U.S. Deploying Security Team to Nigeria for Kidnapping Rescue


to whom belongs the future?
via BBC

The militant Islamist group Boko Haram (loosely translated as "Western education is forbidden" in the local Hausa language) kidnapped eight more girls from the village of Warabe in northeast Nigeria shortly after its leader threatened to do just that and to sell the nearly three hundred girls the group has kidnapped.

The U.S. offered to send a specially formed rescue team to Nigeria, and urged the president of Nigeria to make a decision quickly after he reportedly "welcomed" the offer without definitively accepting it. According to The Nation of Nigeria, the president accepted the offer today:

The statement [from a presidential spokesperson] reads: "President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan Tuesday welcomed and accepted a definite offer of help from the United States of America in the ongoing effort to locate and rescue the girls abducted from the Government Girls Secondary School, Chibok three weeks ago."

"The offer from President Barack Obama which was conveyed to President Jonathan by the United States Secretary of State, Mr. John Kerry in a telephone conversation which began at 15.30 Hours today, includes the deployment of U.S. security personnel and assets to work with their Nigerian counterparts in the search and rescue operation."

Three years ago, shortly after the election of Jonathan Goodluck as president of Nigeria, Uche Chukwumerije, a senator from the north, suggested the rise of Boko Haram could have been fueled by the successful use of militants and insurgency in the Niger Delta in the south to win that year's election. The Nation reported at the time:

Chukwumerije, representing Abia North, is worried about what he calls the politicisation of militancy in some parts of the country aimed at achieving political objective. 

The Senator expressed his views yesterday in a paper he presented at the 2011 Igbo Day Lecture at the Women Development Centre (WDC) in Abakaliki, capital of Ebonyi State… 

Chukwumerije said: "The issue of militancy in the Niger Delta has yielded them (the Southsouth) the presidency. If you watch what is going on now, the politicised illegal activities of Boko Haram are a proper determination to win the second round of presidential election in 2015".

He accused other ethnic groups of using similar organizations, such as the Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), to win the presidency.

He cited the OPC, the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND) and other youth groups in the Niger Delta as vehicles used by the Yoruba and the Niger Delta to win power.

The State Department stressed commandos, like the ones deployed in Uganda to capture Joseph Kony, would not be included on the team being sent to Nigeria. Whether the U.S. adds Boko Haram to the informal list of war on terror groups for which it has extended its military footprint on the African continent remains to be seen.

NEXT: 'Pole Tax' Still Causing Trouble for Texas Strip Clubs

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. So it is Hannibal Smith or Jack Bauer they are sending in?

    1. Clearly this is the plot of another Expendables movie.

      1. They’re kind of running out of old dudes though. Maybe they could add Clancy Brown and Carl Weathers to that one. Throw in Jackie Chan for good measure.

        1. Where’s Tommy Sizemore when you need him?

          1. Ooh, or Adam Baldwin. Now that would be a cunning rescue.

              1. THAT’S WHAT I SAID

      2. I don’t know if it is a real thing or was just a joke but I recently saw a reference to an Expendables spinoff called the “Expendabelles” starring such action adventure heroines as Sigourney Weaver, Linda Hamilton, and Angelina Jolie

        1. You are correct. I’d see that. From the comments there:

          My Dream Cast (7 Ladies)

          1. Lucy Lawless
          2. Pam Grier
          3. Scarlett Johansson
          4. Milla Jovovich
          5. Sarah Michelle Gellar
          6. Michelle Rodriguez
          7. Lucy Liu

          Although I’d like to see a few more older women in the cast.

          1. Also some Latinas:
            Salma Hayek
            Pen?lope Cruz

            1. Or Susan Sarandon or Geena Davis. The female equivalent of the wise and weary old sergeant who’s “too old for this” but they need her anyway, for wisdom and comic relief. Although maybe Pam Grier is in that role.

              1. Pam Grier is five or six years older than Geena Davis. Although she looks better, IMO.

          2. I think Pam Grier is getting up there in years.

            Of course, you have to respect any woman who can turn her hair into a weapon. 🙂

    2. Special Rescue Squad? That’s Predator.

      1. Bunch of slack-jawed faggots around here. This stuff will make you a god damned sexual Tyrannosaurus, just like me.

        1. I ain’t got time to bleed.

          1. “Now you take this home, throw it in a pot, add some broth, a potato. Baby, you’ve got a stew going.”

