or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Time to invade Africa
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Time to invade Africa

post #1 of 66
Thread Starter 
These Somali pirates are out of hand. Evidently there are whole towns that serve as pirate bases. The US patrols the world's oceans, why are we not invading these towns (or at least, sending in a cruise missile or two)?

And as part of a larger context - we need to scale our electrical power generation 500% in the next 40 years (from 300GW to 1500GW). Alternative energies won't scale fast enough, IMHO, fossil fuels are out, and normal nuclear will use up all of our uranium in very short order. The end result, as I see it, is breeder reactors, which means that everyone in the world will have access to plutonium based nuclear weapons.

Large countries with free trade ties are safe, because they have too much to lose. China and the US will never go to war, so they are both trustworthy enough so that nuclear weapons are not a problem. Small countries are a problem, though.

I don't think we can suffer small countries to live, they are too unstable to trust with the nuclear weapons that they will eventually get (just think of Somalia with nukes). We need to invade Africa to merge it into a superpower.

If we could get them to merge up without a war, that would be even better, but it doesn't seem to be happening. Forming a superpower is obviously in the best interest of Africans, so if it was going to happen it would have already happened...

Thoughts?
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #2 of 66
Since this happened, I have been wondering why a special forces team from us or Israel or France or Britain hasn't just gone in and killed them.

As an aside, I seem to remember the US invading Somalia once before....
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #3 of 66
Re: your other point.

Africa is fucked up because a) Europe has been carving it up and tinkering and meddling for 150 years and b) the cold war ended.

I think "merging Africa" into a superpower would work about as well as telling California, Texas, and Virginia that they're all now one big state and they just need to suck it if they don't like it.

Ooh! Or maybe as well as telling three separate states at the collapse of the Ottoman empire "Hey guys! You're all Iraqis now!"
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #4 of 66
As April Glaspie, US Ambassador to Iraq said to Saddam Hussein in 1990 (re. Kuwait slant-drilling into Iraq and stealing Iraqi oil), "do what you must, the United States is not interested in your local problems".

The Somali piracy is their local problem. Perhaps the local Islamist militias in Somalia, enraged that tankers from Islamic countries are being hijacked, might go head to head with the pirates.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #5 of 66
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I think "merging Africa" into a superpower would work about as well as telling California, Texas, and Virginia that they're all now one big state and they just need to suck it if they don't like it....

Ooh! Or maybe as well as telling three separate states at the collapse of the Ottoman empire "Hey guys! You're all Iraqis now!"

That is why I think we need to invade - those countries are not likely to combine unless we shred the fabric of their society, and turn them into a mad max style hellscape. All of Africa needs to be reduced to rubble, and a new society with a new identity needs to form from the ashes.

We don't really have a choice, as I see it, unless they do it on their own. The European Union is a group of very different groups, as is the US - maybe they can form "The African Union". And it isn't just Africa, BTW - South America also needs to form a superpower (hopefully Chavez will merge everybody into a new version of the USSR).
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #6 of 66
Let the oil companies form their own elite military hit squads. It's their oil, they should defend it.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #7 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

that is why i think we need to invade - those countries are not likely to combine unless we shred the fabric of their society, and turn them into a mad max style hellscape. All of africa needs to be reduced to rubble, and a new society with a new identity needs to form from the ashes.

We don't really have a choice, as i see it, unless they do it on their own. The european union is a group of very different groups, as is the us - maybe they can form "the african union". And it isn't just africa, btw - south america also needs to form a superpower (hopefully chavez will merge everybody into a new version of the ussr).

Attention, people contributing to this forum from the year 2003:

We are from your future. I know that this will be difficult to accept, but in only 5 years, the GOP will be out of power in a democratic takeover, bush will have the lowest approval ratings in US history, the occupation of Iraq will be an unmitigated disaster, the economy will be on the verge of collapse, and the country will have just elected a black man whose name is "Hussein."

Do not be frightened. But you probably should also know that the neo-conservatives have been completely repudiated.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #8 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Let the oil companies form their own elite military hit squads. It's their oil, they should defend it.

