http://gamingtrend.com
December 21, 2014, 06:18:31 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: U.N. votes for military intervention in Libya  (Read 3706 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
corruptrelic
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3555


View Profile
« on: March 18, 2011, 06:17:07 AM »

Quote
the U.N. Security Council cleared the legal path for international air strikes on Moammar Gadhafi's forces by authorizing a no-fly zone over Libya and "all necessary measures" to protect civilians from attacks by his advancing forces.

The Thursday night vote was 10-0 with five countries abstaining including Russia and China, which have veto power in the council. India, Germany and Brazil also expressed misgivings about approving military action by outside forces.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2014529025_libya18.html

Shame, I was expecting Russia or China to veto it but instead they abstain.

With the conflict in Libya having absolutely nothing to do with American security interests, why does the U.S. feel the need to continue being the world's police force? Even if you're for the U.S. meddling in the affairs of another country that hasn't harmed us in anyway, how can you justify the cost that comes with it? We're already sinking in debt from two other wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, do we really need to get involved in a third one?
Logged

"A gladiator does not fear death. He embraces it. Caresses it. Fucks it. Every time he enters the arena, he slides his cock into the mouth of the beast."
Ironrod
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3423



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: March 18, 2011, 06:41:17 AM »

Any instability in oil-producing countries is pertinent to US security interests. Libya is just one thread in the skein that's unraveling throughout the Arab world. The US needs to appear to side with democratic revolutionaries as long as they have momentum throughout the region (even if their cause is already lost in Libya).

That said, I hope that Britain and France will bear the brunt of this intervention. Clearing the skies over Libya is within their capabilities and they have more at stake than we do in this particular conflict.
Logged

Curio City Online - Weird stuff you can buy
Curious Business - The Curio City Blog
raydude
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1509


SPICE! Nomnomnomnom


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: March 18, 2011, 01:33:50 PM »

From what I've read the other countries seemed to be taking the lead in advocating a response, not the US. The Arab League were the first ones that I recall calling for a no-fly zone. Then France. Then other European countries.

Even when the vote was approved, it was France and Britain that declared they could have forces moving in a few hours. Obama has not yet given any word as to what US forces will be involved.

I think its safe to say that the US is not the one feeling the need to be the world's police force this time.
Logged

A Pew Research Center poll found nearly half of Americans hold the false belief that TARP was passed under President Obama, while only 34 percent know it originated under Bush.
"Oh yeah?" Bush replied. "50% of the people were wrong."
Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: March 18, 2011, 02:13:53 PM »

Ya we're supposed to be just providing logistics, I think.

But some of the Libyan resistance has been calling for the US specifically to help them for awhile now. I just hope we're not further damaged in their minds by not providing it.
Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
corruptrelic
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3555


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: March 18, 2011, 02:41:38 PM »

Quote from: raydude on March 18, 2011, 01:33:50 PM

From what I've read the other countries seemed to be taking the lead in advocating a response, not the US. The Arab League were the first ones that I recall calling for a no-fly zone. Then France. Then other European countries.

In that case, the Arab League need to be the ones to fork over the bill (and troops) for any military action against Libya. It wasn't that long ago when Bush was saying the oil in Iraq would pay for the Iraq war. We see what happened there as we approach $4.00 a gallon in 2011 and are still paying for that war.

If the U.S. is to "liberate" another oil rich Arab country, maybe the new Al Qaida backed rebel government in Libya should agree to offer us oil at $30 a barrel for the next 10 years. It's the cost the U.S. requires for helping them.

Perhaps the best argument against a no fly zone came from Senator Richard Lugar

Quote
"Given the costs of a no-fly zone, the risks that our involvement would escalate, the uncertain reception in the Arab street of any American intervention in an Arab country, the potential for civilian deaths, the unpredictability of the endgame, the strains on our military, and other factors, it is doubtful that U.S. interests would be served by imposing a no-fly zone over Libya," Lugar said.

He also pointed to other anti-government movements in the Middle East, cautioning that the situation in Libya "may not be the last to generate calls for American military operations."

