Rescue the girls through force?

Originally posted by divegeester
I'm curious, do you think force, possibly violent force is justifiable?

let's say yes. who do you propose should do it? the us? uk? how about the french? why this case and not another? would it stop this from occurring again and what should be done about it?



horrible stuff happens all around the world. do you think the us is responsible to stop it?

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
let's say yes. who do you propose should do it? the us? uk? how about the french? why this case and not another? would it stop this from occurring again and what should be done about it?



horrible stuff happens all around the world. do you think the us is responsible to stop it?

This group, Boko Haram, which means 'no western education', especially for girls, has also just recently killed off an entire village in Nigeria but there is almost no news of that, the kidnapping of those poor girls has taken president.

One problem is if there was a mounted military assault by whomever, US, Nigeria, China, the end result is the girls may be killed out of spite.

Boko Haram spokesmen just announced in a video showing the supposed girls and the willingness to exchange them for Boko Haram terrorists held captive by the Nigerian government.

So there may be a diplomatic solution.

If that takes place, however, that should be the last school the Nigerian Military allows to be attacked, stationing soldiers at those schools most in danger.

Personally, considering the corruption inherent in the Nigerian government, I doubt that would ever happen even if they get the girls back.

They seem not to have the wherewithal to attack Haram directly so the cat and mouse game continues.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
This scenario creates huge amounts of martyrs. Every one of these will cause revenge. USA will suffer.

Remember we are talking about fundamentalists.

If they get away with it, they will become emboldened. Either way, the problem remains. My way, the girls are freed.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
If they get away with it, they will become emboldened. Either way, the problem remains. My way, the girls are freed.

Or killed before the attack begins when they see themselves under attack.

The only way an attack would work would be if they found the exact location of the camp and attacked it at night with stealth choppers like the team that took out Bin Laden.

Get to the girls first, secure them then start on the Boko asssholes.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Or killed before the attack begins when they see themselves under attack.

The only way an attack would work would be if they found the exact location of the camp and attacked it at night with stealth choppers like the team that took out Bin Laden.

True - so far, we have been addressing the comparatively easy question of the moral justifiability of force. The decision to intervene itself carries great risk, as does any hostage rescue mission.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
let's say yes. who do you propose should do it? the us? uk? how about the french?

I think all those governments should offer their services. However, it should be with the permission of the Nigerian government and possibly added oversight by the UN.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I think all those governments should offer their services. However, it should be with the permission of the Nigerian government and possibly added oversight by the UN.

I'm sure as corrupt as the Nigerian government is, they would LOVE to hand over the entire operation to the French, Spanish, US, hell, even Bangladesh if they didn't have to send soldiers of their own in to do the dirty work.

Anyway, even if the Nigerian government does it on their own, they would muck it up and probably just get the girls ALL killed, probably coming in with noisy SUV's and army trucks you could hear 10 miles away and especially with scouts in the trees with radio's.

I don't think the Nigerians are up to any kind of commando attack.

Originally posted by sonhouse
I'm sure as corrupt as the Nigerian government is, they would LOVE to hand over the entire operation to the French, Spanish, US, hell, even Bangladesh if they didn't have to send soldiers of their own in to do the dirty work.

Anyway, even if the Nigerian government does it on their own, they would muck it up and probably just get the girls ALL killed, pr ...[text shortened]... n the trees with radio's.

I don't think the Nigerians are up to any kind of commando attack.

Maybe we should all just agree to pray to God for the girls. What do you think about that?

Originally posted by RJHinds
Maybe we should all just agree to pray to God for the girls. What do you think about that?

Yes, let's all pray for the girls. Nothing more will then need to be done. Prayers solves everything. And then when all girls are killed or raped or married to old farts, then we should know that we did everything that we could. Our souls are clean, we have not sinned.

Not.

Originally posted by sonhouse
I'm sure as corrupt as the Nigerian government is, they would LOVE to hand over the entire operation to the French, Spanish, US, hell, even Bangladesh if they didn't have to send soldiers of their own in to do the dirty work.

Why do you think corruption results in reluctance to engage in this sort of activity?

Anyway, even if the Nigerian government does it on their own, they would muck it up and probably just get the girls ALL killed, probably coming in with noisy SUV's and army trucks you could hear 10 miles away and especially with scouts in the trees with radio's.
Are you basing this on actual knowledge of the Nigerian military's capabilities, or is it simply assumed based on their corruption record?
I have to point out that the US government and military is the most corrupt in the world if measured by total amount of money involved. What is worse, is much of the corruption in the US is legalized - but even the illegal stuff far exceeds Nigeria.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Why do you think corruption results in reluctance to engage in this sort of activity?

