US(and a bunch of other places) vs Libya, GO!

[punkrocker27]

Nations deserve the right to self government and we've no right to tell them what type of government that should be.

So long as said governments are still held accountable in case they're just as bad as the last guys.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

I think they'll be doing hte most, what to clean up that mess they started.

What mess we started?

I live a few miles nearby to Lockerbie and can remember when the 747 was blown up theres no love lost between Libya and the North of England let me tell you.

Lockerbie is in Scotland...

OT: I'm glad this has finally happened, time to get rid of the nutter. Let's not impose "democracy" though, eh? Nations deserve the right to self government and we've no right to tell them what type of government that should be.

I live on the border, Lockerbie is only a few miles away. Being enraged by somebodies actions doesn't magically stop at the border you know...

Could have been worded much better. We're Scottish, we need our disasters. Otherwise all we would be able to complain about would be the weather and the neighbours...

Lol Sorry for the bad wording but that whole thing was pretty scary.

If you remember the Lockerbie bombing the you're a LOT older than your username suggests.

Shhhh I have been 18 for years now >_>

 

[Bad Neighbour]

North Korea is using helicopters and tanks to kill civilians en masse? Holy shit, I didn't know.

Haha thankyou for this. Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks that argument about oil and Korea is really boring.

 

[Baneat]

People should abandon the pretension that governments are helping purely out of moral interest. We have something to gain through intervention, we always do.

This UN resolution has the backing of the Arab nations. There will be no occupation. This isn't about stealing a country's resources - if you want to be cynical, the angle you should be gunning for is that, what with Western Democracies verbally supporting the rebels, if Gaddafi remains in power he can use his oil as an economic weapon to get revenge against those supporting the revolutionaries. By helping the revolution militarily, said powers will hope to support regime change to one that is thankful for their intervention and will provide favourable rates of trade on the oil.

That's pretty much as negative as you can get, and it's pretty tame really - especially considering all the other excuses Gaddafi's been giving everyone else to kick him out.

Just cause I think you quoted the wrong guy before, and this applies to you too

Nah, the right guy, was backing the point. It just seems.. odd that the UK rarely lifts a finger to aid countries, but coincidentally when that country holds value to them (Resources or something like that) we're all humanitarians. I don't buy it.

We give loads of aid to third world countries - like, £3 billion worth or something. We just generally don't send in the troops unless there's a good excuse - and protecting the future supply of oil AT THE SAME TIME AS saving countless lives from what is basically straight forward slaughter. Sure, there's very likely to be economic reasons being high in the consideration (like I said above), but are you seriously saying that saving the civilians is completely irrelevant?!

Of course not, I'm just saying that Cameron's previous answer to the UK that "we're doing this just to save lives and protect freedom" is far from the truth. It's fine for him to have an agenda, it's not fine to mask it.

 

[Funkysandwich]

My country (belgium) offered help with F16's. But there is a joke about stuff like that in our country.

"you want us to send our airforce? Ok. Do you want the one or both F16's?"

If you didn't catch on. Our military ain't worth that much .

I have a lot of sympathy for you guys...

Always getting invaded by Germans on their way to France...

 

[Solon_Mega]

I'm glad we (Russia) didn't get involved.
The bear needs his winter nap.

Too bad for that annoying Chechen alarm clock huh?

 

[JWAN]

I support every war declared to take out dictators. This guy has been mowing down civilians with helicopters and tanks, breaking every rule the UN put in place to stop his activities, then calling the whole thing a "Crusader Invasion". Personally I think he's pissed that France knocked out his air-power in under 10 minutes.

We obviously cannot leave this crazy bastard in power because he will do the same things over and over again. Kill him now so we dont have to deal with it later.
Have we learned nothing from Desert Storm?
Just fix the fucking problem. The problem being Gaddafi.

As far as I'm concerned the coalition missed a huge target of opportunity when they chose not to blow hp his palace because it was full of his supporters.
He was handing out assault rifles and mortars (to start an insurgency). We should have hit his palace with 5 cruise missiles and ended this damn thing plus cut out 400 future insurgents.

 

[Therumancer]

I don't get how they can go after Libya, and continue to ignore North Korea.

Because North Korea doesn't have nearly as much internal conflict as Libya does right now, and the North Korean regime's control over the country is far stronger than Gaddafi's is.

Also, I've been waiting for this for a month. Good job guys.