"We need a broader public discussion about the goals and limits of the U.S. role in the Middle East, especially as it pertains to potential military intervention," he said. Requiring Congress to declare war before implementing a no-fly zone would provide for such a debate.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/14/news/la-pn-lugar-libya-20110315

And don't kid yourself into believing the U.S. will have no direct military role in Libya. We'll be the main ones involved, as always. Obama has already talked about U.S. patrols over Libya.

Hopefully Libya calling for an immediate ceasefire does some good though as the UN resolution was voted on to "protect civilians" and if the Libyan government isn't attacking the rebels (let alone civilians) what justification is there for attacks? Oil country or not, U.S. security (or France or Britain for that matter) is not at risk.
Logged

"A gladiator does not fear death. He embraces it. Caresses it. Fucks it. Every time he enters the arena, he slides his cock into the mouth of the beast."
Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: March 18, 2011, 02:49:03 PM »

Gadhafi has been claiming all along that Al Qaida is behind the uprisings.

If it's at all true, then the US might be at more risk if the current Libyan gov't is gone.

But then this is Gadhafi we're talking about  icon_confused
Logged

I am....Migaloo
Rest in Peace, Nan & Star
XBL Schins67
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6782


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: March 18, 2011, 03:18:22 PM »

The US isn't going to take an active part in this. It will be mostly up to France and the UK. Everyone knows that having the US intervene will cause more harm than good to the Libyan rebels, and the US forces are tied up in Iraq and Afghanistan anyway.

For once you'll get to sit on the sidelines and watch the rest of the world take responsibility. Hopefully that will shut up some of you, though that's probably a bit much to wish for. slywink
Logged
raydude
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1509


SPICE! Nomnomnomnom


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: March 18, 2011, 03:40:19 PM »

Quote from: TiLT on March 18, 2011, 03:18:22 PM


For once you'll get to sit on the sidelines and watch the rest of the world take responsibility. Hopefully that will shut up some of you, though that's probably a bit much to wish for. slywink


I'm going to wait  until the exact nature of US involvement is revealed before saying "I told you so" smile
Logged

A Pew Research Center poll found nearly half of Americans hold the false belief that TARP was passed under President Obama, while only 34 percent know it originated under Bush.
"Oh yeah?" Bush replied. "50% of the people were wrong."
hepcat
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9333


I'M the one that knocks! Now...burp me!


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: March 18, 2011, 05:43:41 PM »

Quote from: TiLT on March 18, 2011, 03:18:22 PM


For once you'll get to sit on the sidelines and watch the rest of the world take responsibility. Hopefully that will shut up some of you, though that's probably a bit much to wish for. slywink


who do you expect to shut up and why?   icon_confused
Logged

Warning:  You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.
Laner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4698


Badassfully


View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: March 18, 2011, 07:39:30 PM »

Quote from: corruptrelic on March 18, 2011, 02:41:38 PM

It wasn't that long ago when Bush was saying the oil in Iraq would pay for the Iraq war. We see what happened there as we approach $4.00 a gallon in 2011 and are still paying for that war.

Is this the quote you're thinking of?

"The oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years. Now, there are a lot of claims on that money, but ... We are dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction and relatively soon."

If there's another statement you're thinking of, please share.  But if that's what you're basing your rationale for higher gas prices on, it does not logically follow, for a number of reasons.  Not to mention that paying for reconstruction and paying for the war are two separate things - though undeniably related.

(And it was Paul Wolfowitz who said that, not Bush)
Logged
Razgon
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8302


The Truth is out there


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: March 18, 2011, 08:11:35 PM »

Well, denmark is now adding 4 F-16 planes, and two spares (whatever that means) to what is now more or less war. I doubt though that danish troops will be added.
Logged

A new one
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6782


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #11 on: March 18, 2011, 10:25:08 PM »

Quote from: hepcat on March 18, 2011, 05:43:41 PM

Quote from: TiLT on March 18, 2011, 03:18:22 PM


For once you'll get to sit on the sidelines and watch the rest of the world take responsibility. Hopefully that will shut up some of you, though that's probably a bit much to wish for. slywink


who do you expect to shut up and why?   icon_confused

I should have clarified. I meant "you" as in "you Americans", not as in "you GTers". There are those among you who insist that the rest of the world wouldn't be able to solve problems like this without direct US support. Now we get to prove them wrong.
Logged
hepcat
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9333


I'M the one that knocks! Now...burp me!


