Doesn't anyone else see that Africa is a big fat DIVERSION?!

[Brotherjohn]

Nothing against the continent or its people, you see. There are problems there that need addressing. But this president has been notoriously disinterested in world affairs (except invading Muslim countries) and, for that matter, world travel. Now he not only launches a 5 country tour of the continent, but begins sending troops to the continent. Coincidentally just when questions about Iraq are really starting to heat up and the war is starting to bog down.

The press needs to bite into the Iraq issue (pre-war intel and post-war quagmire) like a pit bull, because the WH is shaking it harder and harder trying to get free of it. I think they smell blood, but they need to stay on the trail.

[HootieMcBoob]

1. yes

I think the UN has the right intentions but I don't think for a minute that the crime family would consider anything the UN suggests or requests for humanitarian purposes, I mean come on they want the UN gone !

I think they see a cover for going into Africa for purposes of exploitation as well as the use of Liberia as (you're right) a diversion from the quagmire.

I don't believe they do anything ever for the "right" reasons.

[asjr]

2. Africa

Diversion is exactly right. There are too many questions being unanswered and this is a way to at least slow the probe down. As far as the media is concerned, I think they will just go along with W and keep us all in the dark. What I don't understand is why. If everything finally comes out--the truth, doesn't the media know it will all come down on their heads. Their spin will come to haunt them and nobody, ever, will believe a word they say. I am there already.

[markus]

3. They really believe that can win Black and Hispanic votes

They are attacking our own Maginot line as a diversion, yes. Also, any black middle class votes they can peel off will help solidy the south.

The real presidential year assault will be a multi-pronged attack on MN/WI, FL and CA.

[jmcgowanjm]

4. Liberia is Grenada redux

3 million dead in Congo
800k in Rwanda
CAR(across the river from Congo) is a mess.
We stopped hearing about the Ivory Coast civil war.
Saw a piece on Burundi, it's still hot.
And what about that coup(w/ the photo of destroyed tanks!)
in Mauritania.
We'll never control anything outside of Monrovia.
so many stories on DU detailing fraud, coverups, diversions
USMedia ignoring them all.
Yeah, Diversion's the word.

[Brotherjohn]

5. Plus, it allows them to seem more consistent. (emphasize "seem")

They now allege they went into Iraq for humanitarian reasons (yeah, right!). So they have to show that they're willing to go into other countries for similar reasons. So they send -- what, 20? -- troops to Liberia to "save" the people and restore order.

Forget the fact that W pledged to not engage in "nation building". His stubbornness regarding Iraq has put him in a Catch 22 where he has to do things he pledged not to so that he can justify Iraq.

Of course, to this bunch, any excuse to send more troops around the world is welcome, because it's just another step towards empire.

[havocmom]

6. Diversion AND political payoff

to Pat Robertson. Wonder if it is a cover to get a bunch of specialists in to help Robertson with some personell problems at the mines.

Also, everytime the shrub gets in a plane these days, I wonder if he is about to become the next sacrifice to the ongoing BFEE PR macinations. He does seem to be fading in his usufulness to them and getting more and more checks on the liability list, especially as the poll numbers keep falling. Remember, these guys are all Amerikan CEOs and that is a species not known lately for creative solutions to problems. They always seem to go immediately to the 'cut personell' option to balance books.

[DrGonzoLives]

7. Diversion?

A genocidal loon in the Congo, whom we have actual evidence of butchering people, is a diversion? Intervening in a 14-year-old bloody civil war is a diversion?

I can agree that the press' efforts to highlight how terrorism is being fought in Africa is a diversion, but to minimalize what is going on over there is just wrong.

[havocmom]

9. Not minimizing horrors going on there

just questioning misadministration motives for sending the shrub. It is not like he has ever solved any problem for anyone. On the contrary, things seem to go to hell in a handbag whenever he shows up.

Is he gonna make peace there like he does everywhere else?