            1. I wonder how many people here got the reference… I hope a bunch.

              1. If it bleeds, we can kill it…

    3. All of the opertional plans, personel, and raid timelines can be found at

  2. Not. Our. Problem.

    1. Yeah, how could Islamic terrorists in the Third World ever matter to the USA?

      1. OK, so where do you draw the line here, PSF? Are we now obligated to help every other country any time they have an islamist problem?

        1. And by “help” I meant “actively intervene in that country.” It is obvious that if any of the BK guys tries to enter the US, or if any of the girls are trafficked here, that we would arrest/help as appropriate.

          1. As I said below, not the 101st Airborne. But some technical help (e.g. NSA sigint) and maybe a Special Forces team (assuming they’re invited) wouldn’t bother me.

            1. You want to send a couple of FBI agents to help Interpol? We can work that out.

              This is a kidnapping. This is a criminal matter. Our armed forces should have nothing to do with this. Period.

              1. C’mon, it’s not like something can go horribly, horribly wrong, dragging us into another quagmire.

              2. Don’t be obtuse. It’s obviously more than “a criminal matter.” Was it just a criminal matter when Bolsheviks robbed banks to finance a revolution?

                Granted, there is a tendency for separatist and revolutionary movements to devolve into mere criminal gangs (e.g. the Mafia, the IRA). But crimes committed by revolutionary groups aren’t merely criminal matters.

                1. You know who else robbed a bank to finance a revolution and it was just a criminal matter?

                  1. It’s obviously more than “a criminal matter.”

                    Armed men kidnapping girls for profit and/or pleasure is crime. Brazen, well-organized crime, but still crime.

                    It is no different that 3rd world armies getting into the drug trade. These are not acts of war, they are acts of crime.

            2. PapayaSF|5.6.14 @ 3:51PM|#
              “As I said below, not the 101st Airborne. But some technical help (e.g. NSA sigint) and maybe a Special Forces team (assuming they’re invited) wouldn’t bother me.”

              So long as they volunteer and you pay the bill it won’t bother me, either.

              1. Special Forces need to be trained, in any case. A little field trip shouldn’t cost that much extra.

      2. Unless they are backed by a disgruntled billionaire with an engineering degree, the make no difference what so ever to the USA.

        1. I’m generally not an interventionist, but as the military and economic leader of the world, the US using its power to punish slavers (real ones) and rescue slaves isn’t the worst deployment of resources imaginable in a global community.

          We’re not invading anyone. They welcomed and accepted our offer to help. Sometimes neighbors do that.

          1. When will you be deploying?

            1. When you get off the road I paid for.

              1. I’ll see you get TA-50 and a basic load of ammo….go for it.

              2. ooooooooo *snaps fingers*

                I’d deride that as a schoolyard taunt, but that would be unfair, because an actual schoolkid would probably come up with something slightly more clever, like a “your mom” joke.

              3. Tony|5.6.14 @ 3:52PM|#
                “When you get off the road I paid for.”

                No, shitpile, I paid for it.

          2. Fuck. Off. Tony. You. Dumb. Fuck. Lying. Sack. Of. Shit. Troll.

            1. Thank you kinnath for saying what needed to be said.

            2. No thank you.

          3. I can’t believe I’m saying it, but I must say Tony is right on this one.

            1. So, after this I assume you want US special forces in every country where women are kidnapped (probably in most cases to be sold into sex trafficking rings) by people who use violence and terror to achieve their goals?
              Good, should it start in China with the triads? Eastern Europe with their mafia types? Dubai, Turkey, Russia?

              Horrific and evil acts (sad to say) take place everyday and all over the world. Cherry picking a particular one because it gets some news coverage is not an effective way to combat it or a moral justification for sending American soldiers to kill foreigners in foreign countries for crimes committed there.

              1. It also incentivizes countries to spend resources on things other than crime prevention, domestic police forces and military needs because they depend on the US. This creates MORAL HAZARD and results in us subsidizing Europe’s socialism and Saudi Arabia’s monarchy (among others).