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: March 18, 2011, 10:38:31 PM »

Quote from: TiLT on March 18, 2011, 10:25:08 PM

Quote from: hepcat on March 18, 2011, 05:43:41 PM

Quote from: TiLT on March 18, 2011, 03:18:22 PM


For once you'll get to sit on the sidelines and watch the rest of the world take responsibility. Hopefully that will shut up some of you, though that's probably a bit much to wish for. slywink


who do you expect to shut up and why?   icon_confused

I should have clarified. I meant "you" as in "you Americans", not as in "you GTers". There are those among you who insist that the rest of the world wouldn't be able to solve problems like this without direct US support. Now we get to prove them wrong.

ummm...many GT'ers are Americans.  Let's avoid lumping an entire nation of people into one stereotype.  Otherwise I'll be forced to return to my belief that all Norwegians are the product of incest.   Tongue
« Last Edit: March 18, 2011, 10:40:07 PM by hepcat » Logged

Warning:  You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6782


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: March 18, 2011, 10:42:06 PM »

Quote from: hepcat on March 18, 2011, 10:38:31 PM

Quote from: TiLT on March 18, 2011, 10:25:08 PM

Quote from: hepcat on March 18, 2011, 05:43:41 PM

Quote from: TiLT on March 18, 2011, 03:18:22 PM


For once you'll get to sit on the sidelines and watch the rest of the world take responsibility. Hopefully that will shut up some of you, though that's probably a bit much to wish for. slywink


who do you expect to shut up and why?   icon_confused

I should have clarified. I meant "you" as in "you Americans", not as in "you GTers". There are those among you who insist that the rest of the world wouldn't be able to solve problems like this without direct US support. Now we get to prove them wrong.

ummm...many GT'ers are Americans.  Let's avoid lumping an entire nation of people into one stereotype.  Otherwise I'll be forced to return to my belief that all Norwegians are the product of incest.   Tongue

Uh, I thought "There are those among you" would be clear enough in that I wasn't lumping everyone together. I should start spelling everything out in every sentence from now on.
Logged
hepcat
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9333


I'M the one that knocks! Now...burp me!


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: March 18, 2011, 10:43:22 PM »

Quote from: TiLT on March 18, 2011, 10:42:06 PM

Quote from: hepcat on March 18, 2011, 10:38:31 PM

Quote from: TiLT on March 18, 2011, 10:25:08 PM

Quote from: hepcat on March 18, 2011, 05:43:41 PM

Quote from: TiLT on March 18, 2011, 03:18:22 PM


For once you'll get to sit on the sidelines and watch the rest of the world take responsibility. Hopefully that will shut up some of you, though that's probably a bit much to wish for. slywink


who do you expect to shut up and why?   icon_confused

I should have clarified. I meant "you" as in "you Americans", not as in "you GTers". There are those among you who insist that the rest of the world wouldn't be able to solve problems like this without direct US support. Now we get to prove them wrong.

ummm...many GT'ers are Americans.  Let's avoid lumping an entire nation of people into one stereotype.  Otherwise I'll be forced to return to my belief that all Norwegians are the product of incest.   Tongue

Uh, I thought "There are those among you" would be clear enough in that I wasn't lumping everyone together. I should start spelling everything out in every sentence from now on.

or just stop throwing around terms like "you americans".   icon_wink
Logged

Warning:  You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: March 18, 2011, 10:57:27 PM »

It's not like he said 'You tastefully coiffed Americans'.
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6782


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #16 on: March 18, 2011, 11:05:44 PM »

Quote from: CeeKay on March 18, 2011, 10:57:27 PM

It's not like he said 'You tastefully coiffed Americans'.

It certainly isn't.
Logged
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: March 19, 2011, 01:20:02 AM »

Stupid idea, we have no place getting involved in a civil war in yet another country.   One of these years we might just learn what a bad idea that is in general.
Logged
Caine
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10548


My cocaine


View Profile WWW
« Reply #18 on: March 19, 2011, 05:17:42 PM »

it's started.

