Uganda?

[naughtycakes]

I think Iran has tigers. I don't think they have big monkeys though.

They have little monkeys, though.

I had a Persian friend who was Bahai and he told me about a ritual where the men in the family would kill the monkey with little hammers and eat the brain. I think he was serious.

 

[JohnnySavage]

They have little monkeys, though.

I had a Persian friend who was Bahai and he told me about a ritual where the men in the family would kill the monkey with little hammers and eat the brain. I think he was serious.

The little monkeys are funny.

 

[1sickbastard]

They have little monkeys, though.

I had a Persian friend who was Bahai and he told me about a ritual where the men in the family would kill the monkey with little hammers and eat the brain. I think he was serious.

I've heard of chilled monkey brains being served for dessert. Brings a whole new meaning to the term 'sweetbreads'.

For the record, EEEEEWWWWWWWWW!

 

[pointless]

I think Iran has tigers. I don't think they have big monkeys though.

don't know, but i'm pretty sure they used to have lions.

 

[naughtycakes]

The little monkeys are funny.

Till they bite you...

I've heard of chilled monkey brains being served for dessert. Brings a whole new meaning to the term 'sweetbreads'.

For the record, EEEEEWWWWWWWWW!

Yeah, not too appetizing.

 

[JohnnySavage]

Till they bite you...



...

One time, back in about 1982, I was living in London. I had a buddy... I can't remember what his name was, let's call him Davey. Davey was England's version of a country bumpkin.

Well, Davey and I went into this bar/theater and they had a big cage set up. The deal was that anyone who could stay in the cage with this little monkey for 3 minutes could drink for free all night.

Well... Davey was a big, dull witted guy and he took one look at that little monkey and figured it was an easy bet. So he took off his shirt and climbed in the cage. The crowed gathered round, and the MC asked Davey if he was sure about this. Davey laughed and said, "yup"

The cage was shut and a guy put the monkey in the cage from a little door across the way from Davey.

That monkey looked at Davey, and Davey looked at that monkey, and it was on like donkey kong.

The monkey screamed at Davey and Davey screamed at the monkey. The monkey took off across that cage like its ass was on fire and jumped on Davey's head.

It was tiny fists and elbows like a blur. That damned Davey was screaming like someone was standing on his nuts and the monkey continued to just beat the hell out of him.

After about 30 seconds the guy blew a whistle and that monkey turned loose of Davey's ears and went back to the little door, and got out of the cage.

Davey staggered out his door, sat down at the table with a bloody nose, and cherry red ears, took a drink of his beer, and said, "Damn, that monkey was mean!"

It was quite a hoot.

 

[redheadedtxn]

my daughter has been there twice, to an orphanage to give immunizations. It's incredibly touching to see her pics of it.

 

[Ishmael]

I have nothing against sending in the limited number of troops he did -- it sounds like they're just there to help out with some training and tech support -- but I'd hate for this to turn out the way it did in Somalia.

Concerned in the Congo,
Ellie

It will, eventually.

What is going on is essentially tribal warfare. The group that 'we' are after is a quasi-Christian sect led by a pretty certifiable mad man. The government is primarily Muslim now and also led by a certifiable mad man, just less so than the other mad man. Regardless of the religious affiliations, it's still primarily tribal warfare. The religious aspect merely tries to overlay an element of respectability (or philosophical reason) on the whole party.

The ostensible reason for our involvement is 'human rights.' And Kony, the quasi-Christian sect leader, is responsible for a host of atrocities, then again, so is the government.

Of course none of this picking one mad man over another has anything to do with the fact that substantial oil reserves have been discovered there and we might want some governmental stability, no matter that the government is not all that squeaky clean, in order to do some good old American business.

Look for an increase of solicitations in the employment section of "Soldier of Fortune."

Ishmael

 

[eyer]

Can someone help me out realizing how a Lord's Resistance Army affects our national security?

I'll wait

It doesn't. There is no regional power coalessing in any part of Africa.

Nation-building & so-called humanitarian Wars are an even worse use of National blood and treasure than wars with a geopolitical-based strategic rational.

