posted on July 14, 2003 06:07:27 AM new
The US should not send troops to Liberia, we should let that "mighty" organization, the U.N. do their job in this case and let them send troops...
posted on July 14, 2003 07:50:47 AM new
12 The UN aren't going to bale America out of the mess your powers that be have caused.
I rekon, that's why they are letting the invaders sufer so much in Iraq.
They aren't going to HELP America there if they can help it either.
It's the only way to get the message back to the voting public. 'ouch'.
“We owe the U.N. nothing.”
That sentiment has been made abundantly clear to the UN.
posted on July 14, 2003 02:29:09 PM new
Aust - how is the US resposible for problems with waring Liberian warlords?
~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work.
- Thomas Edison
posted on July 14, 2003 05:40:35 PM new
twelvepole
So, where are the cheaper gasoline prices you've been bragging are coming? Haven't seen them here and I don't expect to either. We're paying too high a price for cheap oil, don't you think?
posted on July 14, 2003 06:45:13 PM new
Neo.
I know nothing of Liberia, about all I know is that it is widely perceived that the motive for the US presence there is to give ‘evidence/impression’ that US policy is not driven by ‘self-interest’.
They tell me that there is otherwise nothing ’in it’ for US being there.
The UN is not going to step in and support US just because the US leadership want’s to ‘buy some good will’.
My comment really applied to Iraq.
!2pole said; let the “U.N. do their job”.
The UN is not there to help US policy at the cost of the rest of the world.
Let the UN build its centre in another country, at least that way US ‘Intelligence’ can’t ‘bug the phones’ as easily.
US leadership have done their best to undermine the UN.
Lots of vetos.
Unilateral’ action taken.
Refuse to ‘try’ US alleged war criminals.
In general, contemptuous of the opinions of other nations.
I guess the US aren’t the only ones that TRY to just go along doing as they please, difference is, they are more so in a position where they can.
And so it is not necessarily in the UN’s interest to do as US pleases or requests.
The UN is not there to expend it’s recourse’s to hep along America’s P.R. or any other US ‘agenda’.
posted on July 14, 2003 06:53:43 PM new
Liberia is a nation which was founded by returned freed slaves. There are historical ties between Liberia and the United States.
posted on July 14, 2003 06:54:33 PM new
12, I think the US needs to send troops so it can ‘buy’ some good will, it’s in US interests.
So off you go, on your own.
Australian leaders may send some help from our ‘30,000 Strong’ armed forces.
Many of those are behind a desk.
Sure thing 12, ‘piss on them’.
That is the US sentiment that the rest of us are growing to love.
posted on July 14, 2003 07:14:38 PM new
I said ‘alleged’ because I was trying to be nice.
US does not have citizens that engage in criminal activity
Is that what you are trying to say 12.???
I though your honest feeling is just “piss on them”
12pole “we only helped set that country up and then have them turn against us”
davebraun “There are historical ties between Liberia and the United States.
Why not give back the Statue of Liberty to the nation that gave it to you.
The nation with which you also have ‘historical ties’.
The nation that helped US become liberated from the British Colonialists; France.
NOOO, don’t even allow them the ‘great’ honour of having a potato chip named after them.
Did France ‘help’ out of benevolence or to undermine their colonialist competitor (Britain).
Is the driving force behind US action to ‘help’ Iraq or Liberia. If that is the result I’m sure that’s not the intention.
posted on July 14, 2003 07:27:30 PM new
US NEEDS to $pend more on 'Good Will' to soak up much of the 'piss' which people like 12 have been dishing out.
The name 'America' has taken on a bigger stink than than it already has, and that's only fact.
Short of attacks on America, only American Citizens can bring about a change, from within.
It seems that only 'expense' 'pain' and 'suffering' will drive them to action.
I think that is what the UN feels and so they will let you suffer all you like.
posted on July 14, 2003 07:58:47 PM new"The name 'America' has taken on a bigger stink than than it already has, and that's only fact."
"Short of attacks on America, only American Citizens can bring about a change, from within."
