Jump to content

Backstory?


Recommended Posts

While visiting Syria on their farewell tour of the free (and not-so-free) world, soon to be ex-president, the two term wonder, George W Bush, along with "can't-keep-it-in-his-pants" Bill Clinton seriously offend Bashar al-Assad with their unending run of "Are you Syrias" and "Als-Assad Bashar" jokes, the whole episode culminating in George W trying to calm down the persident by assuring him that he is really an "Alawite" sort of fellow afterall while Billie's caught trying to peek under the serving girls Burkha... ( I was just checking to see if she's going regimental or not, is that a crime?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The two most obvious reasons to intervene quickly with the most mobile force possible, (largely ruling out airborne because of vulnerability to ground fire), are the extraction of friendly civilian personnel ( though there aren't many US citizeans, if it's a UN mandate, it could be EU, Russian, Chinese and probably asian). and secondly genocide.

The deterioration of a domestic collapse that saw us in a Dafur/Rwanda/Kosovo situation wher armed units were literally exterminating civilians, would justify a Stryker type Force.

If this has a weakness it's that when it comes to dieing civilians other than their own the UN/US/EU have previously done bugger all till it was time to count the bodies and organise some show trials.

Still A "Humanitarian" need for rapid intervention would probably be the most "politically" acceptable back story for most.

Peter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The two most obvious reasons to intervene quickly with the most mobile force possible, (largely ruling out airborne because of vulnerability to ground fire), are the extraction of friendly civilian personnel ( though there aren't many US citizeans, if it's a UN mandate, it could be EU, Russian, Chinese and probably asian). and secondly genocide.

The deterioration of a domestic collapse that saw us in a Dafur/Rwanda/Kosovo situation wher armed units were literally exterminating civilians, would justify a Stryker type Force.

If this has a weakness it's that when it comes to dieing civilians other than their own the UN/US/EU have previously done bugger all till it was time to count the bodies and organise some show trials.

Still A "Humanitarian" need for rapid intervention would probably be the most "politically" acceptable back story for most.

Peter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The two most obvious reasons to intervene quickly with the most mobile force possible, (largely ruling out airborne because of vulnerability to ground fire), are the extraction of friendly civilian personnel ( though there aren't many US citizeans, if it's a UN mandate, it could be EU, Russian, Chinese and probably asian). and secondly genocide.

The deterioration of a domestic collapse that saw us in a Dafur/Rwanda/Kosovo situation wher armed units were literally exterminating civilians, would justify a Stryker type Force.

If this has a weakness it's that when it comes to dieing civilians other than their own the UN/US/EU have previously done bugger all till it was time to count the bodies and organise some show trials.

Still A "Humanitarian" need for rapid intervention would probably be the most "politically" acceptable back story for most.

Peter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...