Poll: Did the UN Just Declare War on Libya?! Yes they did

[Fleischer]

It is their independence and they have to fight for it.

Funny thing is wars of independence are often waged by the rebelling faction who courts and gains support of other nations. If the French did not ally with the British colonial rebels, I would be saluting the Union Jack, instead of the Stars and Stripes.

 

[Airsoftslayer93]

Mmmm interesting... but you know what... as soon as fighter jets and attack helicopters are used against anyone armed with only small arms then intervention is needed

 

[Fleischer]

While Ghaddafi did declare a cease-fire he's not abiding by his word. Reports from within the country claim that military action continues.

*ding* *ding* This NPR live blog [http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/03/18/134648904/live-blog-military-action-in-libya-latest-developments?sc=fb&cc=fp] gives some instances where the Libyan government was initially violating the cease-fire. For now, there are no further reports of fighting, but it's dangerous to trust a man like Ghadaffi.

 

[The Lost Big Boss]

Odd... This says diffrently
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/18/libya-ceasefire-announced_n_837478.html

"Libya Ceasefire Announced"

so... What war?

How about you read some more. After the "Ceasfire" military forces went to bomb a rebel held city. It's the equivalent to a little kid screaming stop during a fight, then getting in a sucker punch.

It is their independence and they have to fight for it.

Funny thing is wars of independence are often waged by the rebelling faction who courts and gains support of other nations. If the French did not ally with the British colonial rebels, I would be saluting the Union Jack, instead of the Stars and Stripes.

Oh, and this.

 

[Danny Ocean]

(EDIT: Forgot the quote)

Snip

Well, I'll have to make the point again that that number can fluctuate since the UN is dependent on its member countries to make up its army. And thats not particularly a large army (since you dont just add up all those numbers together). The two is under 125k

Not particularly large, but not small either. 100,000 is pretty good going for an essentially voluntary organisation, I think.

I only mentioned the US because the way the OP post was worded it, it made it seem like this was the US doing all the work.

Yup! I was backing you up. Pull out those figures if anyone wants to say the US is in charge of it.

I just tend to get defensive on here. Often it seems like I'm the only one in the UN's corner.

 

[Fleischer]

Pay attention people the UN have not "declared war" they have given the go ahead for UN members armed forces to set up a no-fly zone above the country.They have not given the go ahead to an invasion or full on attack on the country

you = awesome

The United Nations can authorize force against a nation; however, it has only instituted a no-fly zone.

The United States government can only declare war through the Senate. Obama can say what we wants, but unless the Senate approves a declaration of war, Japan and Germany will be the last two nations the United States declared war upon.

 

[Fleischer]

They are killing each other anyway - would it not do us to help get in there, remove the cancer that is Gadaffi and help to install someone to run the place who isn't a radical Islamist, like Iran wants to do?

Your suggested course of action is exactly what Islamic terrorist groups are hoping will happen.

 

[Tdc2182]

snip

Funnily enough, pretty much a mass genocide has taken place and Gadiffi (or however the hell you spell his name), is killing civilians. That tends to be within the guidelines for war.

Believe it or not, telling a dictator to "Stop it right now", doesn't exactly work when they've been running a country with an iron fist for x amount of years.

The rebels have been asking for help for a few weeks now.

On a related note, if you are trying to let people know the news about a war going on, first you give the facts, then your opinion. Not immediately try to belittle something you very clearly know little about.

 

[Tdc2182]

Your suggested course of action is exactly what Islamic terrorist groups are hoping will happen.

The Islamic terrorist don't want an extremist in government?

I know that they aren't exactly the most rational people, but I really don't think that makes sense.

 

[funguy2121]

Neo-libs everywhere are rejoicing. Remember ? war is evil unless it?s sprinkled with the magic pixie dust of UN endorsement and ?humanitarian? rhetoric, in which case the dead bodies, the terror, and the screaming children are all worth it. The fact that Libya is the richest oil nation on the entire African continent is a mere coincidence. Go back to sleep ? basketball is on the TV. Soon you?ll be able to crack open a 6 pack and enjoy the air strikes like you would a Dwyane Wade slam dunk.
This is precisely what we predicted before Obama even took office?.
?Obama may eventually withdraw a portion of troops from Iraq, but mark our words, they won?t be home long before they are sent off to bomb another broken-backed third world country, this time in the name of a United Nations-backed ?humanitarian? war, just as Bill Clinton presided over in Somalia and Serbia with the full support of the establishment political left.?
-Paul Joseph Watson

Despite Mr. Watson's opinion about oil, I'm more concerned about the waging war thing, not that Libya wasn't doing a good job of that already

,

I was about to call you a neocon troll, and then I read the rest of your post. I'm not sure exactly what all of your points are, but this strikes me...

No 3rd option for the poll?

I'm not sure that Bill Maher and John Stewart are opening champaign bottles over this. I'm not sure why you're convinced that liberals cum all over ourselves when we think of the U.N. A lot of liberal reporters have exposed rape and war crimes committed by U.N. troops who are protected by diplomatic immunity. Maybe it's because we don't think it's a good idea to give our finger to the whole world as our economy plummets, like Obama's predecessor did?

Somalia and Serbia - don't forget Kosovo. I'm acquainted with a Serbian and a Kosovar, both of whom were witnesses to those respective wars before they came her. Serbia and Kosovo are two of the precious few countries where the U.S. has intervened in wars and where the citizens generally have a very positive view of the United States - well, DID until Bush gave the aforementioned middle finger to the world.

