War against terror widens to Yemen

Where and when will the cycle of fighting terrorism end?  Al Qaeda's mission is fairly predictable.  Find a country of poor, disenfranchised population and move in.  Is Yemen and Somalia going to be the next Afghanistan.  And what about the madrassas appearing in places like Tunisia?  The U.S. cannot continue to sacrifice American lives and dollars in a continuous effort to fight Al Qaeda around world, which costs billions, while domestically the country is suffering on the economic and job loss front.

I realize internationla terrorism is a problem, but the U.S. cannot continue to be the primary provider of lives and money.  There needs to be an international fighting force dedicated to fighting terrorists.  This is one of the problems  of the U.N.  There is no standing army, but perhaps its time to consider changing this.     

Perhaps, instead of talk of more armies, the world looked at helping the countries of "poor, disenfranchised populations" to become better equipped to deal with, and become part of, the modern world we would see less support for the extremists.

stejeb

Yes, I agree with you wholeheartedly.  And to some extent there are international efforts to improve the lives of developing countries, but some would say it is not enough. 

I can still remember Britain's ignominious exit from Aden, and the US from Vietnam, the question is....when will the west learn?

Let's not forget the Russians from Afghanistan or even farther back in history the French from the Philippines, and all the colonialized nations of Africa like the Congo by Beligium, the Dutch in South Africa, and all the other countries by the West and Europe.  It's not just a Western problem, it's the legacy of colonialization of countries with rich resources by a dominate country over developing countries.  Beginning with the Romans, and perhaps before, world history is the history of conquering and domination.  But we are now at the point where this cannot go on from a humanitarian, economic, global perspective. 

My suggestion for an international army would not displace peaceful humanitarian and economic efforts to raise these populations out of poverty; rather, it is a protection to the rest of the world while those efforts are at work.  To rely on either one or the other is not realistic in the current world crisis we are in. 

cowpoke,

You are so correct, it is not a new crisis--the only thing that has changed is the resource.

In the 19th century in California, it was gold.  The whole nation designed itself around the riches out West first with the pony express then the railroads. With that came stealing the land from the Native peoples and the elimination of the buffalo.  Most people thought this was progress and hailed it as Manifest Destiny and all manner of justifying genocide and "scorched earth" philosophies.  As the riches go, there go the prospectors of resources and wealth.

Today it's "black-gold," and it's not in our backyards, and the prospectors are in bed with some Congress people, not all.  And it's awful crowded in there together with the health insurance companies. The links between big business and foreign policy is not difficult to deciphor, and the only way to stop it is by campaign financing reform.  Nothing is going to change without it. 

stejeb

Civilian casualities alienates most of us, and from the reports I have seen and read there are efforts to reduce them.  I think it must be disheartening for the military to know civilians are targets just as much as they are. 

Many times the U.N. feels their hands are tied, and they cannot give the assistance needed or timely intervention.

I just saw a report of a massacre in a country in Africa. ( sorry I can not rememberthe name of it, as only saw the end of the program.)  But a U.N. station was one half kilometer from a town where 200 men, women and children were killed.  The U.N. failed to intervene: 1) they did not have the right translators for that area; 2) they have no military force for any kind of intervention, and it would take too long to gather international volunteers.  The U.N. representative said they are just not equipped militarily to respond like they should in a crisis like this one.

Peacekeeping, human trafficking, and forced prostitution Main article: Peacekeeping child sexual abuse scandal

Reporters witnessed a rapid increase in prostitution in Cambodia, Mozambique, Bosnia, and Kosovo after UN and, in the case of the latter two, NATO peacekeeping forces moved in. In the 1996 U.N. study The Impact of Armed Conflict on Children, former first lady of Mozambique Graça Machel documented: "In 6 out of 12 country studies on sexual exploitation of children in situations of armed conflict prepared for the present report, the arrival of peacekeeping troops has been associated with a rapid rise in child prostitution." [13]

[edit] Proposed reform

"In response to criticism, particularly of the cases of sexual abuse by peacekeepers, the UN has taken steps toward reforming its operations. The Brahimi Report was the first of many steps to recap former peacekeeping missions, isolate flaws, and take steps to patch these mistakes to ensure the efficiency of future peacekeeping missions. The UN has vowed to continue to put these practices into effect when performing peacekeeping operations in the future. The technocratic aspects of the reform process have been continued and revitalised by the DPKO in its 'Peace Operations 2010' reform agenda. The 2008 capstone doctrine entitled "United Nations Peacekeeping Operations: Principles and Guidelines"[2] incorporates and builds on the Brahimi analysis." source

It's now 2010, I hope never again to see that so-called peace-keepers have indulged in continuing the exploitation and abuse of the victims of war and civil discord, we hope to see the arrival of these people as a start to a better future for the victims not a continuance of their misseries.