100
opinion
2 votes
Jul 19, 2015

Those are Islamist terrorists, if the U.S. is waging a war on terrorism there is no better way then to show it's intolerance of any extremists action globally. The longer the U.S. fails to act the more it reinforces the preconceptions that the war in the Middle East was for economic control of the oil trade and the supposed Lithium mines in Afghanistan.

Right now we are all aware the war in those regions were mostly motivated for economic reasons but it'd be nice if the U.S. pretended for a second that it was serious on its war against terrorism instead of letting it slowly spread through Africa as it has been happening.

Reply to this opinion
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
Discussion (4)
::unhide-discussion::
100
main reply
1 vote,
Jul 19, 2015

This terror group, and it is a terror group poses little or no risk to the US, it appears they are only operating inside their own country. So, why should this small group of girls get more of a response from the US than Libya, India, Rakhine State, Central African Republic, Burma, South Sudan, all of which involve in ethnic cleaning and certainly involve more than 300 girls?

At some point the US has to say it's YOUR problem deal with it. Why is the US the policemen for the world? The US has pressed it's "will" on other countries time and time again, and what has it gotten us? We put Saddam Hussein in power, we armed the Afghans, supported Bin Laden and what did we get? War, well ,we're really not at war in a technically as congress hasn't declared it so call it a conflict, but people are very unhappy with us and are shooting at us.

We should give indirect support, satellite coverage, and what intelligence we can gather without putting people on the ground we can, but that's where it should end.

And yes I know this is going to be very unpopular with people, but if we as a country get involved into another conflict "war" over 300 girls how can we not go stop ethnic cleaning all over the world?

reply
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
::unhide-discussion::
100
linked reply
1 vote,
Jul 19, 2015

Good points but my whole point is prevention, those groups always start small and then balloon to the levels of al-qaeda. They may eventually become sponsored and target U.S. targets. The truth is these groups are currently fighting for local power and here in 20 or 30 years they may become an international threat. The way I see it is remove the tumor while it's small instead of waiting for it to increase in size and spread to other parts.

Honestly I do share your opinion a war over 300 girls seems silly but sending an Apache to get rid of Boko Haram is a pretty good bargain imo.

The U.S. just needs to be more involved in African conflicts giving them the tools to fight extremism instead of letting it snowball, soon the war against terrorism will be a global conflict not just limited to a region, if it already isn't and their number one target will always be the U.S. Hell, a suicide bomber with HIV is probably much worse then a regular suicide bomber. That is something to think about.

reply
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
::unhide-discussion::
100
1 vote,
Jul 19, 2015

If you really look into this issue you'd see they had plenty of warning, they didn't send in their own troops when this happened, they refused international help to search for kidnapped girls – for weeks. Now they are asking for money and equipment, given the alleged human rights abuses by Nigerian security forces and given that Nigerian President has acknowledged that his government might be penetrated by insurgents from Boko Haram, giving them money and equipment would be arming Boko Haram.

Yes Boko Haram might become the new Al-qaeda, but given the fact they have already be in the government, giving the government money and weapons would just be arming them.

Now it might be a good deal if you could kill all of Boko Haram, but all you would really do is make more people hate the US, and make more terrorist.

reply
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
::unhide-discussion::
0
0 votes,
Jul 19, 2015

We need to learn to move the money to the bottom not at the top.

Radicals have an advantage. As a member of the Taliban said , "Shoot 2 members of a village and the village is not a problem anymore."

It will be a lot cheaper to end this now then later. The only boots on the ground should be a raid to rescue the girls if they are still being held as a group.

reply
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
Challenge someone to answer this opinion:
Invite an OpiWiki user:
OR
Invite your friend via email:
OR
Share it: