http://gamingtrend.com
October 25, 2014, 07:57:33 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 3637 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Ironrod
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3402



View Profile WWW
« Reply #40 on: March 20, 2011, 02:27:25 AM »

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.

Except that the Arab League united against Khadafy, NATO hammered out tactics that didn't put the US in the fore, and the UN gave its blessing. We didn't choose sides unilaterally and we are not committed to supporting other rebellions in the region unless those same forces align for them.

Believe me: I am very reluctant to support military adventures where we have no direct stake. But this one was handled correctly.
Logged

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

Offline Offline

Posts: 3555


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: March 20, 2011, 02:45:01 AM »

Quote from: raydude 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?


I know, having an open mind and looking at BOTH sides of the story doesn't make sense when it's easier to just drop a bunch of bombs and replace one government with another..  Roll Eyes

I'm not going by what Gadaffi said either, I was going by what Al Qaida themselves have said in support of the rebels in Libya. (Link provided on first page.)

Agreed.. the Arab League is united against Gadaffi as well.. in words anyway. We'll handle the rest!
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."
corruptrelic
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3555


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: March 20, 2011, 02:55:15 AM »

And it wasn't that long ago..



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."
Scraper
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3954



View Profile
« Reply #43 on: March 20, 2011, 03:26:57 AM »

Quote from: raydude 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?


For real. Lets not forget this all started when Lybians took Egypt's protests to heart and decided to act. This wasn't started by a car bomb or terrorism in any way. Al Quida is a scape goat being used by the Lybian dictactor.
Logged

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

Offline Offline

Posts: 1507


SPICE! Nomnomnomnom


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: March 20, 2011, 03:44:44 AM »

Yes, I saw the link in the opening post. If I may quote Quaddafi in the article:

He vowed to level Benghazi...."there will be no mercy"...and my favorite " the whole world will see what will happen to Benghazi".

Strange that he didn't feel the need to substitute "al quaeda" and instead used the name of an entire city.
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 #45 on: March 20, 2011, 04:18:04 AM »

Quote
WikiLeaks cables, independent analysts and reporters have all identified supporters of Islamist causes among the opposition to Col Gaddafi's regime, particularly in the towns of Benghazi and Dernah.

An al-Qaeda leader of Libyan origin, Abu Yahya al-Libi, released a statement backing the insurrection a week ago, while Yusuf Qaradawi, the Qatar-based, Muslim Brotherhood-linked theologian issued a fatwa authorising Col Gaddafi's military entourage to assassinate him.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8391632/Libya-the-West-and-al-Qaeda-on-the-same-side.html

Quote
Anti-American Extremists Among Libyan Rebels U.S. Has Vowed To Protect

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/19/extremists-among-libya-rebels_n_837894.html

Quote
A senior member of al Qaida urged Libyan rebels to continue their fight against Muammar Gaddafi and warned of the consequences of defeat, in a videotaped message posted on Jihadi websites, the Qatar-based Gulf Times reported on Sunday

http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=212001

Regardless of the side that is "right", without any threat to national security there's no reason we need to get in the middle of another civil war.
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."
Alefroth
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 690



View Profile
« Reply #46 on: March 20, 2011, 05:31:23 AM »

Quote from: brettmcd 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.

That argument is old and simplistic, and I'm sure you know that.

Just because you can't solve all problems with the same tool, doesn't mean you should do nothing.


Ale
Logged
Alefroth
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 690



View Profile
« Reply #47 on: March 20, 2011, 07:00:51 AM »

Quote from: Ironrod on March 20, 2011, 02:27:25 AM

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.

Except that the Arab League united against Khadafy, NATO hammered out tactics that didn't put the US in the fore, and the UN gave its blessing. We didn't choose sides unilaterally and we are not committed to supporting other rebellions in the region unless those same forces align for them.

Believe me: I am very reluctant to support military adventures where we have no direct stake. But this one was handled correctly.

Agreed. This is how a modern international military action should look.

Ale
Logged
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 6620


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #48 on: March 20, 2011, 10:29:19 AM »

Quote from: corruptrelic on March 20, 2011, 04:18:04 AM

Quote
WikiLeaks cables, independent analysts and reporters have all identified supporters of Islamist causes among the opposition to Col Gaddafi's regime, particularly in the towns of Benghazi and Dernah.