They did, but the mercenaries are otherwise engaged.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #9 of 66
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Attention, people contributing to this forum from the year 2003:

We are from your future. I know that this will be difficult to accept, but in only 5 years, the GOP will be out of power in a democratic takeover, bush will have the lowest approval ratings in US history, the occupation of Iraq will be an unmitigated disaster, the economy will be on the verge of collapse, and the country will have just elected a black man whose name is "Hussein."

Do not be frightened. But you probably should also know that the neo-conservatives have been completely repudiated.

So you are OK with small countries with Nukes? Not a very good argument on your part IMHO. So what if it is a neo-conservative position, everything I said is still true. Hopefully Obama will do a better job of invading these crappy places than Bush did.

Obama could be the ultimate neo-conservative because he is more intelligent than Bush, and if he starts to think along the lines of my OP above, then he won't bungle it like Bush did. Every small country is a "failed state" or "potential failed state", and we need to get rid of them.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #10 of 66
Just a small thing, but it is impossible to "invade Africa".

It's like saying "We should invade Europe" or "We should invade Asia."

Africa's a continent, and it's bigger than America and Canada put together, and bigger than the whole of Central and South America, so you'd need an army bigger than... all the armies in the world to "invade" it and hold it, and that would be really hard, especially as the Egyptians and the Libyans and the Sahel states like Chad would unite with states south of the Sahara, like Niger and Eritrea and probably Mali, and the Middle East states across the Straits would weigh in, and you'd be fighting a guerilla war there in a place as large as Western and Central Europe, and then there's Nigeria, which has 24% of the whole population of Africa, and the southern and central African states like Namibia, Angola, Congo, Botswana would weigh in together, so there'd be more guerilla fighting in the huge forests and deserts of the Congo and the Kgalagadi, and there's South Africa, which actually has fighter jets and everything, and, well, I wouldn't do it, although Zimbabwe would be easy.
post #11 of 66
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah View Post

...especially as the Egyptians and the Libyans and the Sahel states like Chad would unite with states south of the Sahara, like Niger and Eritrea and probably Mali, and the Middle East states across the Straits would weigh in, and you'd be fighting a guerilla war there in a place as large Western and Central Europe

Exactly - I want them to unite. We don't have to win the war, just get them to unite and stay that way (to protect themselves from us). And, anyway - who cares how hard it is, getting rid of these small countries is a matter of survival.

If we do it, the human race might survive, if we don't then we won't.

Northern Africa isn't that big a deal - just a little more global warming and desertification and all that will be left is a few resort towns on the mediteranian. It is sub-Saharan Africa that I am talking about.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #12 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

Exactly - I want them to unite. We don't have to win the war, just get them to unite and stay that way (to protect themselves from us). And, anyway - who cares how hard it is, getting rid of these small countries is a matter of survival.

If we do it, the human race might survive, if we don't then we won't.

Northern Africa isn't that big a deal - just a little more global warming and desertification and all that will be left is a few resort towns on the mediteranian. It is sub-Saharan Africa that I am talking about.

Let me get this straight.

You're suggesting we "invade" the whole of sub-Saharan Africa?
post #13 of 66
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah View Post

Let me get this straight.

You're suggesting we "invade" the whole of sub-Saharan Africa?

Yes. Either that or get them to form a superpower some other way. What do you suggest - do you not think this whole thing is a problem or something?

We could make it a lot easier by picking a winner (Kenya, Congo or S.A.) ahead of time, and turn them into an empire builder.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #14 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

Exactly - I want them to unite. We don't have to win the war, just get them to unite and stay that way (to protect themselves from us). And, anyway - who cares how hard it is, getting rid of these small countries is a matter of survival.

If we do it, the human race might survive, if we don't then we won't.

Northern Africa isn't that big a deal - just a little more global warming and desertification and all that will be left is a few resort towns on the Mediterranean. It is sub-Saharan Africa that I am talking about.

I know you must be joking, and I'm getting a kick out of it.

It is absolutely impossible for the US to "invade" Africa. We are outsourced as it is. Unless we institute the draft and pour whatever coins and monopoly money we have left into defense (all of it, every last dime). It would be a mission that would either last decades and would collapse this country into ruin. There is no win here, just complete and utter failure.

Again, this reminds me of John Brunner's Stand on Zanzibar, this book is a fucking revelation.

