53PM
How is Obama going to spin his credit for taking down Joseph Kony when in his own words it will not be our troops engaging?
although the U.S. forces are combat-equipped, they will only be providing information, advice, and assistance to partner nation forces, and they will not themselves engage LRA forces unless necessary for self-defense.”
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/po.....ance-army/
Oh wait a minute, what the hell am I talking about? Obama loves taking the credit for the actual work done by others. My mistake.
Occam's Tool| 10.31.11 @ 8:08PM
Who?
Martin Owens| 10.31.11 @ 11:34AM
On behalf of the late Field Marshall Rommel,
I must take exception to the comparison with the Afrika Korps.
Rommel had a clear objective. Obama ( or whoever's running this sideshow) has no goddamned idea what what he's trying to do. Or at least not one that he'll repeat out loud.
WilliamInWien| 10.31.11 @ 11:48AM
A nephew of mine left the US Army after three years because he trained to be a warrior and wound up trying to keep Haitians from nearly killing each other after he distributed food and water. When will US politicians learn the difference between a functioning nation and a "country" run by tribes that are bent one settling age-old differences? "National Security" has to be most elastic term in the US political vocabulary.
Skippy| 10.31.11 @ 4:28PM
The US military acting as an International Meals-on-Wheels program is beyond insulting to our warriors.
I liked the alleged comment from a Navy Seal when a reporter asked him how many foreign languages he spoke.
"None" was the reply.
"We don't go to talk."
Priceless and proper.
SpiralArchitect| 10.31.11 @ 1:44PM
Sure, the actions in Yemen, dubbed "covert airstrikes", are allegedly covert but these too are military actions in progress.
Sugartown Super| 10.31.11 @ 1:46PM
No matter who sends them into battle, we support our troops; I object to referring to ANY unit of the American armed forces as the "Afrika Korps" - those men served Hitler and his inutterably evil regime.
Al Adab| 10.31.11 @ 4:54PM
True enough Super, but as a military force the competence of the Afrika Corps was superb. The Army of Northern Virgina also served a wrong cause, yet did so brilliantly. It is their elan we recognize albeit this was not the authors purpose in choosing the term. I believe he was simply using geography.
Occam's Tool| 10.31.11 @ 8:10PM
Yeah, Al, but 100 guys? That's no Afrika Korp, unless they have Starship Trooper Marauder Suits.
Tell me we got the suits, Al. I wanna believe.
JimH| 10.31.11 @ 2:04PM
This action provides internationalist brownie points while providing a diversion as the economy continues to tank.
ImissBuckley31| 10.31.11 @ 7:00PM
Blame it on Congress! Their desire to avoid taking responsibility for any foreign policy matters has effectively rendered them useless. Hell, Obama at the very least should of been censured for the Libya intervention.
bluecollarbytes| 10.31.11 @ 8:21PM
Unless we became a colonial power and forced law & culture onto the Africans, we couldn't really change anything. Who wants that?
Obama has his world view and our place in it. He's creating new military 'adventures' that the next Republican president will have to deal with (not walk away from).
My own two bits is that we should be more judicious in the application of military forces. Why do we go into this country when that other one over there is worse? Because we can, seems to be the reason, which is a pretty sad justification.
If Africa was ready for political civility they'd already have it by now. In this it's no different that Afghanistan, and maybe Iraq...
POST American| 10.31.11 @ 11:02PM
----David Rockefeller and Henry Kissinger
'brought in' 'brought up' front man
------------------BARACK OBAMA----------------------
------tick ---tick ---tick ----tick ---tick
-----------HUAC meets NUREMBERG 2012---------
-------------------------tick --tick ---tick ----tick
AVCurmudgeon| 11.1.11 @ 12:46AM
The Uganda imbroglio demonstrates a simple reality about our resident President: he believes that he knows best and that he should always get what he wants. It is of a piece with the "we can't wait" campaign on the "jobs bill". He wants it, and everyone else's job is to give him what he wants.
He has some purpose in mind in sending our troops to Uganda, but as is typical of Obama he will not be frank about that purpose. He will disguise it under claims of "humanitarian purpose"; he will justify it under the rubric of "international community" that only exists because Hillary is running around cobbling it together (as we now know she did with Libya).
And this is the real danger of the man: his messianic sense of self combines with an overwhelming hubris to allow him to undertake almost anything without compunction because, after all, he is Obama and we are not.
Tom Mauel| 11.1.11 @ 12:47AM
You failed to mention the 2 to 6 billion barrels of oil recently discovered at Lake Clark, Uganda.
The pretense of humanitarian military intervention is a construct of the Pentagon in order to gain imperial control of those fresh reserves.
Jones | 11.1.11 @ 8:28PM
Sorry- your construct only works when a Republican is President.