An al-Qaeda leader of Libyan origin, Abu Yahya al-Libi, released a statement backing the insurrection a week ago, while Yusuf Qaradawi, the Qatar-based, Muslim Brotherhood-linked theologian issued a fatwa authorising Col Gaddafi's military entourage to assassinate him.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8391632/Libya-the-West-and-al-Qaeda-on-the-same-side.html

Quote
Anti-American Extremists Among Libyan Rebels U.S. Has Vowed To Protect

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/19/extremists-among-libya-rebels_n_837894.html

Quote
A senior member of al Qaida urged Libyan rebels to continue their fight against Muammar Gaddafi and warned of the consequences of defeat, in a videotaped message posted on Jihadi websites, the Qatar-based Gulf Times reported on Sunday

http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=212001

Regardless of the side that is "right", without any threat to national security there's no reason we need to get in the middle of another civil war.


So, the Al-Qaida is desperately trying to achieve some credit for a peaceful civilian revolution where their own terrorist approach has failed them. And this proves... what, exactly? Terrorists have tried to get rid of Gadhafi for decades with absolutely no success. Now, much to their annoyance, a peaceful movement (going against Al-Qaida's teachings) manages to do in weeks what they haven't been able to do at all. Of course they'll try to pretend they're part of it.

As for Gadhafi's offers to have foreign observers in Libya, it's a stalling tactic. The world already has live coverage from independent journalists in the area (and the Libyan government is arresting them. A Norwegian journalist was taken away just yesterday, for example). Gadhafi also claimed that he had called for a ceasefire, then bombed the civilians even harder than before and told the world that the rebels had broken the ceasefire. He knows that he only needs a few more days at most to destroy his opposition if the world doesn't stop him, so stalling is hist most valuable tactic.

I'm honestly flabbergasted that you're taking Gadhafi's side in this, particularly when you seem to have very little knowledge of the conflict. I just don't see what you think you, or the world, have to gain. Rarely does the world have a chance to do a military action in such a clean and good way as we are doing now, and there is massive world-wide support.
Logged
corruptrelic
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3555


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: March 20, 2011, 01:28:28 PM »

Quote from: TiLT on March 20, 2011, 10:29:19 AM

Quote from: corruptrelic on March 20, 2011, 04:18:04 AM

Quote
WikiLeaks cables, independent analysts and reporters have all identified supporters of Islamist causes among the opposition to Col Gaddafi's regime, particularly in the towns of Benghazi and Dernah.

An al-Qaeda leader of Libyan origin, Abu Yahya al-Libi, released a statement backing the insurrection a week ago, while Yusuf Qaradawi, the Qatar-based, Muslim Brotherhood-linked theologian issued a fatwa authorising Col Gaddafi's military entourage to assassinate him.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8391632/Libya-the-West-and-al-Qaeda-on-the-same-side.html

Quote
Anti-American Extremists Among Libyan Rebels U.S. Has Vowed To Protect

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/19/extremists-among-libya-rebels_n_837894.html

Quote
A senior member of al Qaida urged Libyan rebels to continue their fight against Muammar Gaddafi and warned of the consequences of defeat, in a videotaped message posted on Jihadi websites, the Qatar-based Gulf Times reported on Sunday

http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=212001

Regardless of the side that is "right", without any threat to national security there's no reason we need to get in the middle of another civil war.


So, the Al-Qaida is desperately trying to achieve some credit for a peaceful civilian revolution where their own terrorist approach has failed them. And this proves... what, exactly? Terrorists have tried to get rid of Gadhafi for decades with absolutely no success. Now, much to their annoyance, a peaceful movement (going against Al-Qaida's teachings) manages to do in weeks what they haven't been able to do at all. Of course they'll try to pretend they're part of it.

As for Gadhafi's offers to have foreign observers in Libya, it's a stalling tactic. The world already has live coverage from independent journalists in the area (and the Libyan government is arresting them. A Norwegian journalist was taken away just yesterday, for example). Gadhafi also claimed that he had called for a ceasefire, then bombed the civilians even harder than before and told the world that the rebels had broken the ceasefire. He knows that he only needs a few more days at most to destroy his opposition if the world doesn't stop him, so stalling is hist most valuable tactic.

