Here we go again...

I wonder who these people are who think that we should be the police force for the whole world?

Another article, with more detail:

French Strikes in Mali Supplant Caution of U.S.

"But as insurgents swept through the desert last year, commanders of this nation’s elite army units, the fruit of years of careful American training, defected when they were needed most — taking troops, guns, trucks and their newfound skills to the enemy in the heat of battle, according to senior Malian military officials."

"The virtual collapse of the Malian military, including units trained by United States Special Forces, followed by a coup led by an American-trained officer, Capt. Amadou Sanogo, astounded and embarrassed top American military commanders."

I wonder who these people are who think that we should be the police force for the whole world?

Well, it is coming from both sides, Republican and Democrat.

EDIT: I like a comment from another site:"It's like Jihadist whack-a-mole over there."

'nother article:

Leon Panetta Says U.S. Has Pledged to Help France in Mali

"Mr. Panetta said that even though Mali is far from the United States, the Obama administration was deeply worried about extremist groups there, including Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, or AQIM. “We’re concerned that any time Al Qaeda establishes a base of operations, while they might not have any immediate plans for attacks in the United States and in Europe, that ultimately that still remains their objective,” he said."

"The United States has spent between $520 million and $600 million over the last four years to try to combat Islamist militancy in the region, including in Mali, which was until recently considered a prime example of what could be accomplished with American military training."

I wonder who these people are who think that we should be the police force for the whole world?

Right! Like who decided to pimp out our sons and daughters in the US military service as third world rent-a-cops? Active duty service should be a pre-requisite for all congressmen, cabinet members, the comander-in-chief and network news anchors. No win situations against a phantom enemy is expensive and demoralizing!

U.S. military suicides exceed combat deaths

The article only takes into account military deaths in Afghanistan, so I don't think the headline is completely truthful. Although, "it remains below that of the civilian population."

I think it is criminal that we do not give more come-home-soldier aid.

An interesting side is the sanctions we have put on Iran. This article goes after the seems-to-be next Secretary Of Defense, Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel, who in that position would not have a say in sanctions:

Hagel’s inexplicable position on Iran sanctions

It tells of how we are seriously, financially, hurting Iran. I think this is a proper method of dealing with a country you have a dispute with.

// I also don't think Iran is anywhere near making weapons grade plutonium

EDIT:: I like the writers comment " It would be one thing if Hagel were arguing from the right that sanctions will never work and we should skip right to the threat and use of military action." like it would be OK with him if we invaded Iran.

Heh, edit 2: It is a her, and by her name, well, Jennifer Rubin...

Well, there are some gem quotes from her, from wikipedia: She has opposed Barack Obama on multiple occasions, calling him “the most anti-Israel U.S. president (ever),” and writing that “Obama isn’t moderate, doesn’t like the free market, and isn’t interested in waging a robust war on Islamic fundamentalists.”

...
"The virtual collapse of the Malian military, including units trained by United States Special Forces, followed by a coup led by an American-trained officer, Capt. Amadou Sanogo, astounded and embarrassed top American military commanders."

Anyone but me see the similarity to our 'creating' the Taliban?

Seems as if any time we stick our noses in where they don't rightly belong it ends up coming back to bite us in the (military) assets.

Anyone but me see the similarity to our 'creating' the Taliban?

Seems as if any time we stick our noses in where they don't rightly belong it ends up coming back to bite us in the (military) assets.

I think, unfortunately, that what we have done, in terms of both military action and financial aid for procuring more military equipment, has placed us in at least a very long term of hatred (unreasonable or not) by the majority of the people in the area of the Middle East reaching into Africa.

I wonder who these people are who think that we should be the police force for the whole world?

Well, it is coming from both sides, Republican and Democrat.

EDIT: I like a comment from another site:"It's like Jihadist whack-a-mole over there."

"Over there" belongs to them, not US.

"They" are not sitting on "our" oil.

The situation in the world is extremely simple, and it goes like this:

There are only two kinds of people in the world...pink-skins and brown skins (no, this is not a racial diatribe, just observation).
The brown-skins are living in areas of the world that have resources that the pink-skins need.

Simple as that.

You got it about right, JahRustyFerrari.

I am not thrilled with our alliance with Saudi Arabia either - remember for 9/11 that 15 of the 19 hijackers were citizens of Saudi Arabia. That country will turn on us the day we stop buying their oil, mark my words.

It is so obvious, you don't even have to look very far:

“The U.S. currently receives about 18 percent of its energy supplies from Africa, a figure that is slated to rise to 25 percent by 2015,” Hallinan writes. “Africa also provides about one-third of China’s energy needs, plus copper, platinum, timber and iron ore.”

What’s more, as Maximilian Forte contends in Slouching Towards Sirte, “Chinese interest are seen as competing with the West for access to resources and political influences. AFRICOM and a range of other U.S. government initiatives are meant to count this phenomenon.”

And this explains NATO’s 2011 foray into Libya, which removed a stubborn pan-Africanist leader threatening to frustrate AFRICOM’s expansion into the Army’s “last frontier.” And this explains the French-led, U.S. supported intervention into Mali, which serves to forcibly assert Western interests further into Africa.

Intervention, we see, breeds intervention. And as Nick Turse warned back in July, “Mali may only be the beginning and there’s no telling how any of it will end.”

All that appears certain is a renewed wave of barbarism, as the scramble for Africa accelerates."

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/01/15/a-new-wave-of-barbarism/

There are only two kinds of people in the world...pink-skins and brown skins (no, this is not a racial diatribe, just observation).
The brown-skins are living in areas of the world that have resources that the pink-skins need.
Simple as that.

If by pink-skins you mean developed countries and by brown-skins you mean third world countries then I agree with your observations.

The developed countries have resources, they just would like to use up the ones in the third world first.