|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|03-25-2011 05:47 PM|
No..what I'm suggesting is that now Daffy "shitted out of the pot" (as we say in Rome) made a mess that could not be ignored and infact is not being ignored.
How much of the attention is BECAUSE Lybia has oil? A lot is my guess...but then in 2011 is that something that still surprises you?
No war was fought for else than political and or resources gain. Ever.
|03-25-2011 11:59 AM|
NATO takes command of part of Libya operation
|03-25-2011 09:36 AM|
Originally Posted by pawlo View Post
BBC NEWS | Africa | Profile: Muammar Gaddafi
Basically what you are suggesting, is that all of a sudden, America is unable to restrain its military might, to sort out this repeat and long term offender, whilst forsaking all the other crimes against humanity being perpetrated across the world?
There is a consistency in what rules are enforced and which are not, and it is not being discussed. This is wrong.
|03-24-2011 06:17 PM|
|03-24-2011 04:31 PM|
its so obvious that the bottom line is all about oil and always has been. If we really gave a flying fuck about dictators and human rights abuses we'd have invaded the Sudan years ago. but alas, there's no oil there. If you think its all a coincidence then you're a fuckin moron.
and the corporate controlled media is completely complicit in all of this bullshit. they make this Lybia thing look like the worst thing that ever happened, while US funded dictators do much worse things all the time and they never even mention it for a second. in fact, what the gov't in Yemen and Bahrain are doing to their own people right now is exactly the same as what Gaddafi is doing to his own people. but they are "allies", so we don't give a fuck and in turn the media pretends its not even happening
|03-24-2011 02:22 PM|
Originally Posted by JeffreyCH View Post
the issue regarding foreign incursions over Libya, is that none of those making the attacks are actually being attacked!
Germany, a nation who is far closer to this arena of conflict than USA have withdrawn their support for purely this reason.
italy, as mentioned in here by another poster, has had missiles fired at it by Ga-daffy duck and still plays a very minor role in the situation.
and yet the overwhelming majority of acts are being undertaken by the USA.
during recent wars, many have complained that american is NOT the world's police. once again, i am being provoked into reiterating this alleged fact.
i dont like ga-daffy duck. frankly i think there have been more than enough excuses to 'neutralise him'. Pan-Am 103 and WPC Yvonne Fletcher being just two examples from a UK perspective alone!
but right now, you have a ruling authority (whether you like them or not) being threatened by a domestic force, which is being aided by foreign agents at a sudden drop of a hat.
|03-24-2011 08:00 AM|
"The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy.
All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.
It works the same in any... country."
-- Nazi Reich Marshall Hermann Goerring
(at the Nuremberg War Trials)
|03-24-2011 07:05 AM|
Tomahawks and drones are the cheapest and one of the most precise ways to violently kill people from a distance without putting your own men at risk.
I haven't made up my mind about the whole Libya thing in and of itself, but as purely a matter of how it was done (not why it was done) I think for a leader who was backed into a corner by the EU and NATO to do this, Obama handled it as well as anyone could have.
You can ask all the politicians in this country and they'll bitch about it to try and gain votes, but ask just about any foreign observer, pundit, or other talking head, and they will agree that Obama played his cards right when it came to the delicate task of shooting yet more U.S. hardware into a Muslim country - The Arab league was on board, the U.N. was on board, NATO was on board, the security council passed the resolution, and French and English jets were the first over the skies. He's doing everything in his power to a) help the rebels, b) not be seen as hegemonic, c) keep this short.... hopefully, d) not make up wild stories about WMDs or whatever as an excuse, e) keep our boys off the ground, f) keep our boys reasonably out of harm's way
As far as China, Russia, and the Arab League biching about collateral civilian deaths: WTF did you expect? It's war. I think NATO has put a LOT of time, effort, and money into developing very fancy weapon systems that have taken us from WWII Dresden style wholesale slaughter of civilians to a point where civilian casualties, while unfortunate, have been overwhelmingly attenuated (in the case of an air raid).
Now, if we could only get the other countries involved to do what they agreed to do. A lot of countries are showing their true spots right now and just how unreliable they are:
U.S. Pressures NATO Allies To Take Command Of Libya Mission
|03-23-2011 06:36 PM|
Ugly picture. Especially when such tyrant(s) can pick and choose who is worthy of protection. Of course...who can pay..or can be robbed.
On the other hand you cannot really be seriously supporting the idea of just letting an army of mercenary kill everybody without moving a finger.
As for Obama he did nothing wrong...this is no war or invasion...consider it a rescue...with Tomahawks. One million a shot.
But then if you consider that only the Afghan campaign runs at 2 billion a WEEK...
|03-23-2011 06:54 AM|
My only question is, 'Why?'
Pull the USS Mount Whitney out, let the 'coalition' fall apart, and let the Europeans have the war they pushed so hard to have. Then we can do exactly what they do: Point and laugh when it all goes to pot, and bitch that we aren't getting the lucrative oil contracts now that someone else's military has done all the hard work (even as we continually criticize).
If nothing else good comes of this, at least I can laugh the next time a Euro (or mini-American) tells me that all my country cares about is using force to protect the oil.
I'm sure the world will understand, we just need to explain to them that Libya has oil. That way when a Libyan sniper puts a bullet through the head of, let's say for argument's sake, western-educated free-radio anti-Gadaffi Libyan broadcaster who's become a major symbol of the resistance, we can just throw our hands up and say 'Sorry, we could have helped, but people don't think we should help countries who have oil. Sad to say, all you rebels and your families are as good as dead.'
Originally Posted by Snowolf View Post
To draw yet another 'Do not cross' line without regard to circumstance is just as bad as drawing any other 'Do not cross' line - you're just setting yourself up to cross it again.
Folks can't say for a second that if Obama had brought this before congress it would have passed on time to do any good. We'd have ALL sorts of congressmen using it for cheap political points. Boehner would be up at his pulpit crying again, Palin would be telling us she can see Libya from her house. Bachmann would be telling us that we shouldn't be bombing a country in Australia because they came to America's aid during the reign of Charlemagne (and her people would believe her). And they'd ALL be bitching about the cost of a drop in the bucket even as they refuse to address entitlements because that may cost them votes.
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|