Quote:
Fighting in an army is a psychotic condition encouraged by a rule-of-thumb psychological technique discovered independently by every son-of-a-bitch conqueror who ever brought a backward people out of a comfortable, civilized state of nonentity (Chaka Zulu, Attila, Bismark, etc.) and started them slaughtering their neighbors. I don't approve of people who encourage psychoses in their fellow human beings. You probably do. Cure yourself of that habit.

from You: Beast by Chad C. Mulligan

It seems that the Bush mind-set of aggressive problem solving is still alive within you e1618978, as Chad C. Mulligan says, "Cure yourself of that habit."

You can't invade Africa, you definitely cannot unite them and sure as fuck we will not win a battle in Africa, anywhere in Africa. They would rip us to pieces in the deserts and jungles, not including the insects, animals, reptiles, plant life, marine life, weather and disease that would follow us in our wake.

What a joke. Ha. Ha. Ha.
post #15 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

Yes. Either that or get them to form a superpower some other way. What do you suggest - do you not think this whole thing is a problem or something?

We could make it a lot easier by picking a winner (Kenya, Congo or S.A.) ahead of time, and turn them into an empire builder.

OK. Right. Well, they're not that big that on colonial intervention in Africa and I can foresee certain ethical and logistical problems associated with fighting a guerilla war across an entire continent and replacing the government of a functioning, stable democracy like South Africa with a puppet regime that will 'build empires' and then leaving them in control.

If we weren't fighting this war in Iraq, and you were really serious, it would be far cheaper and quicker to write off all African debt, all of it, build infrastructure, hospitals, schools, universities and utilities, make sure everyone has clean water, send in armies of teachers, develop the tourist infrastructure in the national parks, immunise everyone in the whole continent from polio and TB, eliminate cholera and malaria, negotiate land rights settlements, with the single precondition that governments take expert advice in their key ministries from first world experts.

That ought to do it. A solvent Africa would make us all richer and safer.
post #16 of 66
Absolutely Hassan i Sabbah, absolutely. That could work. But we have to take care of our debts and re-build our infrastructure, our healthcare, and our utilities first. Which could take years.

By the way, hasn't China been doing this in Africa for about a decade anyway?

Yes, they have. Probably too late for us, unless we partner with China.
post #17 of 66
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah View Post

That ought to do it. A solvent Africa would make us all richer and safer.

Richer and safer is good, but not good enough. If you have enough small countries, all you need is one bad dictator with a grudge, like Libya had. Libya had plenty of money from oil - 2007 per-capita GDP is $13K, and it was probably much higher before the revolution and embargo, also. Money didn't stop Libya from blowing stuff up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

You can't invade Africa, you definitely cannot unite them and sure as fuck we will not win a battle in Africa, anywhere in Africa. They would rip us to pieces in the deserts and jungles, not including the insects, animals, reptiles, plant life, marine life, weather and disease that would follow us in our wake.

That sounds like what people were saying before we successfully invaded Afghanistan ("The Afghans will shred us like they did to the British and Russians!", "Those Mountains are too hard!"). What is your alternative proposal? Are you OK with small countries with nuclear weapons?
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #18 of 66
Thanks e1618978, that was the best laugh I had all day.
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
post #19 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by iPoster View Post

Thanks e1618978, that was the best laugh I had all day.

He should send this idea to Harry Turtledove. Would make an awesome alternative history series.
post #20 of 66
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

He should send this idea to Harry Turtledove. Would make an awesome alternative history series.

After London is a smoking hole due to a nuke sourced from Angola ("In this alternate universe, the US invaded Africa and sparked them to form a nice safe democratic superpower"), people will be writing alternative histories. Right now it is current events, not history, and we still have a chance to reconfigure the world into one that is safe enough for plutonium.

If we don't invade, we will be constantly having to call in airstrikes on any of these countries that tries to build a reactor. If we keep them poor enough, maybe they can meet their energy needs with solar panels and windmills, so they don't need nuclear reactors. Niger and Nambia would be the biggest problems, due to their uranium mines.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #21 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

After London is a smoking hole due to a nuke sourced from Angola ("In this alternate universe, the US invaded Africa and sparked them to form a nice safe democratic superpower"), people will be writing alternative histories. Right now it is current events, not history, and we still have a chance to reconfigure the world into one that is safe enough for plutonium.