So, are Libya rich or are they backbroken? I'm confused.

War is already going on in Libya, or at least the beginnings of war. The leadership there is slaughtering the people. I heard one of the best stories the other day. Protesters were unable to gain access to a military base, because Quadafi had ordered the soldiers to spray them down with their assault rifles, so one man loaded up his black Kia with propane and drove it right into the building. I'd say the Libyan people are about as fond of Quadafi right now as we are.

 

[Cliff_m85]

The UN does some pretty unspeakably horrific things to people as well. Diplomatic Immunity allows for rapes to go unpunished, even if the victim was a child.

Got a source for that? Just generally, it's not really the kind of allegation you can make about a multinational organisation without a source.

http://bosniagenocide.wordpress.com/2010/12/09/un-peacekeepers-took-part-in-rapes-during-bosnian-genocide/

 

[Pyro Paul]

Odd... This says diffrently
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/18/libya-ceasefire-announced_n_837478.html

"Libya Ceasefire Announced"

so... What war?

How about you read some more. After the "Ceasfire" military forces went to bomb a rebel held city. It's the equivalent to a little kid screaming stop during a fight, then getting in a sucker punch.

well first off... A Ceasefire is not a switch. There is delay between orders given and orders recieved this can, and often does, lead to military actions occuring even after any sort of ceasefire, surrender, or end of hostilities order is issued.

Second... Link or it didn't happen.
saying "War is Declared!!" does not make it so.
provide a news report or reputable sorce which states offically that hostilities have begun.

 

[Tehlanna TPX]

So it's liberal if it's declared a humanitarian effort, and it's republican if its for the oil/revenge/etc.

...........how about no?

 

[Cliff_m85]

Without the UN stepping in whoever wins this revolution will do unspeakably horrific things to the people on the other side.

Plus it feels good to finally take real action against Gadaffi despite the UK having to grit it's teeth and pretend we respect him for years since Lockerbie.

The UN does some pretty unspeakably horrific things to people as well. Diplomatic Immunity allows for rapes to go unpunished, even if the victim was a child.

Finally! An American who doesn't like the UN! I've been waiting for so long!

But seriously, no. You don't condemn the an entire organisation for actions committed by a few working for it.

To say, "The UN does some pretty unspeakably horrific things to people as well" is a poor choice of words. Not only do they imply the guilt of the whole organisation, they imply that an official decision was made to carry out these actions. Obviously neither of these things are the case.

When the UN doesn't punish those who did such, they are all bound to be judged.

Add the oil-for-food program if you choose, as well. That and the fact that it's not really a United Nation, as many countries (America, for instance) get more say than other countries.

 

[Fleischer]

The Islamic terrorist don't want an extremist in government?

I know that they aren't exactly the most rational people, but I really don't think that makes sense.

If a western backed force goes into Libya, knocks Ghaddfi out of power and then installs a government of their liking, then terrorist factions such as Al Quaeda are being given a perfect example to turn moderate Musilins into people willing to fight and die under these terrorist fundamentalist groups. It'd give Al Quaeda and other groups a massive surge in funding as well as recruitment, nevermind it'd turn back all of the diplomatic efforts the West has been making to Islamic nations.

It is the right of the Libyan people to choose their leader, not the US, not the UN. No one has that right, save the Libyan people. To install a pro-Western government in Libyan would be a grave error.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

It isn't a formal declaration of war nor even hostile intent. The initial purpose of such a resolution is to make a particular faction reconsider their position. The trouble is, in order to enforce a No-Fly zone, one must maintain air superiority which, of course, includes destroying various assets related to contesting this air superiority.

For the record, the UN does not maintain a standing military force. Whenever an armed response is deemed necessary, member nations are expected to contribute resources to build the necessary force. In the event the UN mission eventually ends (they often never actually end and instead simply get reduced in manpower over time. There are still UN troops in Lebanon as a result of the civil war in the 1980s), the forces are demobolized and returned to their home states.

 

[darth gditch]

seems to me like its too little too late, the rebels have practically lost already and air power alone wont stop the remaining from being killed. We ought to just send in the bloody SAS to take out Gadaffi.

Heeheehee, funny thing, an SAS squad was deported from Libya not too long ago after getting arrested for "suspicious activity."

 

[funguy2121]

Did they actually declare war, or just the no-fly zone? Because there is a difference, you see.

War was declared,

Source! The people call for a source! And anything from Wikipedia shall be struck from the record!

 

[Danny Ocean]

When the UN doesn't punish those who did such, they are all bound to be judged.

Except it did punish them, as much as it could. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil-for-Food_Programme#Investigations]

You've got to remember that the troops the UN uses are not the UN's troops, they are the militaries of separate sovereign nations. It'd be like the US punishing UK troops for the actions of those troops in Iraq or something, except even more unlikely than that.

That and the fact that it's not really a United Nation, as many countries (America, for instance) get more say than other countries.

I suppose you're one of those who thinks that the USA isn't really a democracy, either.

When reviewing the UN it's important to know how it's structured, and to look at all the smaller parts in context.

Too many people only go on what they see in the news, and a very basic or misguided understanding of how it actually works. This leads to an unfairly negative portrayal of the organisation.

And I do feel able to speak about it more than the average person.