Anyone know any good countries to move to?

[Simon_Jester]

And there is also a good chance you end up in rear duty and not in a postcolonial shithole where you do France's dirty work before getting killed somewhere nobody cares about.

Well, at least until the US gets involved in another dust-up. We are still in Afghanistan. As long as we stay Democratic though, I'd give it about a decade or so... hopefully... provided Iran or the Norks or someone (and I include the US in that sweeping generalization) don't do anything stupid...

Honestly, even serving in another Iraqistan isn't really all that bad from the individual soldier's point of view, compared to what soldiers might experience in other wars. The death rate is quite low, even the casualty rate is pretty low (seriously, at least 1.5 million troop-years, resulting in fifty thousand total wounded, sixteen thousand severely wounded, 6800 or so dead).

If you go in convinced the war is for absolutely nothing I suppose it's damned demoralizing, though many of the soldiers actually present seem to feel otherwise. If I had to choose between Iraq and Vietnam I'd take Iraq in a heartbeat. Likewise if I had to choose between Iraq and marching with the Legion into, oh, Chad or Mali.

[Thanas]

That is ironic considering the French in Chad and Mali are doing a lot more good than the US is doing in Iraq.

[Simon_Jester]

Hm. OK, my perception may be colored by the fact that these countries have struck me as... chronic failures to thrive. And I perceived this as something France has some degree of responsibility for because they never really had a hard severance of colonial influence- if they had, then the Legion wouldn't be there.

Arguing that this is better than invading, removing a brutal dictator and replacing him with a brutal civil war is of course straightforward enough; the odds are reasonably good that you're right, and I could easily be wrong in my perceptions.

[Lolpah]

Chad would possibly qualify as a failure, but Mali has had a constantly growing economy and from 1999 to 2012 was rated as "Free" by the Freedom house (considering both Political freedoms and Civil rights). The 2012 coup changed that, but after the intervention the coupist government resigned and apparently democratic elections been held. Tuaregs in the North have been dissatisfied and have rebelled several times - the 2012-13 conflict started as a nationalist rebellion. This remains an issue, but I think Mali has relatively high chances of recovery.

[Thanas]

Hm. OK, my perception may be colored by the fact that these countries have struck me as... chronic failures to thrive. And I perceived this as something France has some degree of responsibility for because they never really had a hard severance of colonial influence- if they had, then the Legion wouldn't be there.

By that statement anywhere the EU or Nato intervenes means there never was a hard severance from colonial influence.

Arguing that this is better than invading, removing a brutal dictator and replacing him with a brutal civil war is of course straightforward enough; the odds are reasonably good that you're right, and I could easily be wrong in my perceptions.

The danger are islamic militants (funded by our good friends Quatar) and the instabilities from Libya's fall in the case of Mali. In the case of Chad it is a large number of rebel groups including the good genociders janjaweed (previously known from Darfur). Both are enemies worth fighting and defeating them would do much more than anything the USA has ever done in Iraq (which btw is going to hell fast, considering over 8000 dead in bombings last year alone.)