FCP Bob 1,312 Posted March 25, 2011 Author Share Posted March 25, 2011 I am very curious as to what nations over there will get involved and what the aftermath will look like.Looks like Qatar and the United Arab Emirates are the only Arab countries directly taking part by having their Air Forces flying missions.http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/af_libya;_ylt=A...GFyZmlyc3Rhcg-- Link to post Share on other sites
owise1 0 Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 I believe that more people than not think that promoting Democracy, especially in arab countries, is a lofty goal. Bush was right in his desire to bring Democracies to the Middle East. Having said that, I think recent events have proved him to be more wrong than ever. Democracy didn't come from Bush's doctrine of nation destruction and rebuilding. Instead, it came from internal protests and revolution. It came from the local youth seeing the rest of the world, then looking at the backwardness of their own country, and desiring a change. It is unclear how Obama's doctrine of supporting revolution using targeted bombings will fare. The most successful, quickest, and cleanest changes came when the US wasn't involved.That may be part of it, but also the rise in global food prices:Concerns over Grains in TunisiaReports: Egyptian and Tunisian riots were driven in part by the spike in global food pricesInflation could lead to political instability, report sayscolbert report watch yesterday's (03/24/2011) episode, look around the 4:30 mark.Time to buy stocks in food companies perhaps. Agrium ( AGU )and Potash ( POT ) come to mind. Link to post Share on other sites
AmScray 355 Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 To all the Americans worried about who will be in charge it's a Canadian so your military is safe under our command.http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nation...article1956477/Edit: and to make it even better he's French-CanadianI'm OK with this. Actually, Frenchmen who lack the cowardice gene are quite adept military leaders. I like them because they're warm towards the innocent, but cruel-hearted towards the enemies and enjoy destroying them in surprising, unusual, creative ways. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 That may be part of it, but also the rise in global food prices:Concerns over Grains in TunisiaReports: Egyptian and Tunisian riots were driven in part by the spike in global food pricesInflation could lead to political instability, report sayscolbert report watch yesterday's (03/24/2011) episode, look around the 4:30 mark.Time to buy stocks in food companies perhaps. Agrium ( AGU )and Potash ( POT ) come to mind.Thank you Ethanol..starving children around the world for 5 years and counting!I'm OK with this. Actually, Frenchmen who lack the cowardice gene are quite adept military leaders. I like them because they're warm towards the innocent, but cruel-hearted towards the enemies and enjoy destroying them in surprising, unusual, creative ways.Must be the infusion of German blood in the 40's? Link to post Share on other sites
vbnautilus 48 Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 You consider them finished?Well, their leaders were definitely ousted. Link to post Share on other sites
ShakeZuma 585 Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/03/25/...dex.html?hpt=T1so we should be bombing syria next, no? Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Well, their leaders were definitely ousted.And the report today was that the Muslim Brotherhood is making inroads into Egyptian politics.I hope they are more westernized and will stay secular aka anti sharia law, but I would not bet on it. And I bet on Obama to lose in 2010. http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/03/25/...dex.html?hpt=T1so we should be bombing syria next, no?Should have been bombing them 20 years ago. Link to post Share on other sites
hblask 1 Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 We'll be there for days, not weeks.Oops, I meant weeks, not months.Oops, sorry, I meant months, not... what comes after months? Link to post Share on other sites
All_In 0 Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 the western forces continue to bomb government positions to help the rebels advance on tripoli. "Coalition air raids have hit Muammar Gaddafi's birthplace of Sirte, a key target for westward-advancing rebels...""Over the weekend, a number of coastal communities and important oil installations, including Ras Lanuf, Brega, Uqayla and Bin Jawad, fell to the rebels...""The precise rules of engagement have not been revealed, our correspondent adds.Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Monday that attacks on pro-Gaddafi forces amounted to intervention in a civil war, and were not backed by the UN resolution."------------this is enforcing a no-fly zone? the west have probably lost egypt (i.e. they don't have a brutal dictator installed by them), so now they need libya.and a lot of idiots fall for the 'protecting civilians' excuse, while western forces bomb them. pathetic.libya is one of the most modern countries in africa, gaddafi built-up the infrastructure, kept libya secular, women could wear what they want, get educated, etc. same with iraq under saddam. anytime a non-western nation starts to greatly improve itself, the west comes in and destroys it.but as long as western media 'reports' on these issues using western officials as the info source, and mindless lemmings get played by it, it will continue. sad state of affairs, uneducated mob-rules. Link to post Share on other sites
Pot Odds RAC 23 Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 ...and a lot of idiots fall for the 'protecting civilians' excuse, while western forces bomb them. pathetic...Horseshit. And Pathetic. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 GG EgyptIt is also clear that the young, educated secular activists who initially propelled the nonideological revolution are no longer the driving political force — at least not at the moment. “We are all worried,” said Amr Koura, 55, a television producer, reflecting the opinions of the secular minority. “The young people have no control of the revolution anymore. It was evident in the last few weeks when you saw a lot of bearded people taking charge. The youth are gone.”The Muslim Brotherhood is also regarded warily by some religious Egyptians, who see it as an elitist, secret society. These suspicions have created potential opportunities for other parties.Ahhh youth...."let's start something with good intentions, have no plan for the next step and then wonder why it didn't all fall into peace and happiness."It's like Baby Democrats. Link to post Share on other sites