              2. No, because the mafia, triads, etc. are not totalitarian ideologies that hope to rule the world, and have declared war on and attacked the US. That’s what makes militant Islam different.

                1. They wouldn’t rule the world if given the chance? So, the only difference is the desire to rule the world. Leaving out the realistic chance that it could actually happen is immaterial to you. Also, what does their desire to rule the world have to do with rescuing kidnapped girls? One has naught to do with the other and its the kidnapping that is being used by you to justify the intervention.

          4. They’re not neighbors.

            1. “We are the Worrrrrrld, we are the children….. were saving our own lives!”


              1. Don’t they know it’s Christmastime at all?

    2. But we’re the World Policeman.
      Stop Resisting!

      1. Maybe we should para-drop Hans Brix!

  3. Well here’s a horror story that makes it difficult to take a non-interventionist position.

    1. Sure, if you’re looking for an excuse to intervene. (Which I know you aren’t, GMSM).

    2. Not really. The correct position is “That sucks. Hopefully the Nigerian authorities can resolve it with a minimum of violence.”

      1. I agree that we shouldn’t send troops in, but I really can’t overstate how abominable the Boko Haram is.

        This is just pure evil that needs to be destroyed

        1. I’m having trouble understanding why a big, rich nation like Nigeria needs our help. Surely they can kill people, too?

              1. I can see the NY Post headline now…

                Drone Loan Saves Slaves

          1. You’d think a nice, juicy bounty, say $1,000,000 McDuck dollars (or whatever they use for currency) on each head of the group, delivered dead, might bring in some outside interests in, in Africa itself.

            1. Christopher Walken overthrew a whole African government for just $100,000.

            2. Oh, I think we could get that price down. Start low and only raise it if we don’t get results.

            3. There is some humor here I am too rushed to write. But someone should put that idea in the form of a Nigerian 419 scam email.

              1. Dearest President Goodluck,

                I am a former Special Force Green Beret Ranger Airborne SEAL, with several medals. I am offering to you, help to free girls who have been captured and almost sold.

                If you can advance to my account the sum of $17,831.26, enough to purchase ammunition and first aid supplies, I can come and free hostage slaves for you.

                yours genially,

                Sargeant Commander Ruck Humper

                1. You did that wrong. The scammers don’t give out their account numbers.

                2. You’re spellangs to gudde.

          2. It’s hard to know how either of us will do it. The Boko Haram doesn’t have a problem with killing either hostages or children.

            1. Tony|5.6.14 @ 4:10PM|#
              “It’s hard to know how either of us will do it. The Boko Haram doesn’t have a problem with killing either hostages or children.”

              Good. Buy a ticket and go argue with them.

              1. He spent all his money on ROOOOOOOOAAAAADDDDSSSSS!

                (I guess we are supposed to pretend a part time glory hole mopper is a net tax payer.)

              2. It’s good that they kill children?

                It goes without saying that if any political philosophy most resembles psychopathy, it would be yours.

              3. Wait until they sell them and then go raid the camp and kill the now hostage-less thugs. Keep the money. And then go find whoever bought them and take them back.
                I suggest the IRS do this, as they are the most ruthless and unaccountable armed bunch of thugs we have.

  4. So boko means “western education?” Huh.

    1. Nah. Considering the geography, it’s probably picked up from French beaucoup, so boko haram means plenty unkosher.

  5. While I can see some situations where we might assist other governments with what are normally internal matters (ie, major catastrophes), I have yet to see a compelling reason for the US to be involved here. Nigeria is one of the more functional governments over there. So why can’t they deal with a bunch of thugs? Where are the other African Union nations? Where is former colonial power the UK?

    1. It has to be us, so there will be someone to blame when it goes badly.

      That’s one of the major problems with setting ourselves up as the world police. When something happens everyone says “Call the cops!” because if they don’t call the cops, they’d be blamed for not calling the cops. Never mind that we’ll going over their, kick down the door, shoot a few dogs, murder someone with a cell phone and then swagger home like we saved the universe.

    2. You don’t think it’s in our national interest (and in the interests of libertarianism) to defeat Islamic terrorists?

      I’m not saying we send the 101st Airborne, but a little US help could go a long way, and a successful rescue would be good PR for us and bad PR for Islamists.

