Enforcing Worldwide human rights (split from 'No Words' thread)

[Archangel M]

Last time we tried policing this country U.S. service men were humiliated.

I take exception to that. The Blackhawk down incident...a handful of American soldiers in the middle of a city of thousands of enemy manage to hold out and inflict heavy casualties on the enemy, theres nothing "humiliating" about that. Americans have come to expect zero American deaths and never being caught in an ambush or being outnumbered as "defeat". Unless you count not being able to achieve political success as "humiliation", we have not been militarily "defeated" in decades if not centuries. Its the political defeat that we have tasted. Somalia was a lesson in objectives. What we wanted to accomplish couldn't be done with the half assed plan that was put in place, and the leadership decided victory wasn't worth the cost of what was required.

 

[Twin Fist]

gotta chime in on this. The ONLY reason 18, got that? only 18, us servicemen died in somalia was because Clinton REFUSED to let them use armored vehicles.

They were far from humiliated Caver, the fact that there were ONLY 18 casualties is a testiment to how good our military is.

back on topic, there is no excuse for this crap in the 20th century

this is no 'they think differently"

this is plain and simple barbarism

 

[MA-Caver]

Unless you count not being able to achieve political success as "humiliation", we have not been militarily "defeated" in decades if not centuries. Its the political defeat that we have tasted.

Hmm... political defeat... like... North Vietnam?

 

[Archangel M]

Uhhh..yeah.

 

[Twin Fist]

ah, then in that case,t he north vietnemese defeated the american press, not the military

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Bottom line, we feel revulsion, but it's not our country/culture/etc.

We can't force our view on them, and in the case of Somalia, I doubt it will be tried.
Same with a dozen other ****ed up countries that do this kind of ****, or female circumcisions, or other such barbaric things.

Personally, I'd like to send in a regiment, but in the end, unless the people there are willing to stand up and fight, our sacrifice of life on their behalf would be a waste.

 

[Archangel M]

Thats exactly it. Fighting to free people who want to be free is the business we should be in. The world is full of ugly stuff like this, and some cultures want it. Much like LEO's going to domestics, you may even find women in those cultures fighting against you.

Where I draw the line is when people from those cultures come to America and some people preach the "judge not.." line.

Here its "our rules".

 

[MA-Caver]

Let's start with the bottom. In point of fact, if you are referring to the Bush/Clinton intervention , US servicemen were desecrated, not humiliated. Any careful analysis of the battle from a military sense shows our service personnel fought well and bravely, inflicting wildly disproportionate casualties. Had "Defense" Secretary Les Aspin not withheld M-1 tanks from our soldiers, they would likely have routed the Somalis. The only ones deserving of "humiliation" are Lyndon Johnson, Bill Clinton and Bush the Lesser - all of whom never understood that half measures get troops killed and missions failed.

Ok, sending a 32 X 12 X 8 tank weighing well over 65 tons down narrow residential streets wouldn't been a tactical maneuver I'd even try on a video game. Maybe a M-113 or something similar with a light cannon would've done well. Either way... admit it... those guys fought bravely yes for being out-numbered but they still got their butts kicked... by largely untrained militia soldiers, lead by experienced warlord officers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mogadishu_(1993) U.S. President Bill Clinton directed the acting chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral David E. Jeremiah, to stop all actions by U.S. forces against Aidid except those required in self-defense.

That was the failure and that is what killed 18 U.S. Service men. That's what got their butts kicked.

It would never occur to me to allege that the barbaric practice here is common to all Arabs or all Muslims.... I am, franky, extremely disappointed to read such a thing here. These cannibals do not represent mainstream beliefs. In point of fact, you don't see such atrocities or beliefs from the vast majority of these people. No, this most assuredly is not your average Arab, Black or Muslim at work here. We don't need to convert the Middle East to our beliefs and practices because the huge majority do not subscribe to such things. Their beliefs will serve just fine.

I name the countries where such acts are common place but do not accuse the entire populace of said countries of such atrocities. You likewise acknowledge the individuals who are causing these atrocities, knowing it's not the country itself but that they do reside there.

Originally Posted by grydth
Could be we have the same savagery just beneath the surface.... or could be that fire is what it will take to burn this scourge in Somalia off the planet.

Yes, this act so wrong. If one cannot concede that fact, is there any practice at all that's damnable? What if they'd cooked and eaten her afterwards? What if they'd used blades to cut apart all the women in her family - well, cuz they'd been doing it for centuries (as if that makes it better and not worse!).

