EU peacekeepers soon in the DR of Congo

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Colon


Read my previous post. I think the basic idea is to create a safe haven in the area, which could be very valuable to refugees and also in order to ship humanitarian aid into the region.

If your safe haven is porous, and/or you don't have heavy weapons support and airmobility, 1,400 troops on the ground can't do much, even in a small area. Look at UNISOM I for a good example.

1,400 sounds like a decent number, until you factor in support troops (clerks, maintenance, mess hall, medical, signals, etc.) which don't give you nearly the combat posture as line troops will, and the fact that you can't pull 50% or 100% night alerts all the time.

Three airmobile brigades, OTOH, could rapidly take the war to the militias and rebels all over the country, and break their asses pretty quick, although it would be a while before you could train competent national forces to maintain stability. A long while. Another problem is that the resource richer areas of Congo (Katanga especially) have always been a bit secessionist, so "national" troops wouldn't be particularly welcome.

[Bereta_Eder]

I'm not at all sympathetic at all that EU "peacekeeping" business I have to say. 90% of the time it's interests as with most "peacekeeping missions".

[cinch]

At least it's... something.

to the 1400.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Yes, the world would be a much better place if we just allowed rampant genocide. Who are we to interfere?

[Bereta_Eder]

I'm also not at all comfortable to be part of an expedition i dont know almost anything about.

[MichaeltheGreat]

You going?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
You going?

Mark might be. Has he told any of you where he's being posted?

Yes, the world would be a much better place if we just allowed rampant genocide.

It's in Africa. Who cares?

[Bereta_Eder]

no, but soldiers dont decide for themselves governments do for them and governments should not be unchecked but be ruled by the people hence my simingly pretentious attitude of being involved in it.

and "peacekeeping" has always been a nice dressing for furthering interests, for the most part as I said. i'm sure the EU hasnt passed on to another level of esoterical enlightnment to start being an exception to that sad rule. so a general caution until we know more.
Congo was a rich belgian colony BTW wasnt it?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by DinoDoc

Yes, the world would be a much better place if we just allowed rampant genocide.

It's in Africa. Who cares?

I don't recall anything in my religious studies that the value of one human life is inherently less than the value of another, just because of where mommy and daddy happened to be from.

If that don't work for you, though, Africa has tons of valuable resources, and if someone can fix the place up, it's a nice potential marketplace.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
I don't recall anything in my religious studies that the value of one human life is inherently less than the value of another, just because of where mommy and daddy happened to be from.

I'm an equal opportunity uncaring bastard. I was against intervening in the Balkans as well.

[Bereta_Eder]

its funny... "peacekeeping" while at the same time forcing them to give up their donations to their farmers in order to enter to free trade agreements while we keep ours to our farmers... no wonder african exploitation by the west has risen 3fold the last ten years
and tons of "little" things like that.. including forceful campaigns for poweder milk instead of breat one resulting in tons of child deaths due to bad water but hey nestle made a profit.

just doesnt click

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Mark might be. Has he told any of you where he's being posted?

Yes, the world would be a much better place if we just allowed rampant genocide.

It's in Africa. Who cares?

Even the Greek army wouldn't have him trained up and assigned to a unit this fast. IIRC, he did mention where he was going, but it sounded like REMF staff duty.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I'm an equal opportunity uncaring bastard. I was against intervening in the Balkans as well.

I have an inherent interest in empire. I like the idea of filling up power vacuums around underutilized resources. Call it a long term global dominance strategy.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
I like the idea of filling up power vacuums around underutilized resources. Call it a long term global dominance strategy.

1400 people without adequate arms or rules of engagement (as is common in these peacekeeping missions to places without peace to keep) won't get you very far in filling a vaccum of any sort.

[Menlas]

Originally posted by paiktis22
its funny... "peacekeeping" while at the same time forcing them to give up their donations to their farmers in order to enter to free trade agreements while we keep ours to our farmers... no wonder african exploitation by the west has risen 3fold the last ten years
and tons of "little" things like that.. including forceful campaigns for poweder milk instead of breat one resulting in tons of child deaths due to bad water but hey nestle made a profit.

just doesnt click

The Rwanda/ Congo genocide that happened some years ago, with the Western countries being silent, surely made a lot more victims than the milk campaign.

I'd be very happy if this mission could avoid this kind of consequences. But maybe you'd prefer the EU to do nothing, as we brilliantly did the last time...