      1. Maybe we should help them out, then get them to help Europe out with oil, then we can exit European affairs.

      2. No, it’s not. As should be obvious by our disastrous foreign policy (never mind the fact that these terrorists – pieces of shit that they are – have not harmed me). You wanna kill ’em? Start a Lincoln Brigade and knock yourself out.

        1. Our disastrous foreign policy is a separate issue from whether Islamic terrorists are defeated. It should be obvious that the success of Islamism comes at the expense of liberty. The issue is how to deal with it. Simply ignoring it isn’t much of a strategy. The Taliban hadn’t harmed us before 9/11, either.

          I like the Lincoln Brigade idea, though.

          1. Attempting to reshape the Middle East for the better part of a century is what led to 9/11. Leave them alone to fuck up their own countries and murder each other.


              1. Who blamed America? Look out for your knee flying at your face . . .

                1. Psst. I was being sarcastic.

                  1. That’s on me – I should have known. Didn’t sound like you.

            2. This would not be about attempting to reshape Nigeria. Just a hostage rescue and killing some Islamists.

      3. No, it’s not at all our national interest. And even if it were, we have proved time and again that we’re incompetent at this basic function (see, for example, Iraq and Afghanistan, where we managed to turn the successful removal of genocidal governments into a futile decade-long exercise is “nation building”).

      4. Your pants-shitting fear of Islamic morons half a world away is not shared by all of us.

        1. You sound just like that guy before Vader Force-choked him.

          1. That was my uncle.

            1. Oh, sorry to hear that. He died when those terrorists blew up the Death Star, huh? Damned shame.

              1. He died when those terrorists blew up the Death Star, huh?

                It was an inside job!

                You’re all a bunch of drones! Especially the drones!

              2. Terrorists? You think a bunch of bush fighters could hit a target less than two meters wide?

                No, no, no. It was an inside job!

                1. In case anyone has never seen this thread.

                  1. Funny–forgot about that one. Interesting how you took on the interventionalist role so smoothly.

                    1. I’m not a derp, but I do derp one on derpervisison.

        2. How soon they forget.

          1. Forget what? 9-11? I was there. It will never happen again.

            Sorry if I’m not terrified by slack-jawed religious fanatics thousands of miles away like you are.

            1. I’m not “terrified” of Boko Haram. I just want to see Islamic terrorists defeated. Unfortunately, ignoring them doesn’t work.

              1. “Ignoring them doesn’t work.”

                Actually it exactly does. Terrorism is NEVER a FIRST line of attack. That bears pondering.

                1. Um, what? Terrorism is often a first line of attack. It may not be a first choice, in the sense that Al Qaeda would prefer to have nuclear ICBMs, but it’s the main strategy of Islamic militants. And ignoring them doesn’t make them go away.

                  1. Terrorism has always proven extremely ineffective at accomplishing its goals. It is an act of desperation, not aggression. If you had any other means at your disposal whatsoever, you would use those instead.

                    1. “Acts of desperation” can kill thousands of people, and set the stage for much worse later on. It’s ridiculous to minimize them.

      5. OK, so what’s the trigger/threshold/whatever for our becoming involved in this sort of thing. If not a military unit, then who? FBI agents? The Boy Scouts?

        1. ‘Musircans. See: Grenada.

          1. The fuck?


            1. But, seriously, fuck Amerisca.

            2. I thought you were saying “Musicians”.

      6. PapayaSF|5.6.14 @ 3:48PM|#
        “You don’t think it’s in our national interest (and in the interests of libertarianism) to defeat Islamic terrorists?”

        No, not unless they threaten us. If they don’t, I don’t care.

        1. You don’t think Islamic terrorists have been threatening us for several decades now? Examples are legion, and the death toll is in the thousands. The fact that this particular group of Islamic terrorists hasn’t attacked us is kind of beside the point, because all Islamic terrorists, without exception, hate the US and want us destroyed. If Boko Haram hasn’t attacked us, it’s only because they haven’t had the resources yet.

          1. There are actually people in the world who go whole days at a time without thinking about us at all.

          2. It’s like you forgot the entire previous decade.

            We’re dealing with brain dead thugs who live in huts and caves. And their leaders who scream Death to America do so to appeal to these knuckleheads. If they attack us directly then we fuck a bunch of them up, but other than that, none of our business.