So, you're just leap-frogging from Iran to Pakistan to India to Angola...Whew.

But in all honesty, I understand your concerns about Africa and nukes.

It's only a matter of time.
post #22 of 66
Fucking Americans.

Vote Palin 2012.
post #23 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

After London is a smoking hole due to a nuke sourced from Angola ("In this alternate universe, the US invaded Africa and sparked them to form a nice safe democratic superpower"), people will be writing alternative histories. Right now it is current events, not history, and we still have a chance to reconfigure the world into one that is safe enough for plutonium.

If we don't invade, we will be constantly having to call in airstrikes on any of these countries that tries to build a reactor. If we keep them poor enough, maybe they can meet their energy needs with solar panels and windmills, so they don't need nuclear reactors. Niger and Nambia would be the biggest problems, due to their uranium mines.

I've been away. On the day of the American election I was up a mountain in the Cederberg of South Africa. I found out the result on the morning of November 6 by listening to a car radio. But I digress.

I've been to Namibia three times now, if you count breaking down on the border once. They make good beer, but they're not really in a position to make nuclear weapons. Niger has the best camels in the Sahel, apparently, but... they have a lot of desert. I don't think either of these nations are going to aim bombs at us. Namibia is Christian, and a stable democracy (esque), Niger is as poor as dirt. Good beer and good camels. Not a threat.

Incidentally, WE CANNOT INVADE AFRICA. IT IS A CONTINENT. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE.
post #24 of 66
Um, didn't we kinda just zoom past the part about how we'll be obliged to build lots and lots of breeder reactors which leads inevitably to putting lots of fissionable material in the hands of evil-doers, and then we have to invade Africa?

I mean, as long as we're entertaining really vast schemes as the antidote to turing London into a smoking crater, maybe we could start with alternatives to breeder reactors.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #25 of 66
post #26 of 66
I hate to be the one to point it out, but I suspect that the solution to keeping London from becoming a smoking crater is keeping me away.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #27 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I hate to be the one to point it out, but I suspect that the solution to keeping London from becoming a smoking crater is keeping me away.

We could always ransom you off to the Somali pirates. Of course, you'd only reemerge in a few years as a full on Bond villain, leading your band of oddly well educated cutthroats.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #28 of 66
Speaking of cutthroats, here's an interesting counterpoint to the idea that pirates be bad:

Quote:
The United States is essentially allowing Somalia to remain an ungoverned country because the status quo gives us more freedom of action in fighting al Qaeda and other extremist terrorism allies in Somalia. Piracy is a side effect, and not necessarily a terrible side effect, of that strategy.

There are very few people dieing from piracy. The areas that are being governed by the pirate companies are functioning and less violent than areas where piracy does not exist, indeed pirate cities are thriving. The pirates are not only commercial in nature, but they are enemies of the Islamic extremists that represent the enemy of the United States. It sounds crazy to say, but the pirates are essentially the secular, liberal capitalists of Somalia, and the United States would prefer to deal WITH not AGAINST those types of people. Know your history, the Europeans preferred dealing with the Brashaws of the Barbary states than the alternative, the Islamic militant armies. We are essentially allowing the pirates to build themselves as regional Brashaws of Somalia with the ransom money from piracy, while the Islamists who remain violent are struggling for funding.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #29 of 66
14 Reasons Why Somali Pirates Run a $150 Million Per Year Business

Quote:
1. Low Overhead
2. Diversified Labor Force
3. Flexible Business Operations
4. Dominant Market Share
5. Good Location
6. Access to Key Industry Knowledge
7. Good Distribution of Profits to Employees and Shareholders
8. Running a Cash Business
9. Negotiating to Optimize Return on Inventory (Albeit Stolen)
10. Reinvesting a Big Portion of Profits into the Business
11. Competitive Prices
12. A Repeatable Business Process
13. Good Inventory Turn
14. Diversification

From the comments...

Quote:
Posted by Khalid A. Qureishi Nov 24, 2008
This is a nice and funny attempt to provide a different perspective. Although there are many commonalities but in my opinion, point no. 7 is what the corporate world need(s) to improve on.