"It seems that only 'expense' 'pain' and 'suffering' will drive them to action." "I think that is what the UN feels and so they will let you suffer all you like."
The U.S. was doing just fine before Bush came along. I think Americans are reeling from the fact that he's ruined their country right before their eyes, based on deceit and lies in only 3 years. It's not the Americans fault, it's HIS. He faked his way into power and he's f##ked everything he's layed his hands on so far.
posted on July 14, 2003 08:19:30 PM new
I accept that much of the –ve view of America in the past has been based on what we in Australia call the ‘tall poppy syndrome’.
‘Tall poppy syndrome’ is generally perceived as dislike of or criticism of someone doing better than you which is generally based on jealousy. (excuse my spelling it out, I don’t know if this is a universally understood concept)
Unfortunately today, I don’t think this ‘anti-American’ sentiment is as weakly grounded or ill founded.
Australia’s image is also giving off a stink, primarily, I think, because of our leaders' treatment of refuges, & Iraq.
I think both our leaders are extreme racists, and there is too much of it in our cultures.
Eg. In most countries around the world, if you cant speak the language, you’re either a tourist or an immigrant. Too often in our countries the answer is simple, ‘you’re an idiot’.
This will breed more hatred of US & us.
Face, it we stink.
You can be, as proud as you like, you still stink.
posted on July 14, 2003 08:29:57 PM new
I cant understand why you still think the war was about oil. It was about colonization. Iran,North Koria,Syria,China,etc are next. Every 3rd world country is on the USes hit list except SAUDI ARABIA.
For some reason the biggest supporters of Al Quida are our friends. Go figure..
[ edited by bigcitycollectables on Jul 14, 2003 08:31 PM ]
posted on July 14, 2003 08:34:31 PM new
Aust - I have been a little curious about LIberia myself and today stubered on this from the Council on Foreign Relations website.... very interesting and informative
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Why is the United States considering sending troops to Liberia?
Experts point to a combination of factors: heightened Bush administration concern for “failed” states in Africa and elsewhere that could evolve into terrorist havens; the recent indictment of Liberian President Charles Taylor for war crimes by an international court; a brutal civil war; and the special relationship between the United States and Liberia, which was founded in 1847 by freed American slaves.
Has the United States decided to send troops?
No, but it has sent a team of U.S. military experts to Liberia—a west African nation of 3.2 million people—to investigate the conditions peacekeepers could face there.
What support has the United States offered?
President Bush, currently on a five-day tour of Africa, has pledged to help Liberia by assisting West African nations and other organizations willing to enforce a fragile ceasefire currently in place and pave the way for democratic elections. He has repeatedly called on Taylor to resign. U.S. officials say Bush will await the advice of his military team before deciding whether to send troops.
What are the factors affecting Bush’s decision?
Some experts say that the Bush administration will send forces only if it is sure that they will be going into a “permissive” or non-threatening environment. Given the instability in Liberia, this may not be possible. Others say that even a small American force, sent to assist a larger deployment of thousands of African peacekeepers, could easily pacify the disorganized rebels and government troops. Doing so, these experts say, would be a low-cost way to show U.S. commitment to peace in a war-torn nation.
What would the peacekeepers’ mission be?
It depends on conditions in Liberia. If there is a functioning ceasefire in place, experts say the peacekeepers would likely enforce the truce between government and rebel forces, support the creation of a civilian interim government, and help prepare the country for free and fair elections. Another critical part of the mission could be demobilizing the thousands of child soldiers. The mission would likely last a year or two, said Princeton Lyman, a former ambassador to South Africa and Nigeria and a senior fellow in Africa policy studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.
What if the ceasefire does not hold?
In that case, experts say, the international forces could end up fighting rebel or government forces. This would be a much more controversial and dangerous role that the United States might not be willing to take on, given the ongoing fighting in Iraq and the memory of the deaths of 18 U.S. peacekeepers in Somalia in 1993.
How large a U.S. force would be sent?