Quote
French official says French fighter jet has fired on Libyan military vehicle

it's just a matter of time before this gets out of control.



this may have been a rebel aircraft, or it may have been libya claiming it is to sway public opinion/cover their ass.

Logged

Freezer-TPF-
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1372


First in war and peace, second in the NL East.


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: March 19, 2011, 06:18:49 PM »

Has there been any confirmation on whose jet that was?
Logged

Signature on file at the county clerk's office.
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6782


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #20 on: March 19, 2011, 06:49:40 PM »

Quote from: Freezer-TPF- on March 19, 2011, 06:18:49 PM

Has there been any confirmation on whose jet that was?

Yes. It was supposedly a jet controlled by the rebels. The ironic thing is that it was the rebels who shot it down too because they have limited means of communication.
Logged
Ironrod
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3423



View Profile WWW
« Reply #21 on: March 19, 2011, 07:00:32 PM »

Quote from: Zekester on March 18, 2011, 02:49:03 PM

Gadhafi has been claiming all along that Al Qaida is behind the uprisings.

That is a transparent attempt to discredit the revolutionaries by allying them to the West's enemy. But it does raise an interesting tangent. Although this article was written before Libya stole the headlines, its thesis is still germaine. Why Arab rebellions are bad news for al Qaeda

Quote
(Reuters) - Revolts in Egypt and Tunisia have struck a blow against al Qaeda's call to violence as a means of overthrowing autocratic governments, showing "people power" to be a more effective weapon.

The adaptable militant group, with strong roots in Egypt, will work hard to exploit any sense of disappointment if the eventual outcome of the uprising there does not deliver better lives for the Arab world's most populous country, analysts say.

But for now the group has no easy answer to the evidence presented by the world's television screens -- that ordinary men and women are doing more to weaken the 30-year-old rule of President Hosni Mubarak than years of attacks by armed groups.

Nor is there much comfort here for Western strategists who have argued that the West must prop up Arab autocrats or see the region taken over by violent anti-Western Islamist radicals.

"It's a huge defeat for al Qaeda in a country of central importance to its image. It has wounded their credibility with potential supporters," said Noman Benotman, a former organizer for an al Qaeda-aligned group in neighboring Libya.

"These demonstrations by ordinary people show the bankruptcy of al Qaeda's ideology," said Peter Knoope, Director of the International Center for Counter-Terrorism in The Hague.

He said the December suicide of Tunisian stallholder Mohamed Bouazizi -- a protest against the lack of economic opportunity that helped trigger Tunisia's revolt -- proved more powerful than al Qaeda's call for attacks on Western-backed Arab rulers.

Of course, one can find others arguing the opposite point of view. And al Qaeda is scrambling to align itself with these spontaneous people-power rebellions. But the tactic of terrorism has become irrelevant to a huge portion of its intended audience.
Logged

Curio City Online - Weird stuff you can buy
Curious Business - The Curio City Blog
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: March 19, 2011, 08:10:57 PM »

Quote from: Caine on March 19, 2011, 05:17:42 PM

it's started.

Quote
French official says French fighter jet has fired on Libyan military vehicle

it's just a matter of time before this gets out of control.

the US just joined in with missile strikes.  the French are saying they've hit 4 Libyan tanks.

[edit] it's in the link I quoted, they've updated it.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2011, 08:12:47 PM by CeeKay » Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
ATB
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15612


Thanks for everything, Ryan. 1979-2013


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: March 19, 2011, 09:20:53 PM »

Good job Obama! Now we're in three wars! 

Who could have HOPED for this?!
Logged
Razgon
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8302


The Truth is out there


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: March 19, 2011, 09:31:01 PM »

That particular path for the US was paved many years ago - he just follows through on the national agenda.
Logged

A new one
Scraper
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4003



View Profile
« Reply #25 on: March 19, 2011, 10:24:58 PM »

Quote from: ATB on March 19, 2011, 09:20:53 PM

Good job Obama! Now we're in three wars! 

Who could have HOPED for this?!

This is hardly OUR war. If anything we are providing (with the co-operation of several other world powers) the much needed support that the Lybian figthers need and cannot possibly get on their own.