  6. This really isn’t our problem, but this is one case where I’m having a tough time getting worked up over our involvement. These “Boko Haram” gentlemen are pretty damn despicable.

    1. I wouldn’t object to our involvement if we had a good chance of rescuing the girls and destroying BK within three weeks. But more likely this will turn into a sticky trap and there will be mission creep, etc.

      A multi-national force has been looking for Joseph Kony for years and he’s still at-large.

      1. There is that danger.

        1. And don’t forget the propensity of host countries to extort western aid workers and troops. Don’t know if Nigeria is that corrupt, but we’ve seen this before in the developing world.

          1. Nigeria is about as corrupt as a stable government can get.

          2. I’m sure they’re corrupt enough for that.

  7. President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan Tuesday

    You left out “Luxury Yacht.”

    1. Still not as good as Tokyo Sexwale.

      1. “It’s pronounced ‘Sex-wally!'”

    2. no, no! It only looks like Luxury Yacht, it is actually pronounced Throat Warbler Mangrove

    3. His name appears to be Goodluck Ebele Jonathan. Should have read President…on Tuesday…

  8. Since Nigeria is a member of the British Commonwealth – send the Canadians.

    1. Actually, yes, since the Canadians pride themselves on their disaster relief, peacekeeping and other humanitarian uses of their uniformed services.

      1. Well, there you go. Send in the Mounties.

        1. Is Due South still on?

  9. F___ off, slavers.

    1. Yeah! Fall off, slavers!

  10. I am surprised that a country with a President named “Goodluck” needs US help.

    1. It’s “Goodluck” as in “good luck with that,” or “good luck, you’re gonna need it.”

  11. Congressman Mike Rogers (R-Michigan) says he’s very concerned that war-weary Americans are growing more withdrawn from world events.

    Rogers says he sees plenty of evidence that the U.S. may be entering a new isolationist period.

    “And that isolationism, if you look at history, has always treated us poorly. Always. That means less prosperity, less economic opportunity at home, and, certainly, less national security,” he told reporters in Lansing.

    1. I’m not only war-weary, I’m shitty-economy weary as well.

      1. I’m more war-whore weary.

        1. It’s not just the war-whores. We’re riddled with whores. They’re renaming DC Whorinton, District of Holumbia.


          1. Projectile Dysfunction.


              1. “Choke and awe.”

    2. “And that isolationism, if you look at history, has always treated us poorly. Always.

      Is he fucking kidding? The US had its greatest period of economic expansion between the end of the Civil War and the Spanish-American War. We could have saved 120,000 lives by not sticking our nose in WW1. WW2 became justified once the Japanese attacked us–the knowledge of the horros of the Holocaust only became the primary reason well after the fact, but it’s been used as the primary club by which interventionists can beat the war drum.

      Isolationism actually served this country quite well, up until self-righteous progressives with god-complexes began promoting themselves as the Enlightened Ones who would lead mankind into a permanent golden age, and suddenly decided their ambitions and talents were being wasted in busy-bodying their neighbors rather than the entire planet.

      1. We also did everything we could to provoke Japan into attacking us.

        1. Fuck this apologism for those savages.

        2. Uh, yeah, bullshit.

          The “provocations” against the Japanese came about because of their continued belligerence to Americans throughout the ’30s, up to attacking American business interests in the region (like, actually attacking, with bombs).

          Are we supposed to keep selling them oil and steel while they destroy American businesses and murder American citizens? If you honestly believe they were “provoked” into attacking us you are an ignorant twat.

    3. He’s right. Historically, periods of isolationism have always ended with a war.


    4. “And that isolationism, if you look at history, has always treated us poorly[…]” Rep. Mike Rogers.

      Which history are you talking about? The one that says WWII saved us from capitalism, of the one that says the New Deal saved us from capitalism, or to what other strange interpretation of events are you pointing?

  12. We should buy all the girls from him and free them and kill him and take our money back.

    1. It’s the Grand Theft Auto way.

      1. Huh, foreign policy by GTA…. might just work.

        I hope the Nigerians can kill every one of those slaver scum. If it is a matter of sending some satellite or signal intel, maybe some gear – sure. Maybe drop some of their paratroops out of a C-130 and call it a day.

