Boko Haram, what should we do?

[jericho]

Anyone with any real ideas and solutions?

 

Where is your sense of humor.

 

I think we should send in a group of about 30 special forces, track them and kill everyone with the group. Until we neutralize their leadership and get them disorganized we or no one will ever stop them.

Or we capture a few of them, put them to sleep and implant a tracking chip and then send in a few tomahawk missiles.

 

But is it really our job to fight this group, I would love to say lets go get them, ISIS, Taliban, and Al Queda

[SportsGuy41017]

Where is your sense of humor.

 

I think we should send in a group of about 30 special forces, track them and kill everyone with the group. Until we neutralize their leadership and get them disorganized we or no one will ever stop them.

Or we capture a few of them, put them to sleep and implant a tracking chip and then send in a few tomahawk missiles.

 

But is it really our job to fight this group, I would love to say lets go get them, ISIS, Taliban, and Al Queda

 

There ya go! Unfortunately we will never have a 100% end to this, but to throw them back and have them on the run, by going after them full force.

 

I am also very disappointed how we, and the world are treating Ukraine. We need to be in there, we signed an agreement to defend them, as well as all of NATO and the EU. Sitting back won't help matters, it will only get much worse over time, check how WWII got started. We are allowing Ukraine to be divided, similar to what we did with similar situations in the late 1930's, we sat back and did nothing, allowing take overs of a country in hopes they won't want to take anymore. But that is for a different thread.

[PepRock01]

 

There ya go! Unfortunately we will never have a 100% end to this, but to throw them back and have them on the run, by going after them full force.

 

I am also very disappointed how we, and the world are treating Ukraine. We need to be in there, we signed an agreement to defend them, as well as all of NATO and the EU. Sitting back won't help matters, it will only get much worse over time, check how WWII got started. We are allowing Ukraine to be divided, similar to what we did with similar situations in the late 1930's, we sat back and did nothing, allowing take overs of a country in hopes they won't want to take anymore. But that is for a different thread.

 

Ukraine isn't a member of NATO.

[SportsGuy41017]

Ukraine isn't a member of NATO.

 

No, I know that, but they should have been, but that is beside the point. The U.S. signed an agreement that we would protect them. It was in the Budapest Memorandum, where we told them if they give up their nukes that we would protect them, they gave up their nukes, now they see us sitting on our rear ends doing nothing. If they didn't agree to give up their nukes, Russia wouldn't have even considered doing what they have done their and in Crimea. When we go back on our word like this, how are any other countries going to trust us? I wouldn't blame any country for not trusting us. Also, there are similarities with Ukraine and what happened in Kosovo, if we use the same logic now as we did with Kosovo, we would have been in Ukraine over a year ago.

[jericho]

What exactly does Russia want with the Ukraine?

 

I'm not up to speed on what they have that Russia so desperately needs or wants?

 

 

Do you compare what Putin is doing to the Ukraine as the same thing Hitler did to the Sudetenland or Czech.

[SportsGuy41017]

^ I'll attempt to have a longer post later on this. But, back in the 30's, Hitler wasn't even Hitler, he could have been stopped, we sacrificed a nation then, hoping that they would be happy with what they got and would stop. But as we all know, it did not end there, it would have been a lot easier to deal with Hitler before he started to gain steam, but waiting only made things much worse. Same with Putin, he can be stopped now, but just as in the 30's with Hitler, the rest of the world looks the other way, in this case, we are okay with sacrificing Ukraine, hoping Putin will be happy and just stop there, but he won't.

 

If we didn't beg Ukraine to give up their nukes, we wouldn't be talking about this, nor would we be talking about the invasion of Crimea. Now Putin see's we will allow history to repeat.

 

The same people who were against Yeltsin over 20 years ago are the same people backing the so called rebels in Ukraine. Putin has his old KGB buddies in powerful positions, it's not like back in the old USSR when the leader had the Politboro to deal with, now Putin can do whatever he wants with no checks and balances. He has many in Russia believing that Russia's problems are caused by the West (sound familiar? Replace the West with the Jews). Putin has many in Russia thinking they really need him to hold off the West from destroying Russia.

 

The more we allow him to take, the more power he gets. I have heard it put like this "If you give a bully your lunch money today, is that going to stop him from wanting to come back tomorrow and take more?" NO!

 

He laughs every time the West talks about a "deal", the word "deal" or his signature doesn't mean a thing to him. Just look at the map of the Russian troops in Ukraine now, and around the time that they signed a deal back in September, since that "deal", the so called rebels have gained a lot more ground, and will gain more after this so called cease fire and new deal.

 

I hate to say this, but the best thing for the world would be if Putin dropped dead, A LOT of the current issues would be solved overnight.

 

There is a lot more detail to it, but that is all the time I have at this moment.

[PepRock01]

What exactly does Russia want with the Ukraine?

 

I'm not up to speed on what they have that Russia so desperately needs or wants?

 

 

Do you compare what Putin is doing to the Ukraine as the same thing Hitler did to the Sudetenland or Czech.

 

Putin wants an Eastern European economic union similar to the EU and Ukraine being the largest of those countries is a key part of that. That is why former pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovich was ousted by the people, he scrapped a deal that would have brought Ukraine closer to the EU. Yanukovich was going to try to build closer ties with Moscow.

[PepRock01]

No, I know that, but they should have been, but that is beside the point. The U.S. signed an agreement that we would protect them. It was in the Budapest Memorandum, where we told them if they give up their nukes that we would protect them, they gave up their nukes, now they see us sitting on our rear ends doing nothing. If they didn't agree to give up their nukes, Russia wouldn't have even considered doing what they have done their and in Crimea. When we go back on our word like this, how are any other countries going to trust us? I wouldn't blame any country for not trusting us. Also, there are similarities with Ukraine and what happened in Kosovo, if we use the same logic now as we did with Kosovo, we would have been in Ukraine over a year ago.

 

I had forgotten that, good point.