Some experts say the most likely scenario is that a relatively small contingent of U.S. troops—2,000 or fewer—will lead a 6,000-strong international force primarily composed of soldiers from West African nations. This is the basic outline of a plan being worked out by ECOWAS—the Economic Community of West African States—a 15-nation group that includes Liberia and has taken the lead in recent ceasefire talks to end the Liberian war. On July 9, an ECOWAS spokesman said that 1,000 West African peacekeepers would arrive in Liberia within two weeks.
What could the U.S. role in the mission be?
If there is one, it would likely be limited, many experts say. It could consist of providing combat-ready troops to enforce a truce for a few months at the beginning of an intervention, and would likely give way to a U.N.-led mission. Another plan being floated calls for a force of 800 U.S. troops to provide logistical and technical support to West African forces.
Would U.S. peacekeepers be welcomed in Liberia?
It’s not clear. Experts say most Liberians would support U.S. intervention—the U.S. military team in Monrovia was met by cheering crowds. It also seems clear that the main rebel groups would welcome help in deposing Taylor. Less clear is how the rebels and security forces loyal to Taylor would react to peacekeepers that remain in post-Taylor Liberia. Experts say there may be continued fighting even after peacekeepers arrive, which would require a robust response from international forces.
What is Taylor’s view?
Taylor has said he wants peacekeepers to help keep his country from descending further into chaos. He has said he is willing to step down as president, but only after peacekeepers arrive. Washington has indicated it wants him to step down first. Taylor has also said that he might resume his political career after stability is restored.
Who are the combatants in the civil war?
Arrayed against Taylor’s security forces are fighters from two main rebel groups, Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy (LURD) and the Movement for Democracy in Liberia (MODEL). The rebels have reached the outskirts of the capital, Monrovia, and are believed in all to hold 60 percent of the country. The main goal of both groups is to depose Taylor, who was elected president in 1997.
What’s the status of the fighting?
Both sides agreed to a nominal ceasefire in mid-June, but sporadic clashes continue. Taylor’s government is near collapse, and tens of thousands of refugees have fled the fighting in the countryside and sought refuge in Monrovia, creating conditions for a humanitarian crisis.
[b]How long has the Liberian war been going on?[b/]
The current fighting began in 2000, when loosely organized LURD rebels invaded Liberia from a base in neighboring Guinea. But there has been on-and-off war in Liberia since 1980, when Master Sergeant Samuel K. Doe took power in a coup d’etat. The worst fighting in Liberia’s recent history took place between 1989 and 1997, when Taylor led a charge to topple Doe’s government and take the capital. According to the U.S. government, more than 200,000 people died and 1 million were displaced.
Are there any “good guys” in the Liberian war?
Most experts say no. All sides at one time or another have targeted civilians, used child soldiers, and engaged in other acts that are widely considered war crimes. This is why many experts say that a transitional Liberian government should be headed not by any armed group, but by a civilian leader from one of the country’s 17 registered political parties. A presidential election is scheduled in October, but many observers believe it will not be fairly conducted if Taylor is still in power.
What will happen to Taylor if he resigns?
One possibility is that he will be forced to stand trial for his alleged role in providing arms and money to rebel groups in Sierra Leone that killed, raped, kidnapped, or maimed tens of thousands of civilians in a 10-year-civil war. A second possibility is that Taylor could go to nearby Nigeria, which has offered him amnesty from the Sierra Leone charges under terms that have not been publicly disclosed. Many human rights activists stress the importance of arresting Taylor and putting him on trial; some diplomats, however, say that amnesty for Taylor should be considered if it will bring peace to Liberia.
What’s Taylor’s background?
Taylor was born in 1948, the third of 15 children of parents descended from the freed American slaves who established Liberia. His father sent him to the United States, and he earned an economics degree at Bentley College in Massachusetts. He returned to Liberia to work with Doe’s government, but fled to the United States after being accused of embezzling $900,000. He was captured in Massachusetts by U.S. authorities, and escaped from prison in 1985 while awaiting extradition to Liberia.