Incorrect. The reason why we have not acted against North Korea has a lot more to do with the repurcussions of doing so. Going after Libya has little in the way of potential repercussions, going after North Korea however has a decent chance of seeing massive damage done to South Korea which is a US ally, as well as upsetting eastern powers like China or Russia. North Korea has been a sort of "wag the dog" ally for China for a while, where they back it and have it do all kinds of things that China itself doesn't want to be held directly accountable for. Due to people catching onto this, and it becoming an inconveinence, China has been increasingly backing off from North Korea, but they are still close enough where an attack on North Korea, for all diplomatic rambling, would have a decent chance of provoking China into action. Whether that's would be a good thing or not, depends entirely on your perspective and whether your a militant or not, the current administration however does not think that way for good or ill.

Right now one of the touchy subjects about North Korea has been their missle technology and how they are trying to get it to the point where they can conceivably threaten the US (through Hawaii, as opposed to the US mainland). You might remember that back during the Clinton administration one of the big issues with him was that he either lost, or sold a bunch of US military tech to China, depending on whether you believe he screwed up, was incompetant, or a traitor. Shortly thereafter North Korea showed up with much more powerful missles to go along with their WMD. Since everyone knows China had the stolen technology, a lot of fingers are pointed at them.... simple for those who don't understand the overall situation and why China is on good terms with North Korea, despite how it might seem, yet at the same time has been trying to distance itself from them. A situation where an invasion would be touchy due to how it affects a budding super power.

Gadafi is not a nice guy, and I've been kind of waiting to kick his can for decades. However I think the timing is largely because we've failed to install friendly regimes in either Iraq or Afghanistan, due to both nations declaring themselves islamic nations as soon as they obtained their "Freedoms" and putting an end to any hopes of cultural reforms, early promoses of things like women's sufferage fell flat on their face. I'm GUESSING the US dirty tricks brigade talked to the Libyan resistance and a deal was probably cut that if we and our allies step in, they'll institute a follow up regime that will be more outright friendly, and perhaps become the core of the regional renaissance that was at the heart of our winning the peace strategy.

That said, I'm wary about having the UN involved in any way. It's the US and it's allies involved, but honestly I don't like the idea of their bureaucracy getting involved. Especially given that I think the UN has failed due to having a lot of the kind of nations it was supposed to be policing like Russia and China as members. But that is my thoughts. It's kind of hard to take a hard line on human rights abuses in places like China when they are members.















As you can see, while some nations might not like the attack on Libya, nobody had much interest in coming to their aid, nor do they have any allied neighbors they can convincingly threaten.

 

[Throwitawaynow]

Also, as far as I know there haven't been any troops "sent in" to Libya as of yet, and I don't think there are plans to (could be wrong). As of now all I've seen or heard of is lots and lots of cruise missiles and bombing runs on military airfields and AA emplacements.

Muller says the operations in Libya are limited, they aren't planning an occupation or even an ousting. Gadaffi threatened to shoot down any non-Libyan planes that flew over Libya, so the UN issued a no-flying zone. Now America, Britain and France are enforcing it.

Yeah as it stands it's just air, but I think it'll end up being ground too, as I don't think Gaddafi's going anywhere until we get the infantry to physically drag him out. I'd rather we didn't have to do that, though.

I heard the American general on CNN saying they have no plans to go after Gadaffi himself, they only wish to stop their ability to kill civilians. So military bases, runways, and AA towers mostly.

Edit: Wow Im dumb, didn't read jona's comment only bad's. Please move on.

 

[JWAN]

Why are you people assuming it's the US doing this, France fired the first shots

Its a coalition force, and France did get jets to enforce the no fly zone first but make no mistake, the US is providing the most firepower and support.

And Im ok with that, Gaddafi's forces have been mowing down civilians for weeks now. Its time for it to end.

It makes no difference who leads the coalition anyway. As long as we kill that bastard Gaddafi everyone wins.

 

[Bad Neighbour]

Unless it's a really serious genocide situation, which is not, stop medling your nose when you're not called for.

er.. I think it's genocidal enough already without waiting for it to turn into a holocaust, and we sortof were called for actually. Y'know, cause people asked for help.

 

[Solon_Mega]

I don't get how they can go after Libya, and continue to ignore North Korea.

Because North Korea doesn't have nearly as much internal conflict as Libya does right now, and the North Korean regime's control over the country is far stronger than Gaddafi's is.

Also, I've been waiting for this for a month. Good job guys.

