[Mekong Delta]

Originally Posted by superc0ntra

One million people dying is not a cause for invasion. Someone tell Bush they have WMD's and Burma will be invaded before the weekend

Tell Cheney there is oil and his buddies would before before tomorrow afternoon.

[OldGoat]

Well, people clamor for an invasion for humanitarian reasons? Let these other, leeching democracies do something unilaterally for a change? Oh, that's right, they lack the capability and resolve to do anything on their own.

[Timbaland]

Nah I don't think we should do anything. Last thing we need is more people in the world hating us. If their military rulers don't want our help, don't help them. We would receive a ton of criticism and backlash if we invaded that country.

[CJF]

I'm sure China wants an American sattelite nation right next to them!

Remember how tolerant they were in our invasion of the whole Korean peninsula!

[Saith]

Originally Posted by Mekong Delta

Tell Cheney there is oil and his buddies would before before tomorrow afternoon.

Tell Clinton that refugees will vote democrat and they'll be there in five hours.

[Darwinist]

Actually, invading Burma and establishing a base there would be an ideal long-term goal for the US by establishing bases right in China's backyard. But you already have bases not so far away, and right now any movement against Myanmar will lessen the pressure on Iran - you can only do so much at the same time.

So no, Burma will be left to rot. And not just by the US, but by everyone.

[busdriver01]

No, unless it is discovered that they poses natural resources we can use.

[blank1]

If the world is so concerned let the world do something. The European nations' militaries are more than technologically and numerically (combined at least) competent enough, and I'd imagine they have good training too.

The U.S.'s actions are damned if we do damned if we don't. We should take our lessons from Afghanistan and Iraq and not do a damned thing, unless there's mid to long term economic and political advantage in it. Sure, it's the right thing to do, to assist the Burmese people even if it's against the will of their junta. But if it turns to violence, we'd get involved in another occupational war where we are stopped by domestic and international politics from taking the necessary, even if unsavory, means to completely pacify hostile resistance.

Screw that. Let someone else deal with it. Our economy needs any breaks it can get right now.

[SnakeEyes]

HILARIOUS. Burma gets uptight about letting in (certain) foreign countries pretty much out of concern that ruling powers like the States will use their weakness as an opportunity to invade, and here's good ol' chardog validating their concern.

[SnakeEyes]

Originally Posted by Darwinist

Actually, invading Burma and establishing a base there would be an ideal long-term goal for the US by establishing bases right in China's backyard. But you already have bases not so far away, and right now any movement against Myanmar will lessen the pressure on Iran - you can only do so much at the same time.

So no, Burma will be left to rot. And not just by the US, but by everyone.

So not invading a foreign country is equivalent to "leaving it to rot", I'm guessing because American presence anywhere can only be a good thing? Do you actually believe that?