How did Taylor come to power?
In 1989, Taylor invaded Liberia with a few thousand rebels from neighboring Ivory Coast and began a brutal campaign to take control of the Liberian government. Doe was murdered by Taylor’s rivals in 1990, but Taylor continued fighting until 1997, when internationally organized elections were held. Taylor won overwhelmingly, and was recognized as Liberia’s president by the United States and other nations despite allegations that the elections took place in an atmosphere of intimidation.
Is Liberia a democracy?
Liberia has an elected legislature and functioning judiciary, as well as multiple political parties, but in real terms is run more like an authoritarian state, according to the U.S. State Department. “President Taylor used intimidation, patronage, and corruption to maintain power,” according to the State Department’s 2002 human rights country report. The U.N. Security Council maintains sanctions on Liberia that ban it from importing arms, prevent it from selling diamonds and timber, and limit the travel of Taylor and other leaders.
What’s the recent history of U.S.-Liberian relations?
The United States had a close relationship with Liberia throughout the Cold War, and gave hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to Doe’s government despite its brutal methods of rule, said Princeton Lyman, a senior fellow in Africa Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. The United States did not intervene after Doe’s murder in 1990. It also tolerated what in retrospect was Taylor’s “sham election” in 1997, said Chester A. Crocker, a former assistant secretary of State for Africa in the Reagan administration. “It was rather shameful,” Crocker said.
Are other countries involved in Liberia’s current war?
Yes. Experts say LURD receives support from elements in Guinea, and MODEL is believed to receive assistance from forces in the Ivory Coast. In part, experts say, this is because Taylor supports rebel groups in those countries, as part of a deadly practice in West Africa in which governments attempt to use and destabilize each other. It is for this reason that some experts believe getting Taylor to step down could lead not only to peace in Liberia, but also to regional peace.
~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work.
- Thomas Edison
posted on July 15, 2003 07:51:27 AM new
You know neomania, I tried to read it but got bored ½ way through.
Hours later I tried again.
I think that; if this was submitted as an academic work; it wouldn’t get a ‘C’.
What on earth is the
Council_on_Foreign_Relations ?
I didn’t need to read further than just a page and a link or 2 but I did
“What is the United Nations’ role in Iraq?
It is a big player on the humanitarian scene—its agencies have, for example, distributed 1 million tons of food and millions of liters of fresh water to Iraqis since April. The United Nations does not have any political authority in the U.S.-led coalition government in Iraq. But Sergio Vieira de Mello, the top U.N. official in Iraq, is discreetly carving out a political role for the United Nations by involving it in a widening range of Iraqi affairs, experts say. “
REPEAT
“does not have any political authority in the U.S.-led coalition government in Iraq”
Meanwhile back at the Screw The Geneva Convention ranch ‘Guatanamo (spell?) Bay’ not subject to any laws on the planet.
Authority!!!!!!!!!!!!! Yeh Riiiiight.
At risk of sounding like I’m asking for a cut of the action!
Why Wasn’t the UN There When The Iraqi Booty Was Being Split UP????????
And now it’s “discreetly carving out a political role”????????
Let us recall that the persons responsible for these claims and other ‘most informative’ information on their site, (neo-cons as they prefer to be called) have not proven to be clean credible witnesses in events leading up to and including the splitting of the booty, as I choose to call it.
neomania quoted” Has the United States decided to send troops?
No, but it has sent a team of U.S. military experts to Liberia
“
So I guess that means ‘not nasty boy grunts, but clean clerks like Oliver North; good men that can be trusted to do what they are told!’.
And may I add, even if it’s in the face of fire from his own citizens or own courts with many rewards to come when the smoke and blood dies down.
12, While you are rolling on the floor laughing your ass off, remember that the US economy is suffering because of all the actions of the neo-cons, but from their own personal, stand their pockets have been doing better than ever.
The saying ’not to question why, but to do or die.’ Is a rule only for the military.
In the ‘civilised’ world, we prefer to question why!!!!!, isn’t that part of your declaration of independence.