Incorrect. The reason why we have not acted against North Korea has a lot more to do with the repurcussions of doing so. Going after Libya has little in the way of potential repercussions, going after North Korea however has a decent chance of seeing massive damage done to South Korea which is a US ally, as well as upsetting eastern powers like China or Russia. North Korea has been a sort of "wag the dog" ally for China for a while, where they back it and have it do all kinds of things that China itself doesn't want to be held directly accountable for. Due to people catching onto this, and it becoming an inconveinence, China has been increasingly backing off from North Korea, but they are still close enough where an attack on North Korea, for all diplomatic rambling, would have a decent chance of provoking China into action. Whether that's would be a good thing or not, depends entirely on your perspective and whether your a militant or not, the current administration however does not think that way for good or ill.

Right now one of the touchy subjects about North Korea has been their missle technology and how they are trying to get it to the point where they can conceivably threaten the US (through Hawaii, as opposed to the US mainland). You might remember that back during the Clinton administration one of the big issues with him was that he either lost, or sold a bunch of US military tech to China, depending on whether you believe he screwed up, was incompetant, or a traitor. Shortly thereafter North Korea showed up with much more powerful missles to go along with their WMD. Since everyone knows China had the stolen technology, a lot of fingers are pointed at them.... simple for those who don't understand the overall situation and why China is on good terms with North Korea, despite how it might seem, yet at the same time has been trying to distance itself from them. A situation where an invasion would be touchy due to how it affects a budding super power.

Gadafi is not a nice guy, and I've been kind of waiting to kick his can for decades. However I think the timing is largely because we've failed to install friendly regimes in either Iraq or Afghanistan, due to both nations declaring themselves islamic nations as soon as they obtained their "Freedoms" and putting an end to any hopes of cultural reforms, early promoses of things like women's sufferage fell flat on their face. I'm GUESSING the US dirty tricks brigade talked to the Libyan resistance and a deal was probably cut that if we and our allies step in, they'll institute a follow up regime that will be more outright friendly, and perhaps become the core of the regional renaissance that was at the heart of our winning the peace strategy.

That said, I'm wary about having the UN involved in any way. It's the US and it's allies involved, but honestly I don't like the idea of their bureaucracy getting involved. Especially given that I think the UN has failed due to having a lot of the kind of nations it was supposed to be policing like Russia and China as members. But that is my thoughts. It's kind of hard to take a hard line on human rights abuses in places like China when they are members.















As you can see, while some nations might not like the attack on Libya, nobody had much interest in coming to their aid, nor do they have any allied neighbors they can convincingly threaten.

Better not to mess with China. Fallout 3 taught us something, and that is to NEVER F***ing piss of China.

 

[Arif_Sohaib]

As an american citizen it is getting old of this nation constantly getting involved in the matters of others. America is broke we have invaded two muslim nations on questionable to false pretenses. I think countries should be allowed to handle their own business. The headlines say that its the UN but how often do these multinational colaitions become US. We have enough problems domestically.

Because the last time the most powerful nation in the world told a multinational organisation (the league of nations) that it had it's own problems and it couldn't be assed helping out, the said organisation bent over backwards and got a Severe Rodding from every tyrant and dictator going. America is the only western nation powerful enough to back UN resolutions and it has a responsibility to champion the virtues it's supposed to be so proud of (freedom, democracy, equality etc) and defend those who share simlar views, because if it didn't...no one else will. (dey aint got the ballz)

Every dictator is not Hitler. That monster is dead and has been for more than 60 years. It was the only time a war was justified and now it is over. Get over it.
Hitler was invading countries left,right and center and abusing his own citizens horribly. Tell me the name of one country Qaddafi has invaded in the last five years. Tell me the name of one ethnic group he has destroyed. When revolts started in Egypt, the US was actually contemplating assisting the dictator because he bent over on their every whim without caring what his people wanted, the same case is probably there in Bahrain and Yemen and would be there in case of revolt in Saudi Arabia.
America did the same kind of meddling in Pakistan against Musharraf when he questioned the drone attacks by bringing Mr 10% to power. And in Iran by supporting the Shah and killing Mosaddegh.

 

[JWAN]

This is retarded. Let their people solve their problems, specially when the actions taken by US/UN are masked with other intentions.

If you want to be the good guys and save the World from the bad guys why didn't UN take down Bush? Hell, why don't you come here (Portugal) and take Jose Socrates from us since he's doing shit.