I'm honestly flabbergasted that you're taking Gadhafi's side in this, particularly when you seem to have very little knowledge of the conflict. I just don't see what you think you, or the world, have to gain. Rarely does the world have a chance to do a military action in such a clean and good way as we are doing now, and there is massive world-wide support.

I understand you have a much better understanding of the conflict than the rest of us do, as you pointed out before the air strikes started the U.S. would get to sit by on the sidelines and watch the rest of the allies handle it for a change.

Don't get where you're thinking I'm taking Gadaffi's side from. Whether he stayed in power or was replaced internally by the people of Libya's own ahnds, I could care less.. my feeling is, the U.S. has no place in this conflict. Firing 110 cruise missles into Libya at say, $500k per missle, comes out to what? Now the reports of 19 U.S. jets and bombers dropping even more bombs, how much is that going to cost? If we were doing this because U.S. security interests were at stake - absolutely.. I'm all for it.. but considering the Libyan government was/is no threat to us, it's simply not our job to be the world police force.

If there is massive support, why are we (with some help from France and Britain) the main ones involved, yet again? If the Arab League wants this, why arethey not committing their own armed forces? Or at least help out financially?

I think Dennis Kucinich summed it up nicely..

Quote
Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) is questioning President Barack Obama's decision to participate in Saturday's missile attack on forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi in Libya.

During a conference call with fellow Democrats yesterday, Kucinich asked if the missile strikes should be considered an impeachable defense.

"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation," Dennis Kucinich said in a statement issued on Friday.

Congress was not consulted before yesterday's air strikes, Politico reports.

"It is an act of war," according to Kucinich, who carries a copy of the U.S. Constitution in his coat pocket. "War from the air is still war."

Republicans Ron Paul and Richard Lugar have made similar arguments as well. Going to war needs congressional approval and Obama didn't get it. Even Bush brought it to a vote before going to Iraq (as misguided as that war was) whether for or against it, at least he got the votes needed the right way.

Oh and now lets hear about how much I love Bush too!
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."
ATB
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15530


Thanks for everything, Ryan. 1979-2013


View Profile
« Reply #50 on: March 20, 2011, 01:40:40 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.

Not a fan of French intervention in the 1770s either?
Logged
ATB
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15530


Thanks for everything, Ryan. 1979-2013


View Profile
« Reply #51 on: March 20, 2011, 01:53:59 PM »

As for Obama being impeachable, he's not.  Iirc, presidents as CNC have the ability to engage us assets without a formal declaration of war.
Logged
corruptrelic
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3555


View Profile
« Reply #52 on: March 20, 2011, 05:05:18 PM »

http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/03/20/quotes-arab-league-condemns-libya-airstrikes/

http://www.sudantribune.com/NAfrican-Union-demands-end-to,38339

Quote
CAIRO—The Arab League secretary general, Amr Moussa, deplored the broad scope of the U.S.-European bombing campaign in Libya on Sunday and said he would call a new league meeting to reconsider Arab approval of the Western military intervention.

Moussa said the Arab League’s approval of a no-fly zone on March 12 was based on a desire to prevent Moammar Gaddafi’s air force from attacking civilians and was not designed to embrace the intense bombing and missile attacks—including on Tripoli, the capital, and on Libyan ground forces—that have filled Arab television screens for the last two days.
 
« Last Edit: March 20, 2011, 05:39:40 PM 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."
kronovan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7930



View Profile
« Reply #53 on: March 20, 2011, 06:33:35 PM »

The problem with this whole action is that it's not just a current event, but one with a very long historical evolution. IMO the minute Mubarak was out in Egypt, Gaddafi's fate was sealed. As long as there was a leader in Egypt that could possibly intervene on his behalf, things were stalemated. With Mubarak out and Egyptians not even having a newly elected government, there was any number of potential trigger-point events that would have lead to the same thing. Much of the reason behind that is because Libya under the direction of Gaddafi has been one of the most controversial Arab League states since the leagues formative year. I've been reading about this tyrant -yes I'm definitely comfortable calling him that- since I was a child. Just to put Gaddafi in perspective here's some facts about him taken from the Libya Wikipedia entry:

Quote
On 1 September 1969, a small group of military officers led by then 27-year-old army officer Muammar Gaddafi staged a coup d'état against King Idris, launching the Libyan Revolution.Gaddafi was, and is to this day, referred to as the "Brother Leader and Guide of the Revolution" in government statements and the official Libyan press.
 