Steve Zissou would make good work out of these pirates...search and destroy.
post #30 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

So you are OK with small countries with Nukes? Not a very good argument on your part IMHO.

You are correct. Our only options are either to allow small countries everywhere to have nukes OR to conquer the entire continent of Africa.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #31 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

You are correct. Our only options are either to allow small countries everywhere to have nukes OR to conquer the entire continent of Africa.

Well, to be fair, the e#s plan doesn't require actual conquering. We just have to goad the countries of Africa into merging into a continent spanning super state. With nukes.

But, as history shows, the process of creating continent spanning super states reduces the likelihood of........

Huh. I just had a dashboard widget pop up warning me that I've exceeded my keyboard's plausibility parameters.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #32 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I hate to be the one to point it out, but I suspect that the solution to keeping London from becoming a smoking crater is keeping me away.

You are da bomb hahahahahaha lol

kill me hahahaha lol
post #33 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

14 Reasons Why Somali Pirates Run a $150 Million Per Year Business



From the comments...



Steve Zissou would make good work out of these pirates...search and destroy.

Is the ransom in US dollars or some other currency? And how is the money transfered... large suitcases or electronic transfer?? All seems a little fishy to me.
post #34 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by trailmaster308 View Post

Is the ransom in US dollars or some other currency? And how is the money transfered... large suitcases or electronic transfer?? All seems a little fishy to me.

Usually cash, probably USD or, in some cases, euros. The company delivers typically delivers it, usually with the help of a security firm that specializes in this. Alternatively, some are handled through negotiations in London with law firms representing the pirates.
post #35 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

That is why I think we need to invade .....

Just send in those three dudes from Gears of War.

They kick ass.
post #36 of 66
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Well, to be fair, the e#s plan doesn't require actual conquering. We just have to goad the countries of Africa into merging into a continent spanning super state. With nukes.

But, as history shows, the process of creating continent spanning super states reduces the likelihood of........

Huh. I just had a dashboard widget pop up warning me that I've exceeded my keyboard's plausibility parameters.

When have super-states gone to hot war, exactly? We had the cold war, and the "Great Game" between Britain and Russia, but neither of those were hot wars. We had Spain trying to take over England during the reign of Elizabeth I, but England wasn't a superpower until after the Spanish armada was destroyed.

WWI - started in the baltics
WWII, Europe - really a continuation of WWI
WWII, Pacific - would not have happened if China was stronger
Vietnam war - would not have happened if Vietnam was part of China
Korean war - would not have happened if Korea was part of China
Iraq war 1 and 2, would not have happened if the middle east was a single superpower.

Although I don't support a superpower in the middle east until we get off oil, that would be too much power in one set of hands. In the mean time, we benefit by stoking the fires of hatred between Jew and Arab, and between Sunni and Shia, because it stops them from forming a Middle-Eastern Union.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #37 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

In the mean time, we benefit by stoking the fires of hatred between Jew and Arab, and between Sunni and Shia, because it stops them from forming a Middle-Eastern Union.

My head is spinning...what a misguidance of intelligence.

Meanwhile India's burning...



So far the tally is:

Taj Mumbai [6-7 blasts][Gateway of India], Oberoi Hotel [4-5 blasts], Senior police officers are injured in cross-firing, Railway station in Mumbai attacked, Cama Hospital attacked, GT Hospital attacked and hostages taken. Some may be American and other western people.

All in one evening.

India and Pakistan. The Tweedledee and Tweedledum of the nuclear apocalypse.

...and you want to stir up more shit?
post #38 of 66
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

India and Pakistan. The Tweedledee and Tweedledum of the nuclear apocalypse.

Pakistan = too small. Russia, China or India (well, probably not India) - they need to pick one and merge up. Also, we can't afford "disputed territories" like Kashmir either, they have to have a single owner with a well defined border.

And I absolutely am against "Free Tibet". Screw Tibet, those pashmina wearing bastards.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #39 of 66
post #40 of 66
Thread Starter 
There is a disputed border between Alaska and Canada, but the two countries aren't killing each other over it. If Pakistan was larger, the issue would resolve itself, or at least not be a big issue anymore.

The Tibet part was a joke, though. Every other car in Boulder, CO where I live has a "Free Tibet" sticker on it.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Time to invade Africa