    2. A solid plan. simple and straightforward.

    3. Just like Lincoln could have just bought all the slaves instead of waging a war of aggression against the South!

      //embarrassing Confederate apologist

    4. Actually that’s not a half bad idea. Set up a sting operation posing as some Saudi prince looking to buy 300 new concubines and then kill the fuckers when they show up with the “goods”.

      Then sell the movie rights to Hollywood.

      1. In the alternative, we agree to help out, provided that we get the movie rights to the escapade. Even if it’s a debacle, there’s money to be made.

      2. I like it.

      3. I like that. I understand the desire to stay out of this but I am tired of these fuckers breathing my air. These people just need to be exterminated. No nation building, no nothing, just kill them and be done with it.

        1. Well call me a cynic, but it strikes me that that has more or less been the US government’s strategy for about thirteen years now, and I am hard-pressed to find evidence that Islamic extremism/jihadism is on the wane.

          But sure, killing even more of them is sure to finally stamp out an ideology that thrives on promoting the notion that the West is at war with Islam and trying to exterminate it.

          1. Okay. Maybe instead we should send them a check. If punishing them produces more of these behavior, won’t rewarding it produce less? Maybe we could get them a Nobel Prize and them some kind of chair in post colonial studies somewhere.

            They kidnapped 200 school girls. And you blame it on the US. BTW, to my knowledge we have never bombed anything in that area. Is it your contention that what is going on in Afghanistan or Yemen is the cause of this?

            1. They kidnapped 200 school girls. And you blame it on the US.

              There is absolutely no support for that in anything I have said. That is a deliberate misconstruing of my position that rivals anything Tony vomits out.

              I know this is a pretty extraordinary step for an Internet thread, but I’m going to demand an apology for that remark.

              1. If our actions are at least partially the cause of this, then yes we are to blame at least in some way.

                And again, what would you propose to do besides killing them? Do nothing? If the point is that killing them will make things worse, then it seems to be rewarding them or at least showing some compassion and understanding ought to make things better right?

            2. I don’t think he was blaming the US necessarily – I think he was pointing out that your “kill ’em all” attitude probably doesn’t help with the fact that many Muslim governments and terrorist groups alike thrive on the “myth” that American right-wingers want to wipe out Islam.

              1. On the other side, though, is the fact that successes by Islamic terrorists tend to breed support for them, and attempting to ignore them will allow them more successes. Sure, fighting back is something they can use for propaganda. I’m sure that in 1944 average Germans and Japanese were more susceptible to the idea that the Allies wanted them all dead. But that’s not much of a reason to not fight back. And anyone who thinks every Islamic terrorist in every obscure Third World shithole isn’t a sworn enemy of what Americans and libertarians hold dear just isn’t paying attention.

                1. I think you have a greatly exaggerated sense of how many radical Islamist terrorists there are in the world and of how obsessed they are with America.

                  Case in point, these shitheads in Nigeria are no “Islamists.” They are themselves violating Islamic law in enough ways to get them all executed tomorrow by any proper Sharia court. They are thugs who quote the Koran, selectively. Painting them as Islamists serves many political purposes for all involved, but just because a thug happens to live in a Muslim country that doesn’t make all Muslims scary terrorists.

                  1. Islamic terror gets double-digit support in countries around the world.

                    Of course Boko Haram violates Sharia law, according to some views of Sharia law. That means about as much as saying Stalin was violating the teachings of Marx. So what? They self-identify as Muslims, so you’re going to argue that they’re lying?

        2. Exactly. No nation building, just kill some bad guys, rescue the girls if at all possible, and get out.

  13. I hate to have to make the same joke twice in one day, but…

    “The militant Islamist group Boko Haram …kidnapped eight more girls from the village of Warabe in northeast Nigeria…

    They really have gone downhill since Whiter Shade of Pale. A shame.

    1. I prefer Conquistador

      1. That is a good song. Jesus, though, could you have linked to a more depressing version of it? They’re old and crusty and sound like ass.