On Prophet Muhammad's birthday in 1973, Muammar Gaddafi delivered his famous "Five-Point Address". The five main points of his address being:
* Suspension of all existing laws and implementation of Sharia
* Purging the country of the "politically sick"
* Creation of a "people's militia" to "protect the revolution"
* Administrative revolution
* Cultural revolution
Muammar Gaddafi set up an extensive surveillance system. Reportedly 10 to 20 percent of Libyans work in surveillance for the Revolutionary committees. The surveillance takes place in government, in factories, and in the education sector.

Muammar Gaddafi executed dissidents publicly and the executions were often rebroadcast on state television channels.

If you're thinking shades of Saddam Hussein and his famous press event during his assension to power in Iraq - yup you're right, he got the idea from Gaddafi.

Quote
In 1977, Libya officially became the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. Later that same year, Gaddafi ordered an artillery strike on Egypt in retaliation against Egyptian President Anwar Sadat's intent to sign a peace treaty with Israel. Sadat's forces triumphed easily in a four-day border war that came to be known as the Libyan-Egyptian War, leaving over 400 Libyans dead and much of Gaddafi's armored divisions in ruins

Great, so to protest peace  between an Arab League member and the state of Israel he commits a senseless military act that costs the lives of 400 of his own citizens.

Quote
February 1977, Libya begins supplying Goukouni Oueddei and the People's Armed Forces (FAP) with substantial amounts of military supplies. The Chadian–Libyan conflict began in earnest when Gaddafi's long-held support of rebel forces in northern Chad escalated into a Libyan military invasion of its southern neighbor

For those who don't know the details: the war raged on for 10 years at the cost of tens of 1000's of lives on both sides. At one point Gaddafi had a plot in play to assasinate the President of Chad, Tombalbaye. Perhaps a bit to Gaddafi's defense, Tombalbaye was a complete tyrant and perhaps more importantly - a Christian in a nation with a Sufi Muslim majority who had outlawed all civil liberties as early as 1962. Still, I can't help but find it ironic when a Tyrant wants to assassinate a similar Tyrant.  The war went back and forth for a decade until the French intervened on the side of Chadian forces and equipped them with sand-savvy, Toyota pickup trucks equipped with new gen antitank missiles - famously dubbed the Toyota War. The result was that the French and Chad forces absolutely kicked the ass of Gaddafi's forces and the war ended shortly after.

Quote
Hundreds of Libyans lost their lives in the war against Tanzania, when Gaddafi's tried to save his friend Idi Amin.

More winning stuff

Quote
Once a breadbasket of ancient world, the eastern parts of the country become impoverished under Gaddafi's economic theories.
Much of the country’s income from oil, which soared in the 1970s, was spent on arms purchases and on sponsoring dozens of paramilitaries and terrorist groups around the world.

As expected, his economic policies were just another version of the Cold War era failed African-Socialist experiment's. Complete with a good helping of corruption, nepotism and misappropriation of funds. Interesting to note that it's the Eastern portion of the country where most of the current rebel support is strong. If it wasn't for the huge bounty reaped from their oil, he'd likely have been turfed out much sooner.

Quote
Gaddafi assumed the honorific title of "King of Kings of Africa" in 2008 as part of his campaign for a United States of Africa

Yup you read that correctly - he's the main proponent behind the new USA (United States of Africa) concept and he seems to think he'll be king - or at least 1 of the kings. He was also the main founding member of the African Union in 1999. So it might be advisable to take what they AU says with a grain pound of salt. As well, it's the AU that's been the primary observers/monitors of the Darfur genocide in Sudan and to date they've done SFA about it.

I personally don't have much opinion on what's transpired so far with no flyzone actions, as IMO it was fairly predictable. About the only criticism I might have is to allow France to be involved based on their much heated history with Libya. Yup, if there's any nation that has complete utter antipathy for Gaddafi and his Libyan co-hearts - France would be it.