Mr. Obama wrote [to Congress] that he had decided to act because it was “in the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/15/w...rica-to-help-fight-lords-resistance-army.html

Then why - and this is critical - must an intelligent man intentionally lie?

 

[1sickbastard]

Then why - and this is critical - must an intelligent man intentionally lie?

Just a guess-Ulterior Motives? People would rather believe a lie than deal with the truth?

Hell, I don't know. I'm not all that intelligent. Put the question to someone who is.

 

[trysail]

What is with this "save the world" shit ?


Half the reason a lot of people voted for Geo. W. Bush was 'cuz the guy promised there wouldn't be any "nation building."


Goddamn Lyndon Johnson didn't even know where the fuck Vietnam was ( and, god knows, that sleazoid didn't have a fuckin' clue about their history ).


People are of the mistaken opinion that our meddling in the Middle East has something to do with petroleum. It doesn't ( or, at least, it shouldn't ). The owners of petroleum cannot afford not to sell it. What're they gonna do with the stuff, eat it ?

War is God's way of teaching geography to Americans.
-Ambrose Beirce​

 

[1sickbastard]

What is with this "save the world" shit ?


Half the reason a lot of people voted for Geo. W. Bush was 'cuz the guy promised there wouldn't be any "nation building."


Goddamn Lyndon Johnson didn't even know where the fuck Vietnam was ( and, god knows, that sleazoid didn't have a fuckin' clue about their history ).


People are of the mistaken opinion that our meddling in the Middle East has something to do with petroleum. It doesn't ( or, at least, it shouldn't ). The owners of petroleum cannot afford not to sell it. What're they gonna do with the stuff, eat it ?

War is God's way of teaching geography to Americans.
-Ambrose Beirce​

Bush43 certainly lived up to his promise. Didn't build a single nation, did he. Wrecked a couple though.
No, the ME intervention wasn't about oil, nor WMD or Saddam being an evil tyrant, but the simple bumper sticker cry trumps nearly every other form of expression in US politics today, doesn't it?

 

[stickwork]

FYI, tigers are not native to Africa, but to SE Asia and India, as far north as Siberia and as far west as the Black and Caspian seas.

What about lions and bears?

 

[eyer]

Again...

Mr. Obama wrote [to Congress] that he had decided to act because it was “in the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/15/wo...ance-army.html

...why does the President intentionally lie?

 

[stickwork]

Again...



...why does the President intentionally lie?

Mistaken lies are hard to come by at that level.

 

[1sickbastard]

Again...



...why does the President intentionally lie?

For the same reason that Bush43 said Iraq was about WMD's;
The complexities of geopolitics don't make for good rallying points or good war cries.

But in this instance, The POTUS is going to have a hard time making a case for sending anybody or anything to Uganda, regardless of the reasons, official or actual.

 

[eyer]

For the same reason that Bush43 said Iraq was about WMD's;

What "same reason" was that?

 

[trysail]

Bush43 certainly lived up to his promise. Didn't build a single nation, did he. Wrecked a couple though.
No, the ME intervention wasn't about oil, nor WMD or Saddam being an evil tyrant, but the simple bumper sticker cry trumps nearly every other form of expression in US politics today, doesn't it?

"Elie Wiesel, writer, survivor of Auschwitz and Nobel Peace Prize winner, came to see [ Condeleeza ] Rice on February 27 [ 2003 ] and the president dropped by her office. Rice moved to the couch so the president could take the chair closest to Wiesel.

Wiesel told the president that Iraq was a terrorist state and that the moral imperative was for intervention. If the West had intervened in Europe in 1938, he said, World War II and the Holocaust could have been prevented. 'It's a moral issue. In the name of morality how can we not intervene?...'

... In the face of such evils, neutrality is impossible, Wiesel said."


-Bob Woodward
Plan of Attack
New York, New York 2004.

 

[1sickbastard]

What "same reason" was that?

