HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Obama says 100 US militar...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Feb 22, 2013, 08:41 AM

Obama says 100 US military personnel deployed to African nation of Niger

Source: AP

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama says about 100 U.S. military personnel have been deployed to the African nation of Niger (nee-ZHEHR’).

In a letter to Congress, Obama says the forces will focus on “intelligence sharing” with French troops fighting Islamist militants in neighboring Mali. He says the American forces have been deployed with weapons, quote, “for the purpose of providing their own force protection and security.”

The U.S. and Niger signed agreement last month spelling out legal protections and obligations of Americans who might operate from the African nation. But U.S. officials declined at the time to discuss specific plans for a military presence in Niger.

The Pentagon is also considering plans to base unarmed spy drones in Niger to boost its ability to see what is happening in the region.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-says-100-us-military-personnel-deployed-to-african-nation-of-niger/2013/02/22/d49a4bc8-7cf3-11e2-9073-e9dda4ac6a66_story.html



By Associated Press, Updated: Friday, February 22, 8:29 AM

19 replies, 2287 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 19 replies Author Time Post
Reply Obama says 100 US military personnel deployed to African nation of Niger (Original post)
steve2470 Feb 2013 OP
loudsue Feb 2013 #1
pangaia Feb 2013 #2
EastKYLiberal Feb 2013 #3
SkyDaddy7 Feb 2013 #8
Sunlei Feb 2013 #17
ronnie624 Feb 2013 #13
Fuddnik Feb 2013 #4
newfie11 Feb 2013 #7
amandabeech Feb 2013 #11
KG Feb 2013 #5
dipsydoodle Feb 2013 #6
TwilightGardener Feb 2013 #9
rachel1 Feb 2013 #10
ButterflyBlood Feb 2013 #14
Sunlei Feb 2013 #16
Comrade Grumpy Feb 2013 #18
Sunlei Feb 2013 #19
OKNancy Feb 2013 #12
Sunlei Feb 2013 #15

Response to steve2470 (Original post)

Fri Feb 22, 2013, 08:54 AM

1. Here we go again.

Damn it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to steve2470 (Original post)

Fri Feb 22, 2013, 09:03 AM

2. On no...

need I say more...?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to steve2470 (Original post)

Fri Feb 22, 2013, 09:06 AM

3. Fighting a smarter war on terror. Just like he campaigned on.

 

This should come as no surprise to anyone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EastKYLiberal (Reply #3)

Fri Feb 22, 2013, 10:14 AM

8. EXACTLY!!

I like how he has done things so far...Obama is very effective & puts the least amount of US forces at risk.

Some people think the threat from terrorist attacks is a 100% lie...I could not disagree more. Obama does not use the threat like Bush did & he does not brag about his accomplishments when Bush would brag about his failures as accomplishments!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SkyDaddy7 (Reply #8)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 01:47 PM

17. agree, I also like the way "Obama is very effective & puts the least amount of US forces at risk"

effective assistance and not swatting the fly with a jackhammer. Not many American boots on the ground risking their lives against roadside bombs.

I never want the USA to go back to those days where Bush Admin proudly shows America a picture of a building with a target on it then shows the missile strike crushing the entire building. Or that convoy of cars/trucks leaving Kuwait and proud pics of the entire convoy roasted. Or Iraq where bush cheney protect the oilfields and the city infrastructure is ruined so our 'private for profit' contractors can use billions of our federal dollars to rebuild them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EastKYLiberal (Reply #3)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 10:54 AM

13. The "war on terror" is a crock of shit, to begin with.

It's a pretext for US policies of aggression and dominance; an excuse for maintaining a military empire, which, as has always been the case throughout history, is the very thing that drives terrorism. The threat of global terrorism would be dramatically reduced by a reform to the US foreign policy establishment, and dealing with terrorism from a law enforcement point of view, instead of deploying the military throughout the world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to steve2470 (Original post)

Fri Feb 22, 2013, 09:06 AM

4. Maybe we're just there to protect the Yellowcake from Saddam.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fuddnik (Reply #4)

Fri Feb 22, 2013, 09:48 AM

7. Lol that's what I was thinking nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to newfie11 (Reply #7)

Fri Feb 22, 2013, 01:56 PM

11. Me, too.

I wonder if we will open a diplomatic mission with accompanying CIA annex.

Just kidding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to steve2470 (Original post)

Fri Feb 22, 2013, 09:12 AM

5. man, what if we a had a prez that was a peace prize winner...oh, wait...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to steve2470 (Original post)

Fri Feb 22, 2013, 09:32 AM

6. Backdoor into Mali.

Plain and simple.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to steve2470 (Original post)

Fri Feb 22, 2013, 10:25 AM

9. Small presence, non-combat, there for a specific task (promised French/Mali support)--

I don't see the problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to steve2470 (Original post)

Fri Feb 22, 2013, 01:52 PM

10. More world policing and more wasteful spending of taxpayers's dollars

to "spread" democracy/freedom/security.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rachel1 (Reply #10)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 10:59 AM

14. How much does a 100 person mission cost?

Probably less than the monthly cost of Cold War-era US bases still in place in Japan and Germany. And significantly less staffed too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rachel1 (Reply #10)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 01:25 PM

16. as wastefull as R-states spending taxpayer money to force vagina probes?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sunlei (Reply #16)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 01:49 PM

18. The two things are not remotely related, but yes, and probably more so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade Grumpy (Reply #18)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 02:05 PM

19. the poster mentioned help to Mali as 'wastefull' spending of OUR taxpayer money

I doubt the republican years of hundreds of bills, hundreds of state gov. hours, to chip away at womans health issues cost taxpayers less- than 100 troops to assist the French troops with their help to Mali. That republican spending is squandering of taxpayer dollars.

The French are our allies after all.

I think it sucks that our American Gov. politicans sit on their thumbs in washingtondc when a country like Mali reports they have been invaded, their citizens are being killed. Mali asked for help.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to steve2470 (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 04:36 AM

12. kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to steve2470 (Original post)

Sat Feb 23, 2013, 12:49 PM

15. good, the French need some assistance, help to get those terrorist attackers- out of Mali

Thank God the French stood up and helped Mali right away.

Our Gov. was to busy fighting days over releasing some gov. funds for the NJ shore and vagina probes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread