Libya - UN resolution

Jason

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Posts
15,616
Media
50
Likes
4,782
Points
433
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
I personally think the EU should stump up.

Well I guess I agree, but it just isn't going to happen.

What we are seeing is not an EU action but within Europe the first new action under the Anglo-French 50 year alliance. Germany has modified its stance, presumably in response to the international outrage expressed, but still isn't directly contributing. And while several EU nations are playing a part, most are doing nothing. Neither the UK nor France are going to be prepared to accept a situation where they risk lives and put up money and then the EU comes up with a foreign policy and tells the UK and France what to do. The EU has been way behind the curve on Libya - indeed it has seemed close to irrelevant.
 

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,779
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