It's something they've been used to doing for that long... no it doesn't make it right by any means but it's how they do it. It's how they WANT to do it and more importantly... it's how they're GOING to do it regardless of what we say. Remember China/Tibet... did they listen to our protests? How about Russia/Georgia? We cried "foul!", did they care? So why should one of the "most violent and poorest countries in the world" even care about what anyone else says about how they want to do things?"

No invasion needed. Our forces have been engaged periodically in Somalia against these militia groups, who by some amazing coincidence are allied with al Qaeda. There is also a piracy issue, which will also require force to handle. I simply suggest adding a couple of extra fire bombs for the child murderers.

Be sure to throw the children into the confligration because those type of weapons are about as caring as the people you're wanting to firebomb.

The dumbest thing we can even think about doing for Somlia, is what we're trying to do for Iraq. Clean up a mess.

Again, I say... let them handle their own and let their people get sick and tired of being sick and tired of the warlords vying for power and they'll take care of it soon enough themselves.

 

[Twin Fist]

18 US deaths vs nearly 2000 somali dead,

you call that a butt kicking?

sorry caver, but military topics are not your strong suit.

 

[Archangel M]

18 US deaths vs nearly 2000 somali dead,

you call that a butt kicking?

sorry caver, but military topics are not your strong suit.

Seconded.

All in favor?

I agree with you Caver, we will not be able to change Somalia. We could if we were playing by "Ancient Roman Empire" rules, but those days are gone. But "butt kicking??"..please the Somalis should have been able to kill ALL of them in that situation. If you and 3 of your buddies were able to fight your way out of a stadium full of armed outlaw bikers and only ONE of your friends were killed, that would make those of you left some real "bad asses". Thats the equivalent of what happened here.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Simple fact. The fast moving HumVees got shot to hell. Slow moving armor would have been an easy target for RPG's and the anti-armor weaponry the militia had on hand. Tanks are also not appropriate for a hit and run raid. The mission was mostly on schedule, however the shooting down of 2 Black Hawks and attempts to rescue their crews added additional complications and further bogged down what was supposed to be a fast moving operation. Task Force Ranger achieved the mission objectives of capturing specific Aidid lieutenants, but the political fallout from the resultant battle and consequent eventual U.S. withdrawal from Somalia could classify this as a Pyrrhic victory.

Given the current situation in the country, and the mostly unified face of hte toards the US that the Somali now have, any similar type of hit and run raid would face even steeper odds, and committing heavy assault forces against militia defending people who hate us more than they desire to escape their current situation doesn't seem like a good use of US resources.

 

[Archangel M]

In the end though Bob they were rescued by Paki APC's..RPG's not withstanding. There should have been some sort of rescue plan in case the ground convoy needed help. The cobbled together collum that went out took too long to organize.

Piss poor planning...as the saying goes.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

All true. A rescue though runs under different ROE than a hit n run.

 

[Big Don]

Bottom line, we feel revulsion, but it's not our country/culture/etc.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing

We can't force our view on them,

There are some absolutes in the world, as much as a great many people only want to see shades of gray. Cannibalism, Rape, Murder, none of these things are ever, EVER acceptable, and they aren't alone in that distinction. This idea that we can't force our view on others is ignorant at best. We certainly can, and we have done so. Prior to and during the Second World War, the Emperor of Japan was a DEITY(see note 31), part of MacArthur's task was to take that away from the Japanese people. Without question or argument, the growth of the United States changed the lifestyles and views of the Native Americans.

and in the case of Somalia, I doubt it will be tried.
Same with a dozen other ****ed up countries that do this kind of ****, or female circumcisions, or other such barbaric things.

Personally, I'd like to send in a regiment, but in the end, unless the people there are willing to stand up and fight, our sacrifice of life on their behalf would be a waste.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing
We CAN force our views on others, lately, we lack the will to do so.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Don, if anyone wants to raise their own militia and go in and do it themselves, I'm sure they'll find the support somewhere. But if I'm going to ask people to risk their lives for a cause, I'm going to first make sure it's one that'll be appreciated. Plenty of stuff here that needs fixing first, considering you're safer in Baghdad than Chicago.

Shame about the girl, but bombing the piss outta the place won't bring her back. Sending in the Marines to take out a few warlords won't change the general publics acceptance of such things. Taking the place over outright won't do anything more than bog us down in a worse mess than Vietnam and Iraq.

