It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Is it Time to Invade Burma?

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on May, 11 2008 @ 04:36 AM
All true northwolf. That may very well be what it comes down to. A strikeforce to help expedite relief. Of course we will be villified in every corner.

posted on May, 11 2008 @ 04:38 AM
I say let the Junta take everything and let those people all die. The United States is constantly getting heap after heap of crap for trying to "police" the world so i say we start taking their advice right now. It's a double edged sword.

Some of ya'll need to wake the hell up. "Oh just drop some food and stuff out the back of a plane and it will be all good."

Then the boys in the trucks pull up and AK everyone around the pack so they can use the supplies for their military campaign that has been going on for 60, SIXTY years. well, then what?

Why do you think they aren't letting any outside help on the ground over there? They are taking all that stuff.

[edit on 11-5-2008 by havingfun]

posted on May, 11 2008 @ 04:51 AM
So the good old US is going save the world? Why not simply take all the US's WOMD, their terror camps and destruction bases and the vehicles that move them about back to the US and help the world by not sending bombs and terrorists into these countries to create death and instability. That would save millions!

posted on May, 11 2008 @ 04:07 PM
reply to post by DaddyBare

Who's going to do the invading? Are the suggested country or countries going to invade every country with a national crisis?

Just curious???

posted on May, 11 2008 @ 05:20 PM
If Burma is invaded, all sorts of wild conspiracy theories would pop up.

One question... what was up with Laura Bush addressing this disaster and not George W Bush?! Couldn't he keep a straight face? Did he know something?

i googled 'warnings of cyclone nagris' and only got one hit.

If it was ever possible, maybe it was known the cyclone would do massive damage, and the US or UN decided to tone down on the warnings knowing that the storm was one huge bruiser. Perhaps they wanted to force the Junta's hand or make it look massively unprepared to handle the disaster. Cue those who will 'rebuild' Burma to their image.

I've actually not read any warnings about cyclone Nagris until it killed dozens of thousands! Did the Burmese along the hardest hit Irrawaddy delta area even KNOW how bad it would be?! They could have evacuated to higher ground.

Personally, I think the world government has been taken aback by the Junta's refusal to allow them to enter. Perhaps the Junta smells an ambush
What's next?

posted on May, 11 2008 @ 06:02 PM
The U.N. and NATO need to put some serious heat on China to resolve the crisis. They are such dirt bags for allowing this to happen in their back yard. Not to mention Darfur. China will not get any Olympics if they keep sitting this one out.

We need to tell them to put up or shut up and then have India go try out their new weapons on the Junta if China don't make them give in to U.N. demands.

We the U.S. are to busy and someone else needs to help out for a change. If you need us to bomb something OK or use our ships to bring in food. If not sorry we cant help.

posted on May, 11 2008 @ 06:17 PM
The USA has not been appointed the sheriff of the world.
We are not the Holy Roman Empire.

This is China's breadbasket, not ours.

It is not our duty to jump into every hellhole in the world and bring democracy.
Or even a hot meal.

When our own people were dieing in New Orleans. We held them prisoners inside and turned them back with roadblocks, without supplying assistance to people an arms reach from transportation and supplies.

Save our own home, before we have none.

The US has arrived used to be a cry of salvation. Nations begged for the US to intervene.
Now it has become a warning.

posted on May, 11 2008 @ 06:57 PM
Hi There,

I like most of the comments in this thread, except for those calling for military strikes and invasion.

The problem about 'policing' the world is that America seems to pick and choose whom it wants to police, and obsfucate the reasons why. The policing of the world should be carried out by all countries capable of doing so. It should not be left to America alone, because truly, the American military doesn't know how to police other countries, it has neither the experience or cause to do so. It just bombs and blasts the crap out of a country to make it less of a threat...mission accomplished!

The Burmese Junta (and it is not the only one) is as ripe as ripe could be for regime change, but it must be mandated and resoluted through the UN. Disasters such as the one to have hit Burma, should automatically qualify a country for international aid, backed up by a international military presence. It can work in conjunction with the home military, but if for political reasons such aid is rejected, then the UN must find ways to insist that international aid is accepted, and if that means regime change as a last resort, then perhaps it needs to at least be discussed for feasibility. However, no one country should profit from such undertaking, except that country whose leadership needs to be forcibly changed.

We all know that our species live in disparate and diametric cultures to one another, but I firmly believe that most people of any country of whatever culture, are decent and peace-loving people, and are probably just as sick to the teeth of having to live under oppressive regimes as any one of us would be. Therefore, if the greater nations want to export democracy, then let it be a democracy geared and fit for the culture of the country to which it is intended to be exported to. Let the people of that country rebuild their country with aid from outside, and with no strings or conditions attached. Teach and empower them, not down the barrel of a gun, but from a welcomed handshake and embrace of a world community sighing a collective sigh of relief to the absence of another repressive regime.

It's a simple idea, maybe a somewhat fanciful and naive idea, but I think it is the correct way to go about bringing world peace globally. Disenfranchise the powerful, and make powerful the disenfranchised.

Best wishes

posted on May, 11 2008 @ 08:07 PM
Sky watcher & Cyberian and others calling out China to 'resolve the problem'.

The Myanmar junta is as paranoiid about an Amerian lead aiding team as one from their biggest neigbour to the North (China) or one from their other huge neigbour to the West (India). Heck, the military junta has not much friends, it's all convenient deals and how to enrich and increase the power of the junta in the least obvious ways.

The non-interference foreign policy for China is still at work, and we will only send in aiding teams when INVITED by the ruling regime. However, I'm pretty sure behind the scenes politicians from China and India and other nations are working on a deal how to "aid" the civilians of Myanmar. I can tell by how much reporting and importance is done in the Chinese media, sympathy (and rightly done) is created for the people in Myanmar so it would be "our duty" to send people to gelp out the victims there, if it ever happens. Hey don't forget more than 80% of our people are also poor uneducated peasants in rural areas, who believes they also need "aid" from the government.

Yes, Chinese foreign policy is very much different from the American ones, and we have not appointed ourselves as the World police, because we simply don't have the capabilities to act like one AND we don't have that much enemies around the globe, so no need to "change regimes". Regretful and honestly to say that we are more business oriented (like any other country) by using much less hypocrisy and double-standards (like some countries). You figure out what I refer to regretful or honestly. So you will most likely only see us where our interests are and only behind the scenese trying to influence the local regime to act more "civil, human and openly", which is obviously also much more benefitial for the longer time of Chinese interests in the specific area if the regime act in the best interests for their own people...

[edit on 11/5/08 by IchiNiSan]

top topics

<< 1  2   >>

log in