This is not Iraq or Afghan, we invaded those countries. This time the Lybian people started the war and are in it for their freedom. I would much rather support our intervention in Lybia than in Iraq. As I've said before, you cannot force democracy on people who do not want it. In this case the Lybians want it and they deserve our help getting it.
Logged

" And they are a strong and frightening force, impervious to, and immunized against, the feeble lance of mere reason." Isaac Asimov
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: March 19, 2011, 10:51:40 PM »

Quote from: Scraper on March 19, 2011, 10:24:58 PM

Quote from: ATB on March 19, 2011, 09:20:53 PM

Good job Obama! Now we're in three wars! 

Who could have HOPED for this?!

This is hardly OUR war. If anything we are providing (with the co-operation of several other world powers) the much needed support that the Lybian figthers need and cannot possibly get on their own.

This is not Iraq or Afghan, we invaded those countries. This time the Lybian people started the war and are in it for their freedom. I would much rather support our intervention in Lybia than in Iraq. As I've said before, you cannot force democracy on people who do not want it. In this case the Lybians want it and they deserve our help getting it.
Yeah, we're just supporting the Lybians against the Libyans.
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: March 19, 2011, 11:06:07 PM »

Quote from: Scraper on March 19, 2011, 10:24:58 PM

Quote from: ATB on March 19, 2011, 09:20:53 PM

Good job Obama! Now we're in three wars! 

Who could have HOPED for this?!

This is hardly OUR war. If anything we are providing (with the co-operation of several other world powers) the much needed support that the Lybian figthers need and cannot possibly get on their own.

This is not Iraq or Afghan, we invaded those countries. This time the Lybian people started the war and are in it for their freedom. I would much rather support our intervention in Lybia than in Iraq. As I've said before, you cannot force democracy on people who do not want it. In this case the Lybians want it and they deserve our help getting it.

No this is a civil war that we have no place choosing sides in.   If a group starts a civil war hoping that someone will bail them out because they took on more then they could handle then they should lose.
Logged
ATB
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15612


Thanks for everything, Ryan. 1979-2013


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: March 19, 2011, 11:06:25 PM »

Maybe when the capture ghadaffi they can put him in guantanimo bay! The prison camp that  Obama promised to close!

What a failure he is!  I guess the change he was running on was referring to the white house reverting back to the repubs!  icon_cool
Logged
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6782


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #29 on: March 19, 2011, 11:13:14 PM »

Quote from: brettmcd on March 19, 2011, 11:06:07 PM

Quote from: Scraper on March 19, 2011, 10:24:58 PM

Quote from: ATB on March 19, 2011, 09:20:53 PM

Good job Obama! Now we're in three wars! 

Who could have HOPED for this?!

This is hardly OUR war. If anything we are providing (with the co-operation of several other world powers) the much needed support that the Lybian figthers need and cannot possibly get on their own.

This is not Iraq or Afghan, we invaded those countries. This time the Lybian people started the war and are in it for their freedom. I would much rather support our intervention in Lybia than in Iraq. As I've said before, you cannot force democracy on people who do not want it. In this case the Lybians want it and they deserve our help getting it.

No this is a civil war that we have no place choosing sides in.   If a group starts a civil war hoping that someone will bail them out because they took on more then they could handle then they should lose.

I think you may want to read up on the background for the current conflict. The world isn't choosing sides between two armed factions. The UN went to the step it did because Gadhafi was bombing civilians who tried to demonstrate peacefully. This is a human right. It was clear that this would have turned into a massacre of unarmed civilians without intervention, so the UN stepped in. The stated goal so far is to keep the skies clear of bombers so that civilians will be safe, but there is also select bombing of military targets that are convening upon these same civilians.

The Libyan rebels didn't start a civil war. They protested peacefully and were killed for it, and are now merely protecting their own lives. Gadhafi started this war.
Logged
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: March 19, 2011, 11:21:49 PM »

Quote from: TiLT on March 19, 2011, 11:13:14 PM

Quote from: brettmcd on March 19, 2011, 11:06:07 PM

Quote from: Scraper on March 19, 2011, 10:24:58 PM

Quote from: ATB on March 19, 2011, 09:20:53 PM

Good job Obama! Now we're in three wars!  