Now you know why even middle of the road politician like Obama say "he's got to go."
« Last Edit: March 20, 2011, 07:07:42 PM by kronovan » Logged
Ironrod
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3402



View Profile WWW
« Reply #54 on: March 20, 2011, 06:45:12 PM »

Quote from: corruptrelic on March 20, 2011, 05:05:18 PM

http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/03/20/quotes-arab-league-condemns-libya-airstrikes/

http://www.sudantribune.com/NAfrican-Union-demands-end-to,38339

Quote
CAIRO—The Arab League secretary general, Amr Moussa, deplored the broad scope of the U.S.-European bombing campaign in Libya on Sunday and said he would call a new league meeting to reconsider Arab approval of the Western military intervention.

Moussa said the Arab League’s approval of a no-fly zone on March 12 was based on a desire to prevent Moammar Gaddafi’s air force from attacking civilians and was not designed to embrace the intense bombing and missile attacks—including on Tripoli, the capital, and on Libyan ground forces—that have filled Arab television screens for the last two days.
 

Yeah, I don't think you get a do-over.

I would guess that these comments are just playing to the cheap seats in their own houses; their real objective is Khadafy's removal. (Based on my vast inside knowledge of Arab League politics, of course).
Logged

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

Online Online

Posts: 6620


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #55 on: March 20, 2011, 10:31:43 PM »

Quote from: Ironrod on March 20, 2011, 06:45:12 PM

Quote from: corruptrelic on March 20, 2011, 05:05:18 PM

http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/03/20/quotes-arab-league-condemns-libya-airstrikes/

http://www.sudantribune.com/NAfrican-Union-demands-end-to,38339

Quote
CAIRO—The Arab League secretary general, Amr Moussa, deplored the broad scope of the U.S.-European bombing campaign in Libya on Sunday and said he would call a new league meeting to reconsider Arab approval of the Western military intervention.

Moussa said the Arab League’s approval of a no-fly zone on March 12 was based on a desire to prevent Moammar Gaddafi’s air force from attacking civilians and was not designed to embrace the intense bombing and missile attacks—including on Tripoli, the capital, and on Libyan ground forces—that have filled Arab television screens for the last two days.
 

Yeah, I don't think you get a do-over.

I would guess that these comments are just playing to the cheap seats in their own houses; their real objective is Khadafy's removal. (Based on my vast inside knowledge of Arab League politics, of course).

Indeed. You also see both Russia and China complaining about the military actions, even though they agreed to them. Sure, they "abstained from voting" after a healthy dose of behind the scenes debating, but that's just their way of keeping their hands clean. It's just politics.

As for Africa, I think there are many countries there that feel threatened by these actions, so it's quite natural that they'll protest.
Logged
ATB
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15530


Thanks for everything, Ryan. 1979-2013


View Profile
« Reply #56 on: March 21, 2011, 06:56:17 PM »

If anyone who wasn't a democrat was president right now, this thread would be 25 pages already.
Logged
raydude
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1507


SPICE! Nomnomnomnom


View Profile
« Reply #57 on: March 21, 2011, 07:12:26 PM »

Quote from: ATB on March 21, 2011, 06:56:17 PM

If anyone who wasn't a democrat was president right now, this thread would be 25 pages already.

If that someone managed to get the UN security council to vote 10-0 on a resolution and managed to get a coalition of nations together, with the understanding that the US would not be the primary player, I'd have no problem with it.

Its a going it alone approach with "might makes right" attitude that I find hard to swallow.
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."
ATB
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15530


Thanks for everything, Ryan. 1979-2013


View Profile
« Reply #58 on: March 21, 2011, 07:35:34 PM »

Who's not the primary player?
Logged
ATB
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15530


Thanks for everything, Ryan. 1979-2013


View Profile
« Reply #59 on: March 21, 2011, 08:03:09 PM »

Obama: it is US policy that ghadaffi must go.  Yep.
Logged
rickfc
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5651


Why so serious?


View Profile
« Reply #60 on: March 21, 2011, 08:12:12 PM »

Quote from: ATB on March 21, 2011, 08:03:09 PM

Obama: it is US policy that ghadaffi must go.  Yep.

