Will American people like to see foreign armed forces for any reasons on their land ?

Question

In my openion people of any nation will tolarate to see the foreign armed forces on their land. It is agaisnt the international laws. Such country is committiong an offense aginst the international community and liable for prosecutions.

Answer 1

Iam not sure i understand your questions .IE Iraq Out of the whole country.Theres a fraction of haters against the US there but theres still a fraction for them being there.Mainly the Minority there whom where killed punished treated badly by the Saddam Government.
Afganistan there some folks there whom hated being under the Taliban rule and are fighting against the return of the Taliban with the US and UK Forces.And live a better live now without the Taliban rules.
Sierra Leone.Nobody in the capital, Freetown, has forgotten how Mr Blair deployed 1,500 British soldiers to defend the city from an advancing rebel army that specialised in hacking the limbs off their victims.
There s just a few examples theres plenty more.

Iam not for War by any means,But sometimes theres a reason we go in.Ok sometimes for not the best true reasons but if it helps the minority but upsets the few whom where/are only upset because we removed them from there hateful power over there people.

Answer 2

The answer in a word, is NO! If there are ever foreign troops here, they wont be here to protect us, they will be here to occupy our nation for some horrific mega-government.

Some of the answers here are really stupid. American troops are on foreign soil at the behest of the governments of those foreign soils, or because that particular country tried to take over the world just one time too many. Americans are not war-mongers. Most of the wars America has been in are ones which We were dragged into against our will, kicking and screaming. This one is the same. We did not attack ourselved on 9/11. There is a big hole in our New York City which says we can do anything we want to to anyone connected in any way with that cowardly attack. America has shown remarkable restraint. If that had been Russia, large parts of middle-eastern real estate would have been converted into radioactive glass ashtrays by now.

Mike C, your answer is really goofy, to say the least. Your bigotry is warping your perceptions. The Balkans were NOT stabilized by any of the Untied Nations "peacekeeping" forces. WHen things got hot, they bravely ran away. After the murdering was done, they moved back in and looted what was left of the place. I have this from eye-witnesses who were with charity groups who went over there (the Balkans) to reunite families, provide medical care, etc. The Italian army units were extorting protection "fees" from these charities under the auspices of the UN. There were planeloads of orphans and refugee kids being held hostage by the UN forces in Sarajevo on hot, stifling airplanes in order to extort additional arbitrary "fees" from these charities. US troops are not doing this in Iraq, another thing I have from eye witnesses. More and more, the Iraqis are in charge of most of the country, and the Americans are in smallish enclaves where they are available to help maintain order. That is how they are in any of the other nations they have been forced to be in, due to world wars or whatever. I was in Korea, and the Koreans were (and are) very much the owners of their own country, with the Americans operating in the background as a deterrent to foreign aggression. They are NOT conquerers, although they very well could have been. Your hatred of the US has clouded your mind. One good thing, if the US is occupied with pathetic troops like the UN has had as Sleazekeepers, they will easily be defeated by such American "Para-military" groups like the Cub Scouts, or the Girl Scouts.

Answer 3

You are almost correct there.

Running in parallel with your statement regarding 'foreign forces on anyone's soil' and 'International Law,' there is also what I see as 'a nation's population under the heel of an oppressive regime ( Mr R Mugabe, for example ) which is killing, destroying, murdering its own people, requires the population to be rescued by International forces under a UN mandate.

Nations who do not come to the rescue or the population are as bad as the oppressors and to my way of thinking, also ought to be called to answer to a Court of International Law.

Likewise with terrorists. However, those who do not survive their own terror attacks, then their body parts should be collected together and buried wrapped in the intestines of certain animals.

Sash.

Answer 4

You advise not be in 2 wars, a balanced funds, the fed reined in , no bogus mortgages, duty, on and on. actuality is the $3.2 billion* and then the less than the table stuff the lobbyists equipment donated t each and every of the domicile and Senate individuals is a procedures extra effective than WE the individuals can discover the money for to compete with. it truly is gloomy that the main characters, chairmans etc are hand picked and not for us. i don't suggestions human beings having funds for an election, yet once you seem a the ethic violations the undesirable ones get away with you in basic terms ask your self.. I consider many of the respond and the above one as why interior the international would human beings pass against elementary sense. Media is ability and so is funds, yet there desires some middle floor reached and that is not going on. lots extra effective solutions, yet needed to pontificate. I advise withthe well-being care foyer increasing their donations via sixty 5% to a million/2 1000000000, you recognize Medicare and the rustic are approximately to take efficient like they did in 2003 with the drug plan. Have a secure one.

Answer 5

So the UK and US forces permanently based in Germany are committing an offence against international law. What about all the UN missions (regardless of how they got there and their true effectiveness) are these also breaking some tenet of international law?

Answer 6

Firstly, it is difficult to take your questions or opinions seriously, given the poor grammar and spelling. That aside, the notion of uninvited armed forces in the US is a non-issue. It simply won't happen in our lifetimes. The US has lots of money, technology and people. If it were needed, the draft could be reinstated. Do you honestly think that given that option, any army in the world could possibly occupy any US soil? ..........I didn't think so.

You state that it is your opinion that any nation will tolerate armed forces on their land. If that is the case, then why do even think an offense has been committed? You do not seem to be making any kind of valid point here.

Answer 7

How much have you studied international law?If your knowledge of it is as good as your English I suggest you start again.

Answer 8

American people are not likely to like to see foreign armed forces on their land. But Some Americans take for granted that other people "have to" like US troops on their land, or that the media "has to report" so.
On a second thought, maybe some Israelis would like to see US troops patrolling Israel...

Answer 9

Are you kidding? They love us. We're going to bring peace, fortune, and the American way of life. Of course we'll insist on a permanent Peace Keeping Force to guarantee their happiness.

Answer 10

If we get someone like Saddam in power who commits genocide on us along with torture and tyranny, yes, please come occupy us. We promise to not respond by blowing each other up, destroying our country further, and acting like complete backward morons.