Unless it's a really serious genocide situation, which is not, stop medling your nose when you're not called for.

Your right, we should wait for the bodies to be stacked waist deep before we stop the madman in charge. Or in Saddams case, let him get away with starving his people as long as he floods France with oil.

 

[Bad Neighbour]

The definition of genocide is the murder of a particular people usually designed around personal traits

This however is just the quelling of a rebellion be it righteous or not

Who cares whether or not it fits the dictionary definition of genocide? It's mass murder, I think those words carry enough weight too. What Gaddafi is doing is vicious, immoral and quite frankly evil to most people's eyes, who gives a damn what word we use for it?

 

[Warboss Robgutz]

As an american citizen it is getting old of this nation constantly getting involved in the matters of others. America is broke we have invaded two muslim nations on questionable to false pretenses. I think countries should be allowed to handle their own business. The headlines say that its the UN but how often do these multinational colaitions become US. We have enough problems domestically.

Because the last time the most powerful nation in the world told a multinational organisation (the league of nations) that it had it's own problems and it couldn't be assed helping out, the said organisation bent over backwards and got a Severe Rodding from every tyrant and dictator going. America is the only western nation powerful enough to back UN resolutions and it has a responsibility to champion the virtues it's supposed to be so proud of (freedom, democracy, equality etc) and defend those who share simlar views, because if it didn't...no one else will. (dey aint got the ballz)

Every dictator is not Hitler. That monster is dead and has been for more than 60 years. It was the only time a war was justified and now it is over. Get over it.
Hitler was invading countries left,right and center and abusing his own citizens horribly. Tell me the name of one country Qaddafi has invaded in the last five years. Tell me the name of one ethnic group he has destroyed. When revolts started in Egypt, the US was actually contemplating assisting the dictator because he bent over on their every whim without caring what his people wanted, the same case is probably there in Bahrain and Yemen and would be there in case of revolt in Saudi Arabia.
America did the same kind of meddling in Pakistan against Musharraf when he questioned the drone attacks by bringing Mr 10% to power. And in Iran by supporting the Shah and killing Mosaddegh.

Oh, So if a dictator isn't as bad as Hitler, then thats ok then? i was not just referencing That particular douchbag, but every other nation or leader from stalin to The Showa dynasty that ignored the league of nations because it had NO POWER, and why did it have no power, because america refused to back it.
And how can you compare eygypts situation to the libyan one? sure, mubarak was determined to hang onto his presidency for as long as possible, but at least he didn;t commit the wholesale slaughter of his own people just for demonstrating.
and you dont think Quaddaffi wouldn't invade every country he could if only he had the power? This is the man who would eagerly "wipe switzerland off the face of the world" if only he had nuclear weapons, who thinks that "HIV is a peacful virus" because it kills gays, who sent soldiers to support the crumbling dictatorship of the genocidal maniac idi armin so that he could murder his own people, 600 of which died when the regime finally fell.
This is a man who Bombed MY COUNTRY, Great Britain, then demanded the monster responsible return to libya for a sickening hero's welcome.
this is the man who supported other EVIL men convicted of both crimes against humanity and war crimes like Mengistu Haile Mariam and Malosevic.
This is a man who thinks he can do what he wants, when he wants, because russia and china always run to his side like a wounded puppy any time the western world so much as tuts' in his direction.
The man is nothing more than a psychotic thug, something he passed on to his vidictive little shit of a son who claims diplomatic immunity any time he decides to assault a police officer.
but i guess he learnt that from his dad who seems to think it's fair game to shoot at them from inside of the London Embassy.
His Crimes are many. Do not defend him.

 

[Bad Neighbour]

The definition of genocide is the murder of a particular people usually designed around personal traits

This however is just the quelling of a rebellion be it righteous or not

Who cares whether or not it fits the dictionary definition of genocide? It's mass murder, I think those words carry enough weight too. What Gaddafi is doing is vicious, immoral and quite frankly evil to most people's eyes, who gives a damn what word we use for it?

No the point is it's not mass murder

He's not systematically rooting out his population

He's fighting a war against rebels

A flatout victory would mean he vanquished the rebels that were trying to take over
I'm not saying I support his cause.
I'm only stating that slating this with mass murder is like
A teacher being branded a pedophile for shouting at a kid who struck him

We're talking about someone who called airstrikes on demonstrators here, not just someone retaliating. Killing the guys with guns might not be murder, but killing the guys with signs certainly is.