Who could have HOPED for this?!

This is hardly OUR war. If anything we are providing (with the co-operation of several other world powers) the much needed support that the Lybian figthers need and cannot possibly get on their own.

This is not Iraq or Afghan, we invaded those countries. This time the Lybian people started the war and are in it for their freedom. I would much rather support our intervention in Lybia than in Iraq. As I've said before, you cannot force democracy on people who do not want it. In this case the Lybians want it and they deserve our help getting it.

No this is a civil war that we have no place choosing sides in.   If a group starts a civil war hoping that someone will bail them out because they took on more then they could handle then they should lose.

I think you may want to read up on the background for the current conflict. The world isn't choosing sides between two armed factions. The UN went to the step it did because Gadhafi was bombing civilians who tried to demonstrate peacefully. This is a human right. It was clear that this would have turned into a massacre of unarmed civilians without intervention, so the UN stepped in. The stated goal so far is to keep the skies clear of bombers so that civilians will be safe, but there is also select bombing of military targets that are convening upon these same civilians.

The Libyan rebels didn't start a civil war. They protested peacefully and were killed for it, and are now merely protecting their own lives. Gadhafi started this war.

So when do you propose the air strikes start in North Korea, Bahrain, Russia and other countries that either treat their citizens worse then what is happening in Libya or their citizens have been shot for protesting their government?
Logged
Alefroth
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 694



View Profile
« Reply #31 on: March 19, 2011, 11:27:00 PM »

Quote from: brettmcd on March 19, 2011, 11:21:49 PM

Quote from: TiLT on March 19, 2011, 11:13:14 PM

Quote from: brettmcd on March 19, 2011, 11:06:07 PM

Quote from: Scraper on March 19, 2011, 10:24:58 PM

Quote from: ATB on March 19, 2011, 09:20:53 PM

Good job Obama! Now we're in three wars!  

Who could have HOPED for this?!

This is hardly OUR war. If anything we are providing (with the co-operation of several other world powers) the much needed support that the Lybian figthers need and cannot possibly get on their own.

This is not Iraq or Afghan, we invaded those countries. This time the Lybian people started the war and are in it for their freedom. I would much rather support our intervention in Lybia than in Iraq. As I've said before, you cannot force democracy on people who do not want it. In this case the Lybians want it and they deserve our help getting it.

No this is a civil war that we have no place choosing sides in.   If a group starts a civil war hoping that someone will bail them out because they took on more then they could handle then they should lose.

I think you may want to read up on the background for the current conflict. The world isn't choosing sides between two armed factions. The UN went to the step it did because Gadhafi was bombing civilians who tried to demonstrate peacefully. This is a human right. It was clear that this would have turned into a massacre of unarmed civilians without intervention, so the UN stepped in. The stated goal so far is to keep the skies clear of bombers so that civilians will be safe, but there is also select bombing of military targets that are convening upon these same civilians.

The Libyan rebels didn't start a civil war. They protested peacefully and were killed for it, and are now merely protecting their own lives. Gadhafi started this war.

So when do you propose the air strikes start in North Korea, Bahrain, Russia and other countries that either treat their citizens worse then what is happening in Libya or their citizens have been shot for protesting their government?

Who says air strikes need to happen in those countries at all?

Ale
Logged
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: March 19, 2011, 11:28:53 PM »

Quote from: Alefroth on March 19, 2011, 11:27:00 PM

Quote from: brettmcd on March 19, 2011, 11:21:49 PM

Quote from: TiLT on March 19, 2011, 11:13:14 PM

Quote from: brettmcd on March 19, 2011, 11:06:07 PM

Quote from: Scraper on March 19, 2011, 10:24:58 PM

Quote from: ATB on March 19, 2011, 09:20:53 PM

Good job Obama! Now we're in three wars!  

Who could have HOPED for this?!

This is hardly OUR war. If anything we are providing (with the co-operation of several other world powers) the much needed support that the Lybian figthers need and cannot possibly get on their own.

This is not Iraq or Afghan, we invaded those countries. This time the Lybian people started the war and are in it for their freedom. I would much rather support our intervention in Lybia than in Iraq. As I've said before, you cannot force democracy on people who do not want it. In this case the Lybians want it and they deserve our help getting it.