With my flawed understanding;

Iraq wasn't about Iraq. It was about scaring the shit out of our ertwhile ally, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
The thinking of the Saudi's, at the time, was that America wouldn't invade Iraq unless it had the time and space to build up it's forces to a similar state of the '91 war. That the US was able to go in with a relatively light force (not to disparage the forces that went in, but it was nothing like the force concentration of '91) and overrun Iraq in such a short time threw their (the Saudi's) calculations into disarray. It wasn't lang afterwards that Saudi internal security forces began to root out Al-Queda members, supporters, financers, etc, in ernest.

In addition, Iraq is the stragegic ground of the Gulf. Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria, Jordan, Turkey, all major players in the region share a border with Iraq. Not only did the invasion put the fear of God (or the USA) into the Saudi gov't, but it had a similar effect on the rest of the region.

Unfortunately, the relatively light forces also gave the Iranians (and to a lesser extent, the Syrians) a perfect opportunity to expand their own influence in the region, as the invasion force was inadequate and unprepared to function as an occupation force able to keep the population under control.

The Iranians made superb use of the opportunity. The Syrians, not so much.

 

[1sickbastard]

"Elie Wiesel, writer, survivor of Auschwitz and Nobel Peace Prize winner, came to see [ Condeleeza ] Rice on February 27 [ 2003 ] and the president dropped by her office. Rice moved to the couch so the president could take the chair closest to Wiesel.

Wiesel told the president that Iraq was a terrorist state and that the moral imperative was for intervention. If the West had intervened in Europe in 1938, he said, World War II and the Holocaust could have been prevented. 'It's a moral issue. In the name of morality how can we not intervene?...'

... In the face of such evils, neutrality is impossible, Wiesel said."


-Bob Woodward
Plan of Attack
New York, New York 2004.

And yet, American would never have gone to war against Germany if Hitler hadn't been dumb enough to delcare war on the US (Which he did after the attack on Pearl Harbor).

 

[stickwork]

And yet, American would never have gone to war against Germany if Hitler hadn't been dumb enough to delcare war on the US (Which he did after the attack on Pearl Harbor).

?............

 

[1sickbastard]

?............

American was firmly against getting involved in another European War at the time. Too many remembered the carnage and eventual disappointment of WW1.

After the Japanese Empire attacked Pearl, War in the Pacific was a defacto state (per FDR's war speech, "A state of War has existed..."). Congess did give him the delcaration he asked for, but only against the Japanese Empire.

But America did NOT declare war against the 3rd Reich until after Hitler declared war on the US.
Had Hilter not done so, it is unlikely the US would have done more than it already had-providing supplies, war materiel, and armed escorts for trans-Atlantic convoys to the Brits and Russians.

 

[stickwork]

American was firmly against getting involved in another European War at the time. Too many remembered the carnage and eventual disappointment of WW1.

After the Japanese Empire attacked Pearl, War in the Pacific was a defacto state (per FDR's war speech, "A state of War has existed..."). Congess did give him the delcaration he asked for, but only against the Japanese Empire.

But America did NOT declare war against the 3rd Reich until after Hitler declared war on the US.
Had Hilter not done so, it is unlikely the US would have done more than it already had-providing supplies, war materiel, and armed escorts for trans-Atlantic convoys to the Brits and Russians.

So, the U.S. would have just waited until...

 

[sethp]

It's the right thing to do. We're just saving lives and stopping people from getting raped. Why? Because we can and nobody else want's to. That guys a criminal and needs to be brought to justice.

Good for Obama.

 

[1sickbastard]

So, the U.S. would have just waited until...

In all likelyhood, yes.

The Brits were safe from invasion. Committing national blood and treasure to help them keep their empire intact wasn't a selling point to the country. Neither was bailing out the communist USSR. By the winter of '41, the Nazi's had stalled at the gates of Moscow and Lenningrad. The Brits had Rommel stalemated in N Africa. US factories were making a buttload of money selling supplies to the allies without risking anything. Lend-lease was already in place, so the US had aquired critical naval bases in Greenland and the Azores.


There was far more outcry and outrage at the Japanese treatment of Chinese civilians at the time than there was about the Nazi's treatment of the Jews, Slavs, Romanii & communists in Europe