I believe every nation should put resources and troops to created a powerful UN. The UN as it is is somewhat of a joke. Yes, they are a great organization. But they need the power to back up their word. Then the UN could become the world police force and America could finally realize that we're not the world's superpower anymore and that we should focus on our country rather than wasting untold dollars on our defense budget.
Poll: Libya and my mother
- Thread starter LitleWaffle
- Start date
Recommended Videos
In this case the no-fly zone was a carefully decided, UN move that the people of Libya seemed to want. We'll see whether or not it makes things better (I doubt it).
What I don't like is the idea of the USA policing the world, as the interests of the USA are not necessarily the interests of the rest of us. No one country should be allowed to do what the US government is doing in Iraq and elsewhere.
What I don't like is the idea of the USA policing the world, as the interests of the USA are not necessarily the interests of the rest of us. No one country should be allowed to do what the US government is doing in Iraq and elsewhere.
We are bad when we do something, and bad when we dont. I actually am in favor of us taking part, but only if we do it for good reasons, ie, the benefit of the people of that country. usually we dont though. But if we (The US) decided to interfere in say, Uganda, I would be all for it. Countries like Uganda make me thankful Im American, despite the flaws...(cause they are not as bad as others)
FYI, Uganda wants to pass laws to make homosexuality illegal punishable by death.
FYI, Uganda wants to pass laws to make homosexuality illegal punishable by death.
I think that the U.S, specifically, should stop getting involved in wars because we can't afford to keep doing this shit. However, the UN's primary role is to keep the peace, so I have no problem with them trying to stop Gaddaffi's lunacy.
America didn't decide to do this - this is the UN's decision ultimately. The USA is lending a helping hand, sure, but to say imply this is America's attack is really far away from the truth.LitleWaffle said:
Anyway, I'll stop nitpicking and onto your question!
I agree with you. I'm all for intervention. I believe it is spineless to sit there and allow a madmen to kill innocent people. I am all in favour of blowing Qaddafi and his loyalists off the face of the Earth. Once you start hurting innocents and decline requests from the international community multiple times to stand down - you should expect to be given a slap.
I wish the UN did this more often.
Well, and Israel, though Israel isn't usually called a Muslim nation.Trebort said:
To me, that more or less looks like what they are doing, letting the locals fight it out but giving the ones the west wants to win just enough help.
My fear is that this will not have any effect. Look at Afghanistan and Iraq. Despite of years of troops policing both you still have bombists killing hundreds of innocents at the first, and mass murders of minorities at the second.
The invasions had zero effect. Terrorist attacks in Madrid and London happened after the invasions. And we know that these terrorist cells are being originated at our door steps and not there in many cases.
Now Lybia has the humanitarian factor, but its still down to lets ensure control of an oil producing country and protect our interests.
If we were so concerned about humanitarism, where were we during the mass genocides in Rwanda?Oh wait, there are no diamonds or oil in Rwanda. That must be the explanation.
The invasions had zero effect. Terrorist attacks in Madrid and London happened after the invasions. And we know that these terrorist cells are being originated at our door steps and not there in many cases.
Now Lybia has the humanitarian factor, but its still down to lets ensure control of an oil producing country and protect our interests.
If we were so concerned about humanitarism, where were we during the mass genocides in Rwanda?Oh wait, there are no diamonds or oil in Rwanda. That must be the explanation.
No, we need to stay out of other countries' problems.
If not for a noble cause like letting countries fix their own problems or stopping the obscene flow of money to the military, then at least so we can give up the sad and self-deceptive notion that the U.S. is the "leader of the free world".
If not for a noble cause like letting countries fix their own problems or stopping the obscene flow of money to the military, then at least so we can give up the sad and self-deceptive notion that the U.S. is the "leader of the free world".
I'm not quite sure on my opinion but if they feel their country is being poorly governed and the government isn't doing jack to help[sub]and more![/sub]then I feel so that at least someone should stop them before more civilian lives are killed.
Now if you'll excuse I need to read Starship Troopers.
What's that? We need money? TAXES! TAXES! MORE TAXES! WE NEED MORE TAXES!
Now if you'll excuse I need to read Starship Troopers.
Thanks Pimppeter, that gave me a good laugh and still is xD!Pimppeter2 said:
TestECull said:
What's that? We need money? TAXES! TAXES! MORE TAXES! WE NEED MORE TAXES!
Yes and no. If the vast majority of the People are being oppressed by a dictatorship and they can not free themselves for some Reason, the Rest of the world should help.
That would be the most positive Solution. But since i would sent Soldiers to fight and die over there not because they are defending their own country or People but rather to help out in another nations internal conflict, i'd better be damn sure that there is very little choice.
I wouldn't interfere in the affairs of another country with military force if i see any other way.
The Situation is somewhat complicated, there are still a lot of People who'd defend Gaddafi. Any military Operation to remove him and his Troops by force will at best result in an uneasy truce with the defenders of the former regime constantly waiting for an opportunity to take down the new Government.
Lybia will have two bloody Revolutions for the Price of one.
That would be the most positive Solution. But since i would sent Soldiers to fight and die over there not because they are defending their own country or People but rather to help out in another nations internal conflict, i'd better be damn sure that there is very little choice.
I wouldn't interfere in the affairs of another country with military force if i see any other way.
The Situation is somewhat complicated, there are still a lot of People who'd defend Gaddafi. Any military Operation to remove him and his Troops by force will at best result in an uneasy truce with the defenders of the former regime constantly waiting for an opportunity to take down the new Government.
Lybia will have two bloody Revolutions for the Price of one.