Support NeoGAF

[Cloudy]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...96e5c0-da1c-11e4-b3f2-607bd612aeac_story.html

President Obama has cited the battle against al-Shabab militants in Somalia as a model of success for his relatively low-investment, light-footprint approach to counterterrorism.

By some measures, it has paid dividends. U.S. drones have killed several of the Islamist group’s leaders, including two top planners in just the past month, a senior administration official said Friday. African Union troops backed by the United States have forced al-Shabab fighters to flee huge swaths of territory.

But this week’s massacre of 148 people at Garissa University College, the deadliest terrorist attack on Kenyan soil in two decades, demonstrates the limits of the administration’s approach and the difficulty of producing lasting victories over resilient enemies.

Only last fall, Obama was touting his counterterrorism strategy in the region as one that “we have successfully pursued in Yemen and Somalia for years.”

The collapse of the American-backed government in Yemen forced the Pentagon last month to pull its Special Operations forces from the country. The chaos in Yemen and the absence of an effective partner has essentially halted U.S. counterterrorism operations against al-Qaeda’s affiliate there.

The White House’s approach reflects Obama’s firm belief that outside military forces can’t compel change in troubled parts of the world. “For a society to function long term, the people themselves have to make decisions about how they are going to live together,” Obama said last August in an interview with the New York Times.

The United States can offer advice, aid and support, “but we can’t do it for them,” Obama added.

That philosophy has guided Obama’s relatively light-footprint approach in places as diverse as Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan and Somalia.

Instead of deploying large formations of American ground troops, as he did in Afghanistan during the first years of his presidency, Obama has increasingly relied on small Special Operations teams to advise local troops and conduct targeted raids. In Somalia, the United States maintains a small military coordination cell that advises Somali and African Union forces, which have received about $1 billion in training, equipment and assistance since 2007.

White House officials said such an assessment overstates the group’s strength. “This is a group that in its heyday attracted lots of foreigners, to include Westerners,” said the senior administration official. The group’s ability to rally foreign recruits has been badly damaged, the official said.

“We saw the attack in Garissa earlier this week,” he said. “But we haven’t seen the group . . . become the threat that many people feared. It is still our assessment that al-Shabab doesn’t pose a direct threat to the U.S. and the West.”

So let me get this straight:

- The administration going after terrorists in Somalia isn't enough because terrorists attacked people in Kenya?

- The administration going after terrorists in Yemen isn't enough because the government they were working with has collapsed due to a civil war?

I personally don't see how killing terrorists in Somalia or Yemen protects Americans (there is little to no US presence in those countries) but it is scary to see that all that isn't going far enough for a lot of people. How is such a ridiculous article able to make the front page of a major US newspaper unless this is a widely-shared belief? Is the United States now responsible for stopping terrorism in other countries?

I

 

[beanoboy7]

Not our problem. Let's the people of those countries figure it out. I'm tired of the USA being the worlds police.

 

[Jinkies]

Not our problem. Let's the people of those countries figure it out. I'm tired of the USA being the worlds police.

Like it or not, global stability affects a world power like the USA. Not having a part in these affairs creates a counterproductive ripple effect.

 

[PeskyToaster]

Not our problem. Let's the people of those countries figure it out. I'm tired of the USA being the worlds police.

Yeah but when it goes to shit everyone cries for US involvement and then when we do it's imperialism.

 

[Cloudy]

Like it or not, global stability affects a world power like the USA. Not having a part in these affairs creates a counterproductive ripple effect.

Many would argue that playing a part is what creates the counterproductive ripple effect. I see no reason why terrorism in Somalia or Kenya should be US responsibilities

 

[Klossen]

Yeah but when it goes to shit everyone cries for US involvement and then when we do it's imperialism.

I often ponder what would've happened to Iraq and Kurdistan had US not intervened with aerial bombardment. They were just kilometers away from Erbil, the capital of Kurdistan and home to millions. Would the EU have acted? Who would've? If anything, ISIS has proven that there are dangers in this world far more lethal than "American imperialism".

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

I do blame the US. Drone strikes create a feeling of insecurity in the region. How is one expected to build infrastructure or create a future for themselves in a region when it is getting bombed everyday? It's completely idiotic, not to mention inhumane. If the US were truly interested in peace, it would invest in humanitarian aid and peacekeeping forces.

*Speaking of Yemen btw.

 

[Siegcram]

Well, they did declare a "war on terror".

 

[esms]

Not our problem. Let's the people of those countries figure it out. I'm tired of the USA being the worlds police.

It's undoubtedly a simplistic viewpoint, but this is closer to where I stand.

 

[entremet]

According to The Constitution the President can only make treaties and sign bills into laws.

Obviously the power of the executive branch has grown, especially under FDR, but it's funny how people just want an old school King and not a President.