        The original is the banger

    2. I cannot get that (the similarity in names) out of my head.

      1. I keep having the opposite problem, because Haram is pronounced quite differently.

        1. There’s also the Boko Haram Globetrotters.

          1. Nah that still doesn’t work. But you could have the Procol Harum Globetrotters.

        2. You mean like that great song,

          “Haram a Lama Ding Dong”

    3. I thought they were a cover group.

  14. Every time I post on this thread I get logged out. Chrome and W7. Anyone else?

    1. Maybe they are finally doing something about the birth defect retard with a name close to yours.

      1. Come on, man, Tman isn’t that bad. He even likes the A-Team.

        1. We’ll take care of Tman later. He knows what he did.

          1. What did I miss? What did Tman do?

      2. birth defect retard

        Hey now, you’d probably be a retard too if your mother had stabbed you in the head with a wire coat hanger while you were still in the womb.

        1. I was thinking something more like.. Cornwallis

      3. I would make a sacrifice for that.

    2. Nope. Same setup that I’m running.

    3. …and the problem went away.

  15. Send the U.S. Marshals, they have experience with slavery-related issues…..lave-catch

    1. Good call, Eddie. Why, I’m surprised that the same people who call for reparations from corporations that owned or rented slaves haven’t called for reparations from USMS.

  16. Where are Roger Moore and the Wild Geese? This seems perfect for that outfit.

  17. For the record – I take a ‘neutral’ position on whether or not the US actually get involved in any hostage-rescue attempt here. If the Nigerians ask for assistance, I do not see any reason why there should be any particular objection. I would object if we forced ourselves into their domestic conflict.

    … That said = it doesn’t bother me the slightest if we do send in DEVGRU to shoot every last one of these douchebags. Hostages or no hostages. I do not think we provoke the ‘Islamic world’ by shooting assholes like this. I see people like this as being completely outside of any narrative of religious/political violence. They’re just psychopathic assholes the world would be better off without.

    call me crazy. I felt the same way about the Taliban in ~1996-1998, back when they were making a name for themselves shooting women in the back of the head for Teaching School and blowing up 300′ statues of Buddha. I don’t think its ‘interventionism’ so much when you’ve really gone out of your way to be the “Worlds Biggest Assholes”

    1. I agree. Find the girls and just wipe these people out and go home. This is horrible.

      1. That sounds terrific on paper. Do you really think our gubmint could ever, ever in a bajillion years, pull that off without utterly screwing the pooch or causing even more damage than they were sent in to prevent?

        C’mon John, you’re military. When have they ever been that efficient and on point?

        1. Well, we do have drones.

          1. “Nigerian Village Bombed, Hundreds Killed, but Extremist Group Escapes.”

        2. Yes I think we could and probably will. We still have a pretty kick ass military and special operations community.

    2. I do not think we provoke the ‘Islamic world’ by shooting assholes like this.

      Sugar Bear (after shooting up the thief’s motel room and killing his dog): Yeah? Well now we got his attention.

      Danny: Yo man, we already had his attention!

  18. Boko Haram

    Really, their best song was Lighter Shade of Pale.

    1. 1) I made the joke in the AM links already
      2) I made the joke in this thread already
      3) Whiter shade of pale. Please.

      1. For the record, Fist made the joke yesterday in the AM links, and we all know no one gets in before he does.

        1. well, to be fair, its a no-brainer.

  19. How’d all those small, discrete interventions work for Clinton?

    And this is obviously an excuse to setup a base and force IP down Nollywood’s throat.

  20. Alt-Text =

    “Best Unintentional Rap Album Cover Ever”

  21. Meh. Just wait until he has an overstocked sale, then buy out his inventory on the cheap.

  22. Just buy them

  23. I have created my own Boko Haram / Rap Album Meme

    Thank you

    1. The aesthetic I was inspired by was more like this =…..005733.jpg

      Which unfortunately there is no auto-generating thing for. Though there should be.

    2. Sweet.

  24. Just a thought… I have a suspicion that the Delta Force may have already been dispatched to perform the rescue. By the nature of what that unit does, the government would not announce to the world IF they had sent them and they have not said they have not sent them.

    It would be likely the Delta Force would have been chosen over the Navy SEALs because the region is mostly of not all land-based and the SEALs is usually used in more water-based activities.

    A combination of information released from Washington from non-news resources and other factors lead me to believe the Delta Force is either already there or they are going there now.

    If they are involved, no one will hear anything until AFTER they have completed the mission, hopefully with a high degree of success.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.