Reading that link, I realize it's been rather quiet on the idiot front lately. I almost miss them.

I haven't been controversial of late.

Not new. Foreign mercenaries have been involved in coups, both successful and failed, in sub-Saharan Africa for years, including a recent case involving attempted coup in equatorial Guinea a few years ago. See the following links:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/low/dates/stories/july/27/newsid_2499000/2499153.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/country_profiles/1070770.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3643250.stm

Of course, none of these would be shocking if people still read Machiavelli.

wasn't margaret thatcher's son involved in the equatorial guinea plot? why yes, yes he was.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4169557.stm

as for the particular article L pointed out... sounds more like fear mongering on the part of the congalese government than a real attempt at a coup d'etat. a few dozen men against 18000 UN peace keepers? well, okay. maybe.

E&L: once i get out from under my work/school work overload i'll see if i can't help make this place a little more controversial. it's been far too long since we had a good row!

KHC

Did I use the word new?

the point was simply to illustrate, although somewhat gratitiously.

"Proper peacekeepers" - you mean like the UN peacekeepers who sit and watch the slaughter (when they aren't being turned into rebel-futter) in the Congo?

Of do you mean 'proper peacekeepers' like the "Imperialist" French who destroyed the Cote d'Ivoire air force, and who inflamed the mess in the Congo?

Speaking of "ill-informed wanking", your opinions are not based on any real knowledge of the industry. You're an expert in finance and foul language, not mercenary operations.

In contrast, your posts about the Saudi stock market and the Iraqi dinar are interesting and entertaining.

have we just found ourselves a "industry expert?"

have we just found ourselves a "industry expert?"

Hardly. I'm no expert on that industry, and I don't pretend to be.

then, correct me if i'm wrong, but i believe this allows us to continue wanking to our hearts content ill-informed or otherwise.

I thought this was an anti IllInformedWanking Journal, but if it's not, don't let me stop you

Ah, my prayers are answered.

"this allows us to continue wanking to our hearts content"

Priceless. Thanks L for popularising the term.

so, mary, does that mean that we shouldn't even discuss the topic if we don't have PhD's in the subject and at least 10 years of field research behind us?

yes, E, our prayers have been answered!

My comment was directed towards "the" L, who is very concerned with issues of expertise.

Ah the boring twit who misreads her own sources is back.

As to my concern for expertise, well, I have a clear standard. If one knows fuck all about something, try to blither on like a moronic git on the subject.

I'm uninterested in your pathetic ideologically driven smears of UN peacekeepers generally (much as I am uninterested in similar smears against US and UK troosp, they are pathetic).

However, on the 'imperialist' French, get a mothefucking clue you ignorant slimey slug of a irresponsisble sub-literate scum of an ideologue: the French and other forces were attached, foreign citizens were killed. The CdI peace keeping force has stopped more bloodshed, whatever your pitiful, ignorant suburbanite whanking would have.

But, then it is merely some idiot suburbanite so let her blither on.

But, then it is merely some idiot suburbanite so let her blither on.

Says one suburbanite to another.

However, on the 'imperialist' French...blah, blah...

The "Imperialist" quote is from this article, originally published in Africa speaks

"During those first demonstrations against the war on Iraq, when some marchers sported "Chirac for President!" and "Vive la France" placards, I thought all the Francophilia naïve. France is, after all, an imperialist country, and while a midget in comparison with the U.S. juggernaut, it has some 33,000 troops stationed at bases in the Caribbean, Polynesia, East and West Africa, the Indian Ocean and elsewhere. In recent history as a NATO member, it has routinely joined with the U.S. in conducting imperial crusades in the Persian Gulf (1991), the Balkans (1993-present), and Afghanistan (2001-present). It retains colonies in the Caribbean, South America, the Indian Ocean and South Pacific, and a dominant role in the economies of some foreign colonies."

If your Francophile heart is wounded by the writer's criticism, tant pis. Discuss it with him.

I feel like it's my birthday.

i feel like i've won the wanking lottery

eerie, drdougfir - do you think the French have done more good than harm in places like Rwanda and the Cote d'Ivoire? If so, why?

Oh, nobody likes the French. Not even the French like the French. But let's keep things in perspective: they can't possibly have done any harm to Africa that a few hundred drug-crazed guns-for-hire couldn't fix.

And if perchance mercenaries won't solve the civil wars, then I'm sure conflict diamonds and child soldiers will.

they can't possibly have done any harm to Africa that a few hundred drug-crazed guns-for-hire couldn't fix.

Have you ever talked to or read anything by these "drug-crazed guns-for-hire?" In contrast to the pro-UN types and the Saudi-loving US state department, they're fairly pragmatic and sane.

The only "drug-crazed guns-for-hire" I've read about lately are the heroin-addled jihadis and the LRA types.

Right: so pragmatic and sane that, when your money runs out, they do too--or, if the rebel leader/warlord/whatever has a cache of conflict diamond, they'll switch sides until and unless you up the ante, too. I'm not keen about UN peacekeepers in internal conflicts generally--these people are outsiders who have no business being in the middle of locals fighting except they were sent there by their governments. They don't give rats ass about the locals--so they they don't their hands dirty. The same, however, applies to mercenaries--except, in addition to Mars, they also follow Mammon. In places where there is no resource, there is no money to pay them, so they don't get involved. If there are resources, then they follow where the money is, and are happy to shoot up whoever inconsequential that stands in their way--usually, the local civilians--and doing wonders for the political process on the ground along the way.....

Like boxing a glacier, or however it was Stephen Colbert put it.

In places where there is no resource, there is no money to pay them, so they don't get involved. If there are resources, then they follow where the money is, and are happy to shoot up whoever inconsequential that stands in their way--usually, the local civilians--and doing wonders for the political process on the ground along the way.....

..like most of the governments, rebels and mujahideen in the area. Unlike the mercenaries, the Mammon-inspired UN is usually happy to give Mammon-inspired sovereign governments and 'separatists' a free pass.

Really, mercenaries are a horrible solution. But just about anything is better the abysmal 'solutions' we have right now.