It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

where will the US send troops next?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   
hi,

so where do you reckon the US will send their troops next??

its a hard call, could be one of many countries.

i found this poll which was on a S.American news site. quite interesting figures.

www.topix.com...

"
COUNTRY VOTES %
Iran 5791 40%
Pakistan 3701 25%
Venezuela 1263 8%
North Korea 1126 7%
Zimbabwe 1061 7%
Sudan 859 5%
Syria 540 3%
"




posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 05:32 PM
link   
I think it forgets to mentions the most probable

The streets of the US - 60% chance.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 05:33 PM
link   
yes, i thought of this after i posted, but thought, "i will see how long it takes someone to say USA!!!"



i think you may be right.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by grantbeed
 


Of the countries listed, I find North Korea and Venezuela as the most likely candidates. However, I don't think they'll invade Venezuela unless Venezuela goes to war first against i.e. Colombia. I highly doubt they'll dare to invade Pakistan. Too risky. Same with Iran. Iran and Pakistan would have to do something really really bad before the US will launch an attack against them. If it happens, it'll make Iraq and Afghanistan look like a picnic. China will not sit idle, and Pakistan also have nukes. The US do have India as an ally, but...against China/Iran/Pakistan? Only if it's absolutely necessary and there are no other options. And don't forget Russia. Russia also have interests in Venezuela, but if Venezuela does something stupid, I'm not sure how far Russia will go to defend them. Before even considering an attack against Iran and/or Pakistan, keep in mind that the war in Afghanistan is already about to be lost.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by grantbeed
hi,

so where do you reckon the US will send their troops next??

its a hard call, could be one of many countries.

i found this poll which was on a S.American news site. quite interesting figures.

www.topix.com...

"
COUNTRY VOTES %
Iran 5791 40%
Pakistan 3701 25%
Venezuela 1263 8%
North Korea 1126 7%
Zimbabwe 1061 7%
Sudan 859 5%
Syria 540 3%
"


The United States Of America will see the biggest surge of troops right here in the U.S. to help put down civil unrest although it should be the National Guard of that specific state in the Union. It does not matter because the obama administration in many cases does not abide by The Constitution of The United States Of America.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by grantbeed


so where do you reckon the US will send their troops next??





We will probably see bombings rather than any commitment of troops.
I suppose it all depends , if a pipeline etc needs protecting , it will need boots on the ground . The next action(s) might involve destroying infrastructure .

Saudi Arabia .....a dark horse.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 07:10 PM
link   
Mexico by far is the next most likely.

The US government will send them under the guise of stopping the drug cartels.
But the real purpose will be to install a new government in Mexico to replace the corrupt one in control there now.



posted on Mar, 20 2009 @ 04:57 AM
link   
with the economic crises here to stay for a while, not only is the US going no where , they have to atleast drop iraq and it's 100billion+ a year price tag.. the us govt already factored in zero spending in iraq in its future budgets.. and the Chinese are signalling that they may stop lending the us money, which is the only thing keeping the us economy hobbling along right now..



posted on Mar, 20 2009 @ 05:49 AM
link   
I think that North Korea is the most likely of all the countries that you listed. An ATS member named Unknown Truth started this thread, What Is North Korea Really Up To ? In it we talked about the current satellite/missile threat the is being 'talked' about by the US, Japan and South Korea. I belive that it will be a satellite, but that the US, Japan and South Korea may see this as a chance to strike against North Korea. This in my opinion gives them all a reason, excuse and a public support platform to attack them.



posted on Mar, 20 2009 @ 12:28 PM
link   
Home?

That would be a nice change of pace.

We can't really afford the deployments we're stuck with now in Iraq and Afghanistan, let alone any new overseas adventures.

I voted for this administration partially in the hope that it would pursue a less aggressive foreign policy.

Given the economic situation, I'm not sure we have much choice anyway.



posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 09:55 AM
link   
no one will dare attack angry n. korea just because they launched a rocket when they are known to have atom bombs, too risky without any justification.. and the topic is 'where will us send troops' not where they will launch an airstrike, the absolutly do not have any public support in s.korea, japan or the us for a war with n korea just because they tested a rocket, what the hell are you thinking?

[edit on 21-3-2009 by ominous]



posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 09:57 AM
link   
They can send them here.
I will fight next to my brothers.



posted on Mar, 21 2009 @ 10:01 AM
link   
It will 100% be Pakistan. thats why Obama and NATO are putting a massive amount of troups in afganistan....we are already droping bombs on pakastani soil as the Taliban signes treaties with their government. pakistan wont take care of the cells in their country but i can gaurentee we will.



posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 06:39 AM
link   
pakistan and afghanistan are the same thing, all your talking about is a cross border operation, not occupation of pakistani territory.


SR

posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 07:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by invisibleman11
It will 100% be Pakistan. thats why Obama and NATO are putting a massive amount of troups in afganistan....we are already droping bombs on pakastani soil as the Taliban signes treaties with their government. pakistan wont take care of the cells in their country but i can gaurentee we will.


Well the thing is Pakistan does have those Nukes. So there is a legit reason to go in but that's also an legit reason not to go in at the same time.

I don't think a prolonged campaign would be popular or sustainable in the current climate so it might just be a quick swoop in seize the nukes and get out with them job.



posted on Mar, 22 2009 @ 07:34 AM
link   
California Arizona New Mexico Texas....was a bunch of MSM coverage tonight about talks of the army being sent in. The cartel violence has gone as far as 250 miles into Arizona and it is spreading farther in over the whole border area now.



posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hellmutt
reply to post by grantbeed
 

keep in mind that the war in Afghanistan is already about to be lost.


I find this statement uninformed and reckless.

I think you should do some research, put some thought into your reply and reconsider your position. Have you read Obama's plan? Are you aware of what it entails? 21,000 more troops, 4 additional Air Force Squardrons, and extra Carrier, DEA Agents burning down Opium Crops to stop the flow of cash.. I could go on. If you wish, we could take it to the debate forum.

Restarted is a better term - and we will win.

Darfur is the next battle ground, UAV's and Spec OPS already roam there.

The African Command is about to come online, if it hasn't already. The State Department recently stated Sudan's leadership will be held responsible for every life lost. We used this same language against Saddam - look what happend to him.

Sudan's President took a huge risk going to Quatar this week, trying to consolidate a support base amoung the Arab world. The Arabs will issue strong statements but not act on his behalf, they want the West to deal with the Persian threat, they will let Sudan fall if it is a means to that end.

The price of oil has tanked, demand is down. Arab nations do not wield the influence they had 4 years ago.

EDIT: Technically, we have won the Iraq war. We replaced a dictatorship with a democracy. Sure there are issues to be had, but we won. We have also ousted the Taliban, but they are gearing up for a comeback. They will be put down, in a fashion more brutal than that when Bush was in Office.

Difference between Afghanistan and Iraq is this, Afghanistan has the support of the American people - winning that war was something Obama campaigned on - he has a mandate issued by the American people to win that war.


[edit on 31-3-2009 by crisko]




top topics



 
0

log in

join