This is why Washington is my favorite, as he rejected the creation of an American monarchy.

 

[TheJLC]

'Cause we are the World Police.

 

[Taco_Human]

Cause the US only cares about countries with their own interest in mind.

Why do you think nothing has been done about Mexico?

 

[MisterFalcon]

I do blame the US. Drone strikes create a feeling of insecurity in the region. How is one expected to build infrastructure or create a future for themselves in a region when it is getting bombed everyday? It's completely idiotic, not to mention inhumane. If the US were truly interested in peace, it would invest in humanitarian aid and peacekeeping forces.

*Speaking of Yemen btw.

People are getting bombed everyday but not by drones. There have been three drone strikes this year in Yemen.

 

[entremet]

Cause the US only cares about countries with their own interest in mind.

Why do you think nothing has been done about Mexico?

We actually have. The Mexican government has rejected our help. You really think the US doesn't care about Mexico? But we can't just march in Mexico without the country's permission.

 

[ISOM]

Cause the US only cares about countries with their own interest in mind.

Why do you think nothing has been done about Mexico?

Um what do you expect the US to do about Mexico? Invade or use drone strikes unilaterally? It's not like Mexico is some country without any adequate power structure. That always seems ridiculous to me when people say something so blanketed like that.

 

[Blackage]

Manifest Destiny, didn't die in the 19th century, still a thing in the 21st

 

[SlickShoesRUCrazy]

The US military isn't a scalpel, it's a broadsword.

Haven't yet figured out why people always want the US getting involved in every conflict(other than lobbyists and the politicians they control for profit of course).

 

[Mii]

The Yemen one is particularly bullshit as the civil war is totally disconnected from the terrorists. The media has no idea how to discuss the conflict in Yemen because many parties are involved.

Al Shabab is more of a concern the US in general could be more actively involved in but has chosen not to for various reasons.

 

[Angelus Errare]

Not our problem. Let's the people of those countries figure it out. I'm tired of the USA being the worlds police.

I disagree. I have no problem with America helping in partnership. But vast majority of times it ends up being America dominating and taking over and telling the other country how it should and will be.

Most countries are tired of that particular brand of helping because it does fuck all for the people there.

 

[Timeaisis]

I swear, sometimes I feel the media wants King Obama and the World Police, but only when they agree and it's convenient.

 

[ISOM]

Regarding the OP's point, yeah the media in the US projects American power to be something greater than it's supposed to be. Like the US is supposed to be able to control all conflicts it involves itself in when that is not realistically possible. It's very annoying to read such opinions because they are often warmongering.

 

[jelly]

Sure, more countries should sort themselves out but you just don't know who is pulling the strings behond the scenes. US and others have interfered with other countries governments etc. and left a disaster in their wake or the opposite of what they hoped. The ripples caused can't soley be blamed on the countries all the time but I think it's better to support good policies and let them deal with it now unless it's unavoidable.

 

[shadowsdarknes]

Um what do you expect the US to do about Mexico? Invade or use drone strikes unilaterally? It's not like Mexico is some country without any adequate power structure. That always seems ridiculous to me when people say something so blanketed like that.

They are our third biggest trade partner.
And they border us. A stable Mexico is directly in our interest for security and immigration purposes, too.

People be crazy.

 

[SlickShoesRUCrazy]

They are our third biggest trade partner.
And they border us. A stable Mexico is directly in our interest for security and immigration purposes, too.

People be crazy.

Can't do anything if they don't want help.

Doesn't help the DEA and shit is paid off by the cartels too.

 

[TheJLC]

They are our third biggest trade partner.
And they border us. A stable Mexico is directly in our interest for security and immigration purposes, too.

People be crazy.

Yup, but we can't force them to accept our help. The US instead gives them money because they won't accept direct assistance from the US.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

People are getting bombed everyday but not by drones. There have been three drone strikes this year in Yemen.

That's still a lot, one a month. There have been possibly ~200 drone strikes in Yemen since Obama became president, with over 1,000 people killed.

 

[dextran]

The Yemen one is particularly bullshit as the civil war is totally disconnected from the terrorists. The media has no idea how to discuss the conflict in Yemen because many parties are involved.

Al Shabab is more of a concern the US in general could be more actively involved in but has chosen not to for various reasons.

I thought the mastermind of the Kenya mall attack was drone strike killed. That's al shabab right? Or am I mixing them up?

 

[ISOM]

They are our third biggest trade partner.
And they border us. A stable Mexico is directly in our interest for security and immigration purposes, too.

People be crazy.

As I indicated in my post you can't force yourself into a sovereign state ESPECIALLY one that is right on your border. If they want the US's help they will ask for it.

 

[Orbis Tabula]

I don't think they really believe it. But acting like they do makes it easy to attack people they don't like.