[DrGonzoLives]

11. He'll try to tap into those diamonds and that oil in western Africa

which, I think, is the real reason he's getting involved. I can also agree that he might be using the situation over there as a diversion to an extent...it just sounded like original poster was implying that the stuff going over there was a simple diversion from Iraq, and I can't agree with that.

[Brotherjohn]

15. Right. As I said in the original post...

I'm not branding the entire continent and its people as a "diversion". There ARE legitimate problems there that need to be addressed.

I just don't think that is what Bush is doing. Besides, I don't think he (or his entire administration) is CAPABLE of doing it. They will only make things worse, in the long run.

I think first and foremost in Bush's (Rove's) mind when this trip was planned was "we need to get people's mind off Iraq and the economy". Funny, but Iraq was to get people's minds off the economy (and to exert American empire). Eeverything these guys touch turns to S***.

[StClone]

12. Years of Horrors...

...and suddenly a Bush interest!?! The hideousness will go on long after, but Bush will use the trip to appear global, caring and involved with helping the lessers of the world now.

Bush's tap dance through the Sub-Sarah will not help the people of that ravaged region. His trip serves other purposes. If that isn't clear it is to the people there.

[DrGonzoLives]

13. Bush USING Africa is a diversion

although there's plenty of oil and cheap labor for his corporate buddies as well. My point was that what is going on every day over there and has been for years is no diversion.

[Brotherjohn]

16. Right, yes, of course. He's USING Africa as a diversion.

I should have been more grammatically complete. He is making this trip to Africa and sending troops to Liberia to create a diversion from issues at home and in Iraq.

There. I feel better now.

[seeker4ever]

8. Yes Immediately!

Mark my words, the closer the election gets expect more "distractions".

Karl the C*nt and his empty headed drone will be orchestrating another terror attack (by way of their limp support of real homeland security measures) and expect lots of dirty smear tactics from the administration that has the patent on "integrity".

Anyone read "Bush's Brain"?

[rman]

10. oil, diamonds, gold

lots of resources there.
maybe it is also a diversion.
but it's not like they don't have interests there.

[havocmom]

14. Yep,

see my reply (#10) in this post:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=7183&mesg_id=7183&page=#7322

[Eloriel]

17. I know one thing for certain about Bush, and he's never let me down

And that is that he and his administration NEVER do anything that isn't for their own benefit first, foremost and too often, only. Everything is either for political gain or benefit (and distraction fits that quite well), or for personal profit for themselves or their corporate cronies.

If there is EVER any benefit for The People, or others, or America as a whole, it's purely and entirely accidental.

So, yes, this Liberia thing has ulterior motives in there somewhere. Perhaps it's just distraction, I don't know. Too, there are often mor than 1 reason to do something. I'm waiting for the real truth to come out, although "oil" is usually truth enough for such escapades.

Eloriel

[Az]

18. Africa and a desperate Bush

The need in Africa is real. Africa has been ignored for generations now and its plight is dire.

Enter Bush Inc. Fresh from a war they claimed was for humane and defense purposes. Their claims of WMD floundering they can only cling to the humane aspects of their claim. Yet Africa burns worse than Iraq ever did and they do nothing. Thus they need to act on Africa to cover their remaining justification for Iraq. Their hands are forced on this one so they are going to make it work for them. Add to the mix the fact that there may be oil and diamonds in the mix and the new opportunity to sell arms and you have your reasons for action now.

[Solomon]

19. Here's what I'm waiting on people to realize:

Everywhere Bush goes, he incites and foments bloody warfare. He goes on these "peace" missions, and the result always is an escalation in fighting.

When you think about it, he's doing nothing but the same thing the Bushs' have being doing for decades. They sell weapons to both sides of a conflict, then they cause war. I feel badly for Africa right now. It has enough problems of its own than to be goaded into suicide so that we can "step in" and save the day. Not to mention of course that the people always have to pay for our stepping in, so all that oil, gold, diamonds, magnesium, etc. becomes ours.