I didn't have too much of a problem with the removal of Saddam Hussein, and I have much less of an issue with Ghadaffi as it is a true international coalition rather than me-against-the-world policy.
Logged
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


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


View Profile
« Reply #61 on: March 21, 2011, 09:59:39 PM »

Quote from: ATB on March 21, 2011, 06:56:17 PM

If anyone who wasn't a democrat was president right now, this thread would be 25 pages already.

maybe it's the Democrats fault that the Republican's/Tea Baggers/Indies here are a bunch of lazy bastards too Tongue
Logged

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

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #62 on: March 21, 2011, 10:03:27 PM »

Quote from: raydude on March 21, 2011, 07:12:26 PM

Quote from: ATB on March 21, 2011, 06:56:17 PM

If anyone who wasn't a democrat was president right now, this thread would be 25 pages already.

If that someone managed to get the UN security council to vote 10-0 on a resolution and managed to get a coalition of nations together, with the understanding that the US would not be the primary player, I'd have no problem with it.

Its a going it alone approach with "might makes right" attitude that I find hard to swallow.

Bush went through the proper channels at the U.N. before that coalition came together. He also went through Congress, unlike Obama.

I'm still on the fence about this Libya thing. I just heard today from a "terrorism expert" that 1 out of 4 or 5 foreign fighters in Iraq were Libyan, tied in with Al Qaeda, and from the eastern side of Libya......where the strongest anti-Ghadaffi rebels are now.

We're supposed to be the world leader, so on one hand we should be leading this in Libya. On the other hand, is it really necessary?

.
Logged

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

Online Online

Posts: 6620


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #63 on: March 22, 2011, 12:25:15 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on March 21, 2011, 10:03:27 PM

Bush went through the proper channels, and was rejected multiple times, at the U.N. before that coalition came together, a coalition that had nothing to do with the U.N.

Fixed that for you.
Logged
Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #64 on: March 22, 2011, 02:24:30 AM »

the hell he was rejected.

not to mention he waited for the U.N. for a year and half before acting.

Logged

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

Offline Offline

Posts: 9262


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


View Profile
« Reply #65 on: March 22, 2011, 03:41:20 AM »

It's easier when you openly lie to everyone to get your way.  Bush had that going for him, I will agree.
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.
Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #66 on: March 22, 2011, 03:49:20 AM »

A whole bunch of countries and people believed that so-called lie, so what's that say?

And the jury is still out on whether what Bush did in Iraq is playing a major role in what's sweeping across the middle east these days.

Let's see......Bush preached democracy, and showed it to the Afghan's and Iraqi's. And what's sweeping across the region right now? Yup, people wanting DEMOCRACY.

if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck..... icon_smile
« Last Edit: March 22, 2011, 03:51:30 AM by Zekester » Logged

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

Offline Offline

Posts: 9262


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


View Profile
« Reply #67 on: March 22, 2011, 03:55:00 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on March 22, 2011, 03:49:20 AM

A whole bunch of countries and people believed that so-called lie, so what's that say?


 icon_lol  I don't think you thought that reply all the way through.
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.
Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #68 on: March 22, 2011, 03:56:20 AM »

Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003

Afghanistan,
Albania
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Czech Republic
Denmark
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Hungary
Italy
Japan
South Korea
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Philippines
Poland
Romania
Slovakia
Spain
Turkey
United Kingdom
Uzbekistan

[Source: US State Department]

Coalition - Libya - 2011

United States
France
United Kingdom
Italy
Canada
Belgium
Denmark
Norway
Qatar
Spain
Greece
Germany
Poland
Jordan
Morocco
United Arab Emirate

Wow...there sure were a lot of stupid and naive people back in '03 huh?

 Roll Eyes
Logged

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

Offline Offline

Posts: 9262


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


View Profile
« Reply #69 on: March 22, 2011, 04:03:23 AM »

 icon_lol  And you still don't get what I meant.
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.
Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #70 on: March 22, 2011, 04:11:06 AM »

what you don't get is how much alike what Obama is doing as President to what Bush did.

Obama wasn't supposed to be getting involved in wars, and in fact was supposed to bring our troops home.

Obama was supposed to close Guantanamo.

Obama continued the Bush tax cuts.