No this is a civil war that we have no place choosing sides in.   If a group starts a civil war hoping that someone will bail them out because they took on more then they could handle then they should lose.

I think you may want to read up on the background for the current conflict. The world isn't choosing sides between two armed factions. The UN went to the step it did because Gadhafi was bombing civilians who tried to demonstrate peacefully. This is a human right. It was clear that this would have turned into a massacre of unarmed civilians without intervention, so the UN stepped in. The stated goal so far is to keep the skies clear of bombers so that civilians will be safe, but there is also select bombing of military targets that are convening upon these same civilians.

The Libyan rebels didn't start a civil war. They protested peacefully and were killed for it, and are now merely protecting their own lives. Gadhafi started this war.

So when do you propose the air strikes start in North Korea, Bahrain, Russia and other countries that either treat their citizens worse then what is happening in Libya or their citizens have been shot for protesting their government?

Who says air strikes need to happen in those countries at all?

Ale

The logic being used by people to support air strikes in Libya says they should start immediately.
Logged
hepcat
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9333


I'M the one that knocks! Now...burp me!


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: March 19, 2011, 11:30:44 PM »

Quote from: brettmcd on March 19, 2011, 11:21:49 PM

So when do you propose the air strikes start in North Korea, Bahrain, Russia and other countries that either treat their citizens worse then what is happening in Libya or their citizens have been shot for protesting their government?

North Korea, yes.  The others, not so much.  Just because they aren't a democracy doesn't always mean they're a dictatorship. 
Logged

Warning:  You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: March 19, 2011, 11:34:34 PM »

Quote from: hepcat on March 19, 2011, 11:30:44 PM

Quote from: brettmcd on March 19, 2011, 11:21:49 PM

So when do you propose the air strikes start in North Korea, Bahrain, Russia and other countries that either treat their citizens worse then what is happening in Libya or their citizens have been shot for protesting their government?

North Korea, yes.  The others, not so much.  Just because they aren't a democracy doesn't always mean they're a dictatorship. 

Bahrain is currently shooting people who are protesting against the government, and look how Russia treated the Chechnyians (sp?) when they tried to break away from Russia.    It fits as well for intervention as what is happening in Libya does.
Logged
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6782


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #35 on: March 19, 2011, 11:35:07 PM »

Quote from: brettmcd on March 19, 2011, 11:21:49 PM

Quote from: TiLT on March 19, 2011, 11:13:14 PM

Quote from: brettmcd on March 19, 2011, 11:06:07 PM

Quote from: Scraper on March 19, 2011, 10:24:58 PM

Quote from: ATB on March 19, 2011, 09:20:53 PM

Good job Obama! Now we're in three wars!  

Who could have HOPED for this?!

This is hardly OUR war. If anything we are providing (with the co-operation of several other world powers) the much needed support that the Lybian figthers need and cannot possibly get on their own.

This is not Iraq or Afghan, we invaded those countries. This time the Lybian people started the war and are in it for their freedom. I would much rather support our intervention in Lybia than in Iraq. As I've said before, you cannot force democracy on people who do not want it. In this case the Lybians want it and they deserve our help getting it.

No this is a civil war that we have no place choosing sides in.   If a group starts a civil war hoping that someone will bail them out because they took on more then they could handle then they should lose.

I think you may want to read up on the background for the current conflict. The world isn't choosing sides between two armed factions. The UN went to the step it did because Gadhafi was bombing civilians who tried to demonstrate peacefully. This is a human right. It was clear that this would have turned into a massacre of unarmed civilians without intervention, so the UN stepped in. The stated goal so far is to keep the skies clear of bombers so that civilians will be safe, but there is also select bombing of military targets that are convening upon these same civilians.

The Libyan rebels didn't start a civil war. They protested peacefully and were killed for it, and are now merely protecting their own lives. Gadhafi started this war.

So when do you propose the air strikes start in North Korea, Bahrain, Russia and other countries that either treat their citizens worse then what is happening in Libya or their citizens have been shot for protesting their government?