Considering that over 90% of the general population there look at women as little more than property, regularly mutilate them to "keep em docile", and all that, at the risk of being an unfeeling jerk here, I can't find it in me to shed any tears. Let me know when they take their destiny in their own hands and rise up against their overlords and start to fight for the freedoms and rights we have come to believe in.

Until then, I'll shed more tears and feel more for that 12 year old boy who was shot and killed trick or treating on Sunday.

 

[Archangel M]

To do it mandates a return to what war has historically been, up till recently (for the US at least). Brutal and bloody. War is a hammer, not a scalpel. "Operations other than War" (OOTW) are the scalpel. You can force your will if you are able to stomach killing everybody who opposes you and repressing the entire population till things take root. Its all easier to do with a "conquer" mindset vs. a "change their hearts and minds" one.

We did a pretty good job at the "killing everybody who opposes you" part in Iraq. We just lacked the will and political backlash of the clampdown on the general population that should have happened afterward. We hoped to look like liberators vs. conquerors. Since we were labeled the latter anyway, it probably would have been a better strategic decision to have declared martial law.

 

[Archangel M]

All true. A rescue though runs under different ROE than a hit n run.

Absolutely. Rangers and Delta dont typically roll with armored collums. But since the extraction was a convoy, there should have been some sort of plan to deal with what eventually happened. The tanks and APC's should have been manned and running while the op was going down IMO.

http://www.netnomad.com/powell.html

Gen. Montgomery told congressional investigators he needed tanks because of attacks by Somali militias. "I believe that U.S. forces are at risk without it," the Sept. 14, 1993 request stated.

"I would have used it on Oct. 3-4 for the rescue," he said. "If we had it, we would have gotten there faster. We would have taken fewer casualties."

 

[grydth]

Ok, sending a 32 X 12 X 8 tank weighing well over 65 tons down narrow residential streets wouldn't been a tactical maneuver I'd even try on a video game. Maybe a M-113 or something similar with a light cannon would've done well. Either way... admit it... those guys fought bravely yes for being out-numbered but they still got their butts kicked... by largely untrained militia soldiers, lead by experienced warlord officers. That was the failure and that is what killed 18 U.S. Service men. That's what got their butts kicked.

I name the countries where such acts are common place but do not accuse the entire populace of said countries of such atrocities. You likewise acknowledge the individuals who are causing these atrocities, knowing it's not the country itself but that they do reside there.

It's something they've been used to doing for that long... no it doesn't make it right by any means but it's how they do it. It's how they WANT to do it and more importantly... it's how they're GOING to do it regardless of what we say. Remember China/Tibet... did they listen to our protests? How about Russia/Georgia? We cried "foul!", did they care? So why should one of the "most violent and poorest countries in the world" even care about what anyone else says about how they want to do things?"

Be sure to throw the children into the confligration because those type of weapons are about as caring as the people you're wanting to firebomb.

The dumbest thing we can even think about doing for Somlia, is what we're trying to do for Iraq. Clean up a mess.

Again, I say... let them handle their own and let their people get sick and tired of being sick and tired of the warlords vying for power and they'll take care of it soon enough themselves.

What did not happen in the past is no indicator of failure in the future.

By the way, the M-113 was obsolescent in front line US inventory by this time. The brigade I was in transitioned from the M-60/M-113 to the Abrams/ Bradley combination back in the mid 1980s.... said vehicles having huge armor other advantages over their predecessors.

Now, nobody is talking about an invasion and occupation here - not on a D-Day model, not as happened in the 1990's intervention, and not as is occurring in Iraq today.

However the very same organization that murdered this child rape victim also happens to be an organization allied to al-Qaeda that we have already been fighting. It is further apparent that force will be required to eliminate the other international threat in Somalia, that of high seas piracy.

Such enemies are best dealt with by long range air and naval assets and by surgical strikes with smart weapons. My opinion is that, in the course of the above necessary operations, the "justices/holy men" responsible for such child murders also be targeted and sent to the Infernal Regions.

We can't police the entire world. But in this specific instance, we can justifiably remove these child killers from the planet. Or, we can just feel really, really awful for her, somehow justify their actions and go back to our football games and steak dinners.... while far away the stadium gets warmed up for more killings of young girls.

 

[Makalakumu]

How about making human rights issues a paramount deciding factor when it comes to aid and trade?

 

[Archangel M]

How about making human rights issues a paramount deciding factor when it comes to aid and trade?

"If you dont feed your people we will stop sending you aid?"


That will teach em.

A bit of a joke there but that is an issue with that strategy isnt it? Who gets punished worse?