From the moment France invaded Mali in January, the US has expressed “support,” but in a limited, troop transporting sort of way, while insisting that “boots on the ground” were never even being considered.
Today marked the arrival of those first “boots,” in the form of US ground troops assigned to “liaison support” for French and African troops. Officials say so far there are only “about 10” troops involved, but the number could grow as the war drags on.
Now instead of insisting the US won’t send ground troops, the Pentagon is simply claiming that those troops aren’t going to engage in direct combat, though exactly what they’re doing remains something of a mystery, with Socom commander Admiral McRaven refusing to provide specifics.
These sort of support missions, of course, have historically been a shoe-horn to much larger, open-ended military commitments, with the deployment of small numbers of military advisers setting the stage for decades of US involvement in Vietnam involving enormous military commitment. Though the US is still envisioning the Mali mission as small, France has already made it clear their forces are never leaving, and that this is an open-ended sort of war.
Ah, the War for Timbuktu grows more serious. So, who will be the first American to die to control the important place called Timbuktu?. And remember, every time you hear that they need to cut the budget or raise the taxes, we had the money to fight the War for Timbuktu.
Learn about Jason Ditz and see his great photo: http://colorrevolutionsandgeopolitics.blogspot.de…
When Ike put troops on the ground in Viet Nam in 1959, they were called advisors. By 1968, we had 500,000 troops on the ground. Make sure you write to your congressmen, and protest these US military liaisons or advisors in Mali. We do not need any more Viet Nam's, Iraq's or Afghanistan's.
Didn't the U.S. follow the French into some other war…gee…I forget…where was that…I dunno…probably not that important or we would have learned from it…[sigh]
As usual, they're lying. Africa has something the U.S. government wants, and is going to get. Telling us that U.S. troops aren't going to engage in combat is like telling rabbits not to breed.