U.S. Marines poised to enter South Sudan

[Jesus Malverde]

Source: CNN

About 150 U.S. Marines are poised to enter turbulent South Sudan to help evacuate Americans and provide security for the U.S. Embassy, two U.S. military officials said Monday.

The troops are moving from Spain to Africa, probably to the nation of Djibouti, the officials told CNN's Barbara Starr on Monday.

An estimated 100 U.S. citizens are believed to be in South Sudan, where steady violence is stoking fears of an all-out civil war in the world's newest country.

On Sunday, all Americans who presented themselves at a U.N camp in the flashpoint town of Bor were evacuated safely, the State Department said.

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/23/world/africa/south-sudan-violence/

[hrmjustin]

1. Hope they get everyone out.

[TwilightGardener]

2. Protecting the embassy? Screw that, close the embassy and get everyone out.

What the fuck would we stay for?

[maxsolomon]

3. Because we invested a lot in getting this nation created

And don't want to see it shoot itself in the head/foot.

[TwilightGardener]

4. Rather not see American military getting shot in the head/foot. Re-open

the embassy when things calm down. It's like we learn nothing. This better not be residual Rwanda guilt.

[former9thward]

5. Keeping an isolated embassy open won't stop that.

It will only provide a focal point for attacks.

[maxsolomon]

7. The fight is between 2 different tribes vying for power and oil $.

It is not anti-USA or anti-NGO in nature, from what I understand. Where the US Military can be a force for good in the world, with truly altruistic (not profit) motives, I would like to see us try. Our efforts to create S. Sudan were largely motivated by humanitarian concerns.

150 well-armed Marines might be enough to protect the Embassy and create a safe zone for non-combatants, especially if the UN/EU nations follow suit. I don't know if it will work, but that would seem to be the idea, right? Stabilize, and stop S. Sudan from turning into another Somalia?

If risking the lives of our troops for any reason is defacto unacceptable, I would like to see our military reduced to the point where we're not tempted to do good, because we can't.

[TwilightGardener]

8. You might have missed where four troops were already wounded by gunfire.

It's enough of a risk to evacuate the embassy personnel and other Americans there--that's an appropriate use of the military. Trying to keep an embassy open in a country that collapsed in exactly 7 days is a recipe for disaster.

[maxsolomon]

11. Yes, wounded evacuating American and foreign nationals from a combat zone.

As you said, an appropriate use of military power.

As to the Embassy, the US Special Envoy is trying to mediate between factions - where should he do that from, Djibouti? Another country's embassy?

[TwilightGardener]

12. Sorry, I don't believe it's wise to try to keep a presence there right now--

diplomatic or military. This is a fledgling, broken country with an ineffective military force and complete political and factional disarray. If the location of the embassy (Juba?) becomes like the town of Bor where there's total chaos (and tons of British, Canadian and other foreign personnel who are currently trapped like rats), we may end up with a siege or a slaughter.

[maxsolomon]

13. 6800 UN troops in the country

And Ban Ki Moon promising the people of S. Sudan we won't abandon them.

I understand your concerns, but I think we're committed. Maybe we'll see the births of two new nations: South South Sudan and North South Sudan.

[warrant46]

6. The World's Policeman begins to flex its muscles

There must be oil or something that the corporations covet near there.

[geek tragedy]

9. 150 troops to evacuate US citizens is not flexing muscles, it's barely the twitch

of a nostril

[warrant46]

15. `LOL

[maxsolomon]

10. Do you even know the story of South Sudan?

Or is that just a reflex - dismiss any actions that Obama or the State Dept take as motivated by a national policy of enabling corporate greed?

[warrant46]

14. Willing to send your kid to die in that shit hole?

I'm Not

[maxsolomon]

16. I'm not willing to let my kid play football.

But parents don't choose where their adult children are sent to die when those kids VOLUNTEER to project American Power in exchange for a steady paycheck. Every conflict zone on the planet is a shit hole - they don't have civil wars on the Cote D'Azur.

You are questioning our motivation for poising 150 marines in Djibouti as a quick reaction force to protect an Embassy as motivated by greed. Are you also accusing the UN of stationing 6800 troops there just to get to the oil?

[warrant46]

17. Below

"those kids VOLUNTEER to project American Power in exchange for a steady paycheck." (the response)

Mercenaries----eh ?

My kid is paid shit, in fact several of his friends who are married get food stamps.

If there were any F@$#ing jobs that paid living wages, the military would have to do what it did ten years ago (when Iraq was the hot spot) pay bonuses etc.

But most here wouldn't understand ---duty, honor,, country, and I as a parent will question WTF the US is doing in that shit hole.

Just like my mother and father did when 3 of my family including me were getting our asses shot at in the Nam for $155.00 a month, $60.00 was "combat pay" (None of us were drafted)

You want mercenaries--send in Blackwater

[maxsolomon]

19. i did not say that americans in the american armed forces are mercenaries

i didn't even think it.

i said that they get paid (they do), not that they were paid adequately. and many join to get employment, or skills, or both. not all are motivated by patriotism like your family.

"duty, honor, country" is, frankly, what they sell you to get you to volunteer. the reality is often a shit hole: vietnam, afghanistan, iraq, the south sudan.

i don't want mercenaries.

[warrant46]

18. -