[b]Anyway, even if the Nigerian government does it on their own, they would muck it up and probably just get the girls ALL killed, probably coming in with noisy SUV's and army trucks you could hear 10 miles away and especially with scouts in the trees with radio's. [/ ...[text shortened]... much of the corruption in the US is legalized - but even the illegal stuff far exceeds Nigeria.

Nigeria does not have much in the way of modern military equipment like the US, like stealth helicopters such as was used in Pakistan against Bin Laden and that is the kind of equipment that would have to be used in a military rescue operation. Maybe not those copters directly but some kind of stealth devices, ultra lights, air strikes with drones, I don't know, but I am sure Nigeria could not come up with that kind of equipment considering most of the money sent there in aid ends up in some chief's bank account to upgrade his private golf course or something.

Sure there is corruption in the US, is in ALL countries but we have something Nigeria doesn't: TRILLIONS to spend on weapons. Even if half of it is lost to some assshole general tucked in an offshore account the leftovers are more than ANY other county in terms of equipment actually built and engineering development to make the stuff even more deadly, such as the latest development, a sub mounted laser weapon just deployed, beam energy weapon that can destroy a boat at 2 miles distance.

You will not find that kind of development in Nigeria. They are far too interested in their own individual interests, the top layer of government.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Why do you think corruption results in reluctance to engage in this sort of activity?

[b]Anyway, even if the Nigerian government does it on their own, they would muck it up and probably just get the girls ALL killed, probably coming in with noisy SUV's and army trucks you could hear 10 miles away and especially with scouts in the trees with radio's. [/ ...[text shortened]... much of the corruption in the US is legalized - but even the illegal stuff far exceeds Nigeria.

That is more reason why the USA should ignore it. Getting involved will only lead to more corruption.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Nigeria does not have much in the way of modern military equipment ...

And why is this? Probably because they do not expect to fight very many wars that require stealth helicopters, or possibly because they are not so corrupt as to spend on unnecessary military spending?

...but I am sure Nigeria could not come up with that kind of equipment considering most of the money sent there in aid ends up in some chief's bank account to upgrade his private golf course or something.
So you would prefer that they spend aid (presumably intended to help the poor) on stealth helicopters?
I think I need to point out that Nigeria is an oil producer and much of their income would be from oil, and if there is corruption in the oil industry then Western companies are most likely involved (with collaboration from the US government).

Sure there is corruption in the US, is in ALL countries but we have something Nigeria doesn't: TRILLIONS to spend on weapons.
Exactly my point. You are so corrupt that you spend far more on unnecessary weapons than the rest of the world put together.
So if you want to talk about corruption, start right there.

You will not find that kind of development in Nigeria. They are far too interested in their own individual interests, the top layer of government.
Or possibly in the interests of the people, who do not need boat destroying lasers? Don't forget that despite all those fancy US weapons, you have the worst record in the developed world for caring for the poor. Development is not measured by how fancy your latest weapon is, development is measured by how you care for your fellow man.

Our society must make it right and possible for old people not to fear the young or be deserted by them, for the test of a civilization is the way that it cares for its helpless members.~Pearl S. Buck (1892-1973), My Several Worlds [1954].

The test of the morality of a society is what it does for its children.
~Dietrich Bonhoeffer

A decent provision for the poor is the true test of civilization.
~Samuel Johnson, Boswell: Life of Johnson

The most certain test by which we judge whether a country is really free is the amount of security enjoyed by minorities.~John E. E. Dalberg, Lord Acton, The History of Freedom in Antiquity, [1877].

"...the moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; those who are in the shadows of life; the sick, the needy and the handicapped. " ~ Last Speech of Hubert H. Humphrey
"A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members." ~ Mahatma Ghandi

"Any society, any nation, is judged on the basis of how it treats its weakest members -- the last, the least, the littlest."
~Cardinal Roger Mahony, In a 1998 letter, Creating a Culture of Life

The greatness of America is in how it treats its weakest members: the elderly, the infirm, the handicapped, the underprivileged, the unborn. ~Bill Federer

"A society will be judged on the basis of how it treats its weakest members and among the most vulnerable are surely the unborn and the dying,"
~Pope John Paul II

Taken from:
http://askville.amazon.com/measure-civilization-treats-weakest-members-accurate-quote/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=4718239

Originally posted by RJHinds
That is more reason why the USA should ignore it. Getting involved will only lead to more corruption.

I fully agree that it would lead to more corruption (the US's recent wars have exhibited the worst corruption the world has ever seen), but I disagree that that is a good reason to not get involved.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I fully agree that it would lead to more corruption (the US's recent wars have exhibited the worst corruption the world has ever seen), but I disagree that that is a good reason to not get involved.

Okay, as long as the involment does not involve money and weapons. Is just talking about it or diplomacy good enough for you?