Roll the Bones 74 Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 George Bush addressing the UN in 2004:The rest is by some blog guy:This is by me:I'm still waiting. Where did Bush say that by invading Iraq and Afghanistan and instituting democracies by force, with no regard for the wishes of the people, that other coutnries would follow suit on there own? Link to post Share on other sites
Roll the Bones 74 Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 I realize that there are tons of opinions being thrown about and I merely want to express my opinions and views on the matter, for what they are worth. This is more or less a converstation I had with friends about it yesterday and most if it is derived and some plagarized for the sake of getting my point across to present my view on the situation.Q-Why didn't Obama go to Congress and why the secrecy by the UN surrounding the bombing that took place?RR- From my understanding, The French pushed for the secrecy and agreed to take the lead role more or less. As often times with wars or actions like this a month long public debate would have been pointless and not effective. They claim and it appears to be correct that it was necessary.Q-What is the purpose of what we or the UN is trying to to accomplish?RR- Well, the resolution said it, to protect civilians. Gaddafi was in the process of perpatrating a bloodbath. We needed to stop him and put his forces out of commision that he was using against his own people.Q- Did we do that?RR- Well, for the most part we have destroyed his major military appartus. He is pretty much hunkered down in his city and has retreated or lost ground so it's not over by a long shot but I think we accomplished the initial phase of what we attempted anyway.Q- Who are we supporting, you know, who are these rebels?RR- There is a Libyan National Transition Council that most countries have recognized as being the legititmate body that everyone is supporting. Their stated purpose is to form a democratic government that includes all the citizens including Ghadafi supporters in forming a new democratic government. Remember this was all started because of the same movements that succeeded on the two countries on either side of them. But we are not going to send ground troops into support them, it is their revolution. We need to stay within the bounds of the UN mandate, which is a legal framework and supported by all involved including the Arab league.Q-I heard they Arabs were backing away from that now. Are they?RR- Well, I wouldn't say they are backing away as much as wavering a little bit. With them unfortunately their always seems to be political ulterior motives and people playing both sides. With that said, they were the ones who came and requested the support for the Libyan people in the first place and at this point still support the UN action.Q-But don't alot of the Arabs support Gaddafi?RR- Which ones? It seems to be almost united against him and Egypt especially has been very vocal in support of his removal.Q-Well let's get down to it though, everyone knows this is only about oil, right?RR-The oil argument is an idiotic argument. Had the problem been oil, the easiest solution would have been to maintain Gaddafi's presence. One can "deal" very well with dictators who are selling oil. Q-So which Islamic group are we supporting this time and why? Who are we dealing with?RR-Secularist actually. The stated purpose of the rebel group is to form a secular government. We have many, many people that have been talked to, interviewed and met with as well as known that are supporting this. Now whether it will happen that way is up in the air until it actually does happen naturally. They want a unified Libya whose capital will remain Tripoli and whose government will be elected as a result of free and transparent elections. Bernard Kouchner, founder of Doctors Without Borders and former foreign minister of France has written alot about the people we are dealing with and has first hand accounts which I tend to trust. Q-What about Bahrain and Yemen, Isn't there a case for intervention in those places as well?RR- Actually, yes. But I believe you have to start with Gaddafi though. The whole outlook of the Arab world has changed. These dictators seemed to be practically invincible and no one imagined that this would take place a year ago. But we have seen countries topple obviously and now dictators who are looking to hang onto power are watching this closely. If Gaddafi hangs on it will bolster their resolve to stay as well. We cannot intervene everywhere but this can serve as warning for other dicators and if successful really set the seeds for democracy to flourish in the area.Q- Look dude, you make this all sound simple. If it is why the hell are so many Americans up in arms over what Obama's done? We have Republicans yelling we should have went in sooner and others saying we shouldn't have gone in or at least consulted congress first. And didn't Obama say that we should consult congress and get approval on military actions? And geez, most of his own party and all the pacifists types are hammering on him as well! What gives?RR- Slow down! There are many concerns that I'd agree have merit!*There is a strong case for staying out of Libya*These kinds of No-Fly Zones always end in troops on the ground*Intervening in a civil war is almost always a miscalculation of the situation on the ground.*The American system does require congressional authority for the use of war powers.