 

[MisterFalcon]

That's still a lot, one a month. There have been possibly ~200 drone strikes in Yemen since Obama became president, with over 1,000 people killed.

And somehow this is worse then the civil war raging in Yemen and the dozens of Arab airstrikes every day ?

 

[Cloudy]

I don't think they really believe it. But acting like they do makes it easy to attack people they don't like.

That is not an opinion article though. It's a straight news report

 

[SomedayTheFire]

Not our problem. Let's the people of those countries figure it out. I'm tired of the USA being the worlds police.

The US is pretty much the reason why Somalia is currently the way it is. Their meddling is keeping Somalia is choas.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

And somehow this is worse then the civil war raging in Yemen and the dozens of Arab airstrikes every day ?

I don't remember saying that.

 

[Ahasverus]

I for one welcome American imperialism, you guys have lots of problems but you know how to make things work.

 

[Wilsongt]

You mean King Obama can't do everything? I was under the impression everything that goes wrong in the world is his fault. Surely he can take care of things like this.

 

[unholyrevenger72]

According to The Constitution the President can only make treaties and sign bills into laws.

Obviously the power of the executive branch has grown, especially under FDR, but it's funny how people just want an old school King and not a President.

This is why Washington is my favorite, as he rejected the creation of an American monarchy.

And only took the Nomination of president because the senate agreed to no political parties

 

[unholyrevenger72]

We actually have. The Mexican government has rejected our help. You really think the US doesn't care about Mexico? But we can't just march in Mexico without the country's permission.

That's because of how corrupt the government is. What if we poled the people of mexico directly?

 

[Barajas_201]

You guys are seriously misinformed, not only does the U.S. provide weapons and money to both the Mexican government and the cartels, but U.S. Marshals operate in Mexico using Mexican marines uniforms which is obviously against the Mexican constitution, or any constitution for that matter, because it violates our sovereignty. The Mexican government is a U.S. puppet state, that's why officially both governments say the U.S. does not intervene just to save face, but in reality they do. The U.S. War on Drugs has been a genocide for Mexico, with more then 121 thousands deaths so far and with no end to it any time soon, also by the fact that the Mexican government is an authoritarian regime with two massacres last year, Tlatlaya and Ayotzinapa, that are still gone unpunished not to mention it is also corrupt. This is all within the status quo, The U.S. weapon industries is banking it here, selling weapons to both "good" and bad guys, this year alone 1,300 million dollars in weapons sold to the Mexican government and there is also evidence of U.S. backing cartels. So please don't spread misinformation because the U.S. intervenes in Mexico already, bringing in drones and troops like if we are Iraq isn't gonna change anything and the only ones that will suffer are the Mexcian people. If you guys would really want to help, stop the War on Drugs and legalize everything, its the only way to stop all this bloodshed that only we are paying.

 

[Owzers]

Why does Obama let bad things happen to good people?

 

[ISOM]

You guys are seriously misinformed, not only does the U.S. provide weapons and money to both the Mexican government and the cartels, but U.S. Marshals operate in Mexico using Mexican marines uniforms which is obviously against the Mexican constitution, or any constitution for that matter, because it violates our sovereignty. The Mexican government is a U.S. puppet state, that's why officially both governments say the U.S. does not intervene just to safe face, but in reality they do. The U.S. War on Drugs has been a genocide for Mexico, with more then 121 thousands deaths so far and with no end to it any time soon, also by the fact that the Mexican government is an authoritarian regime with two massacres last year, Tlatlaya and Ayotzinapa, that are still gone unpunished not to mention it is also corrupt. This is all within the status quo, The U.S. weapon industries is banking it here, selling weapons to both "good" and bad guys, this year alone 1,300 million dollars in weapons sold to the Mexican government and there is also evidence of U.S. backing cartels. So please don't spread misinformation because the U.S. intervenes in Mexico already, bringing in drones and troops like if we are Iraq isn't gonna change anything and the only ones that will suffer are the Mexcian people. If you guys would really want to help, stop the War on Drugs and legalize everything, its the only way to stop all this bloodshed that only we are paying.

All drugs will never be legalized, the most will be marijuana. Mexico needs to take care of it's corrupt government first and foremost if it wants to deal with drug gangs seeming to operate with impunity in many areas of mexico.

 

[Two Words]

Not our problem. Let's the people of those countries figure it out. I'm tired of the USA being the worlds police.

Maybe you should stop talking in terms of countries and start talking in terms of people.

 

[M1ch04c4n0]

We actually have. The Mexican government has rejected our help. You really think the US doesn't care about Mexico? But we can't just march in Mexico without the country's permission.