These are not comparable situations. Gadhafi is indiscriminately bombing cities where rebels are, and doesn't care if he kills thousands of unarmed civilians while doing so. The other countries you mention are systematically oppressing their own people, but not in the same way, and certainly not in a way that requires air superiority RIGHT NOW before it's too late.

If the attacks on Libya had waited only one more day, Gadhafi might have been able to invade the besieged city at a massive cost of innocent lives, and it would all have been too late.

It really should serve as an indicator of how important this is that even Russia and China thought intervention was the best idea in this situation (it's almost impossible to get them to agree with western nations about these kinds of things). They may be publicly announcing their displeasure at the military actions, but that's just what they "have to do" because of politics. If they thought it was a bad idea, they would have used their veto.
Logged
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: March 19, 2011, 11:39:08 PM »

Im sure the people of Chechnya that were being slaughtered and bombed by the Russians would disagree that their situations are at all different.    As would the protesters being shot in Bahrain.
Logged
raydude
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1509


SPICE! Nomnomnomnom


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: March 19, 2011, 11:49:53 PM »

If people would only bother reading the UN resolution they would note that it specifically excludes
Quote
a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory

Logged

A Pew Research Center poll found nearly half of Americans hold the false belief that TARP was passed under President Obama, while only 34 percent know it originated under Bush.
"Oh yeah?" Bush replied. "50% of the people were wrong."
corruptrelic
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3555


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: March 20, 2011, 01:20:06 AM »

What business does the U.S. have sending 110+ missles into a country that in no way threatens us? If a war breaks out between Pakistan and India, should we put U.S. troops in the middle of it?

Libya's internal affairs are none of our business unless it somehow effects the security of the United States - which in this case, it clearly does not.

And lets not forget Libya has asked for outside observers to come in for fact finding missions multiple times to see what was really happening on the ground there. Obama completely ignored it and instead went with the missles. Remember how proud Obama was when debating Clinton about how he voted against the Iraq war when she voted for it? Iraq had WMD's, though! It was told to us again and again.. even though we wouldn't give the weapons inspectors a chance to find them. We're hearing two sides, the rebels (who al qaida has publically backed) side from mostly "phone calls" and the Libyan government side who say they're fighting terrorism. The open letter to Obama said if rebels took over your cities, how would you respond?
Lets remember these aren't just "protestors" either, they're armed rebels who began attacking and taking over cities that used to be under government control. Now when the government does the same in return, we bomb them.

I'm in no way defending the Lybian regime, but where does it end? Yemen security forces have killed dozens of protestors and sent in tanks against the protestors.. should we go ahead and bomb their government too - even though they in no way harm U.S. security interests? Even if you are for the bombing of a sovereign nation that poses no threat to us, how do we pay for it? Where's the money coming from?

The U.S. intervening in places we have no business in comes back to, why does the U.S. feel the need to be the world's police force? We certainly can't afford a third war, Libya has nothing to do with our own security interests, so why are we bombing them again? If the Arab League wants the no fly zone, why don't they finance it with their own money and armed forces? The U.S. as usual, is going to fork over most of the bill on this one and it's us, the tax payers, who will end up paying for it in the end.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2011, 01:22:22 AM by corruptrelic » Logged

"A gladiator does not fear death. He embraces it. Caresses it. Fucks it. Every time he enters the arena, he slides his cock into the mouth of the beast."
raydude
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1509


SPICE! Nomnomnomnom


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: March 20, 2011, 02:10:20 AM »

Quote from: corruptrelic on March 20, 2011, 01:20:06 AM

We're hearing two sides, the rebels (who al qaida has publically backed) side from mostly "phone calls" and the Libyan government side who say they're fighting terrorism. The open letter to Obama said if rebels took over your cities, how would you respond?
Lets remember these aren't just "protestors" either, they're armed rebels who began attacking and taking over cities that used to be under government control. Now when the government does the same in return, we bomb them.

Wow. Just...wow. How much is Quaddafi paying you to say this?
Logged

A Pew Research Center poll found nearly half of Americans hold the false belief that TARP was passed under President Obama, while only 34 percent know it originated under Bush.
"Oh yeah?" Bush replied. "50% of the people were wrong."
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.2 seconds with 103 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.066s, 2q)