*There is no specific U.S. national interest at stake in the outcome*We entered this without an obvious exit strategy.I think all this should be talked about and debated and discussed. No actions of this kind should go unquestioned and everyone is going to come to their own conclusions, but I can only tell you mine and what I presume Obama is going to tell the nation tonight, that is,"that everyone would be asking, "Why did we let another massacre of civilians happen again?" I believe their is a pro-peace case to made for our intervention based on protecting human lives. Sometimes military force is necessary, and I think this is one of those circumstances.Gaddafi was racing across the Libyan Desert intent on killing all of the rebels who have taken control of the Eastern part of the country and invade the opposition's capital city in Benghazi.Gaddafi was promising a bloodbath -- threatening to murder the families of thousands of rebel fighters. The night before the United Nations vote, the lunatic dictator said that, "We are coming tonight... We will find you in your closets... We will have no mercy and no pity." He was already murdering innocent civilians for weeks and was openly showing his intent to continue doing so. Obama decided to stop that military attack on civilians.Ever hear of Srebrenica? In Srebrenica, Serbian forces murdered more than 8,000 Bosnian men and boys in 1995. They even killed male babies. They evacuated over 30K women, children and elderly. It was one of Europes largest massacres in modern times. The United Nations failed to stop that invasion. And that's nothing compared to the more than 800,000 people were killed in the 1994 Rwandan Genocide. It seems to me a civilized world, if anything, should expect the UN to be able to intervene in such cases to protect civilians from massacre if at all possible, right?The threat to the civilians in Benghazi with a population of 700K was very very real. He was already murdering and destroying homes of civilians on the path to there. He also killed 200 protesters in one swat. So aside from the problems I mentioned, at least in Benghazi the new civilian opposition leadership of the city seems to be acting with restraint. The uprising seems to be routed in the new Arab democratic movements that swept Tunisia and Egypt. I sincerely hope they prevail and this doesn't evolve into a civil war which is all too possible. It comes down to this: assuming a civil war is inevitable, stopping certain massacres and protecting civilians is the priority, even knowing that you have to figure the rest out later.That probably isnt' a great answer that everyone wants to hear, but once Gaddafi didn't get ousted early on, this is the cards we were dealt. I am willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt for a limited intervention with the goal of disabling Gaddafi's ability to wage war on the Libyan people. We can argue about the issues mentioned, in the end though, the decision is more clear-cut: the U.S. acted so that Benghazi would not become another Srebrenica. I can support that. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 ####Disclaimer Alert####This will not be seen often and may not be used against me at a future date### End Disclaimer Alert ###I kind of liked Hillary's answer about why we are there.Basically she said: "The guys who have been with us for 10 years in Afghanistan asked us to help them, we owed them"I can live with that. Link to post Share on other sites
hblask 1 Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 RR- From my understanding, The French pushed for the secrecy and agreed to take the lead role more or less. As often times with wars or actions like this a month long public debate would have been pointless and not effective. They claim and it appears to be correct that it was necessary.This is essentially an admission that our government no longer represents us, but instead is its own power-hungry overreaching entity, separate of its original purpose. Link to post Share on other sites
hblask 1 Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 ####Disclaimer Alert####This will not be seen often and may not be used against me at a future date### End Disclaimer Alert ###I kind of liked Hillary's answer about why we are there.Basically she said: "The guys who have been with us for 10 years in Afghanistan asked us to help them, we owed them"I can live with that.2021: Q: Why are we going to war in Dumbassistan?A: The guys who have been with us for 10 years in Libya asked us to help them, we owed them. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 2021: Q: Why are we going to war in Dumbassistan?A: The guys who have been with us for 10 years in Libya asked us to help them, we owed them.2112:Q: What is that thing?A: It's called a guitar. Link to post Share on other sites
Pot Odds RAC 23 Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 2112:Q: What is that thing?A: It's called a guitar. 'I lie awake, staring out at the bleakness of Megadon. City and sky become one, mergingInto a single plane, a vast sea of unbroken grey. The Twin Moons, just two pale orbs asThey trace their way across the steely sky. I used to think I had a pretty good life here,Just plugging into my machine for the day, then watching Templevision or reading a TemplePaper in the evening.'My friend Jon always said it was nicer here than under the atmospheric domes of the OuterPlanets. We have had peace since 2062, when the surviving planets were banded together underThe Red Star of the Solar Federation. The less fortunate gave us a few new moons.I believed what I was told. I thought it was a good life, I thought I was happy. Then I foundSomething that changed it all...' Link to post Share on other sites
nutzbuster 7 Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 oopshttp://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110330/ts_nm/us_libya Link to post Share on other sites
Roll the Bones 74 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 http://www.collegehumor.com/video/6465342/...talk-translatedThis thread explained. Link to post Share on other sites
nutzbuster 7 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 http://www.collegehumor.com/video/6465342/...talk-translatedThis thread explained.well it only goes to show we aren't the only ones concerned.A ray of hope?http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110331/ap_on_bi_ge/af_libya Link to post Share on other sites
nutzbuster 7 Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 Cost so far ...$600 million. Yay liberation!!!Also, lol peace deal. Sigh.........but at least there is talk about it. Soon please?http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_libya Link to post Share on other sites
hblask 1 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Cost so far ...$600 million. Yay liberation!!!Also, lol peace deal. Sigh.........but at least there is talk about it. Soon please?http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_libya There's no chance in hell we're leaving there any time soon. War has become it's own means to an end, just like all Big Government programs -- their goal eventually becomes to propagate itself rather than whatever it's original purpose was. Link to post Share on other sites
ShakeZuma 585 Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 hey is it just me or does this woman who was raped by the libyan government guys look like a completely intolerable cunt? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now