The US didn't seem to had issues with that in the past, sending weapons and tactical help to 'like-minded' groups to prevent the spread of "communism and socialism" and later to ensure the "war on drugs" didn't stop.

 

[cooljeanius]

Intervening in Kenya makes sense at least, seeing as Obama is going to be visiting there in a few months... Kenya is pretty pro-U.S., so they probably even requested intervention as part of this most recent round of diplomacy. If helping Kenya keep the peace within their country is part of the regular business of maintaining regular diplomatic relations with them, then I'd say the U.S. should be happy to oblige them.

 

[Nabbis]

The US didn't seem to had issues with that in the past, sending weapons and tactical help to 'like-minded' groups to prevent the spread of "communism and socialism" and later to ensure the "war on drugs" didn't stop.

That's basically my problem with this whole thing. US has no long lasting policy aside from the fact that someone needs to get bombed. Well, not only that but the problems that the past administration has caused is usually solved in a very stupid manner.

 

[pa22word]

Honestly I'm genuinely tired of it all and almost wish we'd just leave most of the world to its own volition at this point. I like Obama's strat in Yemen and Somalia, and in fact wouldn't mind it being even lighter with heavily reduced drone strikes. Just provide intel and arms support with friendly regimes and fuck everyone else. In fact, I honestly think we should cut NATO spending to the min required instead of the massively disproportionate amount we sink into it now and let europe deal with europe's affairs and instead spend that money at home on domestic problems, and if the europeans decide to blow themselves up again at the expense of every other being on the planet...well, they've done it twice already so if they do it a third time I say let their asses deal with the havoc they wrought on themselves.

I know most of what I just said is totally unfeasible, both economically and otherwise, but a lot of the time I read some of the shit on here and in the news that can't help but make me wonder why in the fuck we, on the other side of the Atlantic, should bear the brunt of all the world's problems. I mean we have people starving and dying on the streets here and we spend billions on defense spending in europe while there are numerous states who don't even bother paying the minimum req'd nato spending.

 

[TarNaru33]

The US didn't seem to had issues with that in the past, sending weapons and tactical help to 'like-minded' groups to prevent the spread of "communism and socialism" and later to ensure the "war on drugs" didn't stop.

Are we going way back to the 1950s when U.S was combating Soviet Union? Sorry, but that is different from Mexico's situation. That was 2 nations trying their best to spread/stop the spread of each other's influence around the world.

We are talking about U.S intervention, which much of the intervention going on right now when it comes to terrorism is welcomed (for whatever reason it may be) by said countries.

You guys are seriously misinformed, not only does the U.S. provide weapons and money to both the Mexican government and the cartels, but U.S. Marshals operate in Mexico using Mexican marines uniforms which is obviously against the Mexican constitution, or any constitution for that matter, because it violates our sovereignty. The Mexican government is a U.S. puppet state, that's why officially both governments say the U.S. does not intervene just to save face, but in reality they do. The U.S. War on Drugs has been a genocide for Mexico, with more then 121 thousands deaths so far and with no end to it any time soon, also by the fact that the Mexican government is an authoritarian regime with two massacres last year, Tlatlaya and Ayotzinapa, that are still gone unpunished not to mention it is also corrupt. This is all within the status quo, The U.S. weapon industries is banking it here, selling weapons to both "good" and bad guys, this year alone 1,300 million dollars in weapons sold to the Mexican government and there is also evidence of U.S. backing cartels. So please don't spread misinformation because the U.S. intervenes in Mexico already, bringing in drones and troops like if we are Iraq isn't gonna change anything and the only ones that will suffer are the Mexcian people. If you guys would really want to help, stop the War on Drugs and legalize everything, its the only way to stop all this bloodshed that only we are paying.

I am pretty sure most people here is thinking about a true intervention (Yemen, Somalia, Afghanistan etc. style) where U.S publicly aide these countries, not a couple black op missions.

 

[Guevara]

The president is CEO of the world or something.

 

[RM8]

Most conspiracy theories revolve around this idea, too. American government can prevent anyone in the world from curing cancer, for example. It's pretty silly.

 

[TarNaru33]

Media is basically a political mouthpiece. Critics and supporters will pick whatever the administration had a hand in that lines up with whatever they believe. U.S is highly influential, it is the sole super power, it is to be expected for those to think it controls everything or can control everything.

 

[Cloudy]

Intervening in Kenya makes sense at least, seeing as Obama is going to be visiting there in a few months... Kenya is pretty pro-U.S., so they probably even requested intervention as part of this most recent round of diplomacy. If helping Kenya keep the peace within their country is part of the regular business of maintaining regular diplomatic relations with them, then I'd say the U.S. should be happy to oblige them.

Helping them is MUCH different from US anti-terrorism policy (in another country no-less) being responsible when they suffer a terrorist attack or if a civil war breaks out