Obama was supposed to be the transparent President

LOL maybe what Bush did wasn't so bad afterall  icon_wink



Logged

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

Offline Offline

Posts: 9262


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


View Profile
« Reply #71 on: March 22, 2011, 04:18:23 AM »

I'm proud of you zekester. Admitting bush was a bad president is definitely a step in the right direction!
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.
Zekester
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #72 on: March 22, 2011, 04:20:35 AM »

Quote
I'm proud of you zekester. Admitting bush was a bad president is definitely a step in the right direction!

is sarcasm a new concept to you?

Bush was a kick-ass President, and history will show just how wrong his critics were.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2011, 04:22:25 AM by Zekester » Logged

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

Offline Offline

Posts: 9262


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


View Profile
« Reply #73 on: March 22, 2011, 04:41:55 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on March 22, 2011, 04:20:35 AM

Quote
I'm proud of you zekester. Admitting bush was a bad president is definitely a step in the right direction!

is sarcasm a new concept to you?

Bush was a kick-ass President, and history will show just how wrong his critics were.

Too late.  No take backs.
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

Online Online

Posts: 6620


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #74 on: March 22, 2011, 06:49:47 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on March 22, 2011, 02:24:30 AM

the hell he was rejected.

Yes, he was. I even went so far as to read up on the subject before posting my previous reply. the U.N. never approved of his actions, and Kofi Annan even ended up saying that Bush's actions were illegal according to international law. Bush finally abandoned the U.N. (and started a campaign to cripple it out of spite) because he was so convinced he was right, and started using political muscle to make others join him. I remember that well, as the main U.S. diplomat in Norway came with thinly veiled military threats against us to make us join the campaign out of fear for the political repercussions (and surprise! We never joined the coalition).

The coalition was filled with countries who either were misguided themselves or who wanted to strengthen their relationship to the US at any cost.

Quote
not to mention he waited for the U.N. for a year and half before acting.

Waited my ass! If there was one thing Bush didn't do, it was to wait. He was so convinced that Saddam had WMDs ready at any moment that he refused to listen to the U.N. when they pointed out that there was little risk of any such thing. Iraq was even, to a certain degree, open to inspectors and wanted to show that they weren't hiding anything (while at the same time trying not to appear weak towards old enemies like Iran and Israel).

And guess what? The U.N. was right. Bush was wrong. He failed on every step of the way, from the research he based his conclusions on, to the conclusions themselves, the people he surrounded himself with, the lack of waiting, the invasion itself...

So can we please stop this idiotic discussion about Iraq in a thread about Libya, or can you at least do some fricking research before trying to convince those who have?
Logged
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 6620


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #75 on: March 22, 2011, 06:51:07 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on March 22, 2011, 04:20:35 AM

Bush was a kick-ass President, and history will show just how wrong his critics were.

That's not history. That's high fantasy.
Logged
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


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


View Profile
« Reply #76 on: March 22, 2011, 09:17:45 AM »

wait, we don't have Azerbaijan, Estonia and Eritrea with us this time?  the whole venture is doomed!
Logged

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

Offline Offline

Posts: 2586



View Profile
« Reply #77 on: March 22, 2011, 11:08:47 AM »

Quote from: CeeKay on March 22, 2011, 09:17:45 AM

wait, we don't have Azerbaijan, Estonia and Eritrea with us this time?  the whole venture is doomed!

According to Tilt, they must be the only smart ones this time around  Roll Eyes

Logged

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

Online Online

Posts: 6620


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #78 on: March 22, 2011, 11:16:27 AM »

Quote from: Zekester on March 22, 2011, 11:08:47 AM

Quote from: CeeKay on March 22, 2011, 09:17:45 AM

wait, we don't have Azerbaijan, Estonia and Eritrea with us this time?  the whole venture is doomed!

According to Tilt, they must be the only smart ones this time around  Roll Eyes

I'm waiting for you to explain the logic behind that statement. I fully expect to wait forever.
Logged
hepcat
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9262


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


View Profile
« Reply #79 on: March 22, 2011, 12:13:30 PM »

Honestly, if the ol' Zekemeister is gonna rewrite history and tell us that Bush had all this support from th UN and other nations, I don't know why he doesn't just go the extra mile and give him superpowers. Maybe make him a firefighter on the weekends?  Oh, and the rightful heir to the Czars!
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.
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 0.225 seconds with 103 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.052s, 2q)