Richard Baker| 11.1.11 @ 5:28AM
Hawk:
So what is striking to me isn't to you, eh? So what, bozo. The parallels are there even if you don't know or see. My Father was one of those early guys.
Sarbo| 11.1.11 @ 12:55PM
" ... the president explained, while U.S. personnel are initially being deployed to Uganda, they are to "provide assistance to regional forces" and could end up in the Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and/or South Sudan as well."
One prominent country not even mentioned by Obama was Kenya, Uganda's neighbor. Read what you will into this, but don't expect knowledgeable people to think that Congo, not Kenya (his father's nation) was not foremost in the President's mind.
And Kenya definitely has US security interests at stake, with Somali Islamists making inroads.
sirbourbon| 11.1.11 @ 8:57PM
Congratulations, neoCons, on another foreign policy failure - Libya. Sharia law and more refugees coming to America to get on our welfare rolls!
The cheerleaders for war under any circumstances, and under any president, no matter how far left he may be, have gotten what they were too dumb or too established brainwashed to expect: the neos helped to create another depotic future enemy of America in both Iraq and Libya.
IRAQ
Iraq is under the influence of Iran's leaders and the few Christians left in Iraq are under constant harrassment from intolerant Muslims we helped to power. The unifored troops may be redploying but the former Blackwater hired guns will remain behind. We aren't supposed to consider these mercenaries as US troops but try to tell that to an Iraqi.
LIBYA
The TNC flies the al-Qaeda's flag over the headquarters of the "rebels'" Transitional National Council. The US-backed "rebels" hunt for TNC supporters to murder them. Civil war is breaking out and Gadhafi's anti-aircraft missles are up for grabs.
That is the mess neos helped to create by not following the advice of George Washington: Keep away from "entangling alliances."
Horrahs were all over the other "conservative" news sites and "conservative" talk about Navy Seals knocking off Osama and US-led NATO forces helping to topple strong man Gadafhi. They used our military as props to shamelessly sell traditionally peaceful America into more interventionism. Any criticism of US interventionism, even in Libya, was snarled at by the Neos like jackals sorrounding an injured prey.
No matter how incongruous the notion that a leftwing socialist on domestic policy would somehow shift to "Conservativism" on his foreign policy, the Neos pushed the fairy tale that when it comes to foreign policy Obama betrays his socialist roots!
Uganda
The neos will spin that unconstitutional intervention as fighting a war on something. Neos should have the guts to call it what it is - fighting a war on reason and sanity.
Deb Spilko | 11.1.11 @ 8:58PM
Okay-- Obama is a warmonger, and shame on you for not being more anti-empire during the Bush years.
But... what is with your drone exhibit malarkey? http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl.....sfeed=true
sirbourbon| 11.2.11 @ 7:52PM
Deb Spilko, are you talking to me?
If so I should like to tell you that I opposed George I and George II's wars.
In the case of G.W. Bush and his thirst for empire abroad and socialism at home (Medicare prescription drug program, His building of bureacracy at home with the department of Homeland Security, NCLB and his total lack of respect for constitutional law) are a few examples in addition to his envirnmentalism and anti-energy policies.
Those Bush years were 12 long years of welfare, warfare and big government filled with kidnappins of elected foreign officials, torture and debt.
Don't blame me I did my part to explain even to Bush fans that Bush was no conservative. I got through to a few.
Tenn Slim| 11.2.11 @ 9:01AM
"The world would be a better place if evil was eradicated. But war has proved to be a very poor humanitarian tool. The Obama administration should be pulling U.S. troops out of wars, not intervening in more conflicts."
The quote is straight out of Code Pink Mission.
The US should hide, stay home, isloate the US presence to, say, North Oakland, and further, it is simply against every Leftist agenda to have a US involvement, period.
The Ethiopian government is now assisting inbuilding a Drone capable Airport, which the author missed.
South African Command was established late last year.
Folks, this action, albeit controversely, will be a card played for Leftist Relection in 2012.
Recc you NET LURK and R/D Williston ND. Another card yet to be played.
The LEFT will not go quietly into the night.
Semper FI
Christie| 11.2.11 @ 5:31PM
Has anyone even heard of the invisible children and how awful kids are being treated in Uganda?
If so, how can you possibly say that Uganda doesn't deserve help?
It amazes me how people don't have a stronger reaction to injustice plaguing this nation. People are dying, being tortured, being raped and living in extreme fear everyday. Also, this war is targeting children, the future of the Uganda and they are not able to gain an education let alone sleep in their own homes due to the risk of being abducted. Being a bystander makes you just as immoral.
The U.S. has the resources to help, thus they should. This is not a question of left or right, it is a question of human rights and every person has the right to live without fear. Obama is so correct in his actions, this genocide has been going on long enough without any international notice and it is time that these extremely oppressed people are offered some help.
realist431| 11.2.11 @ 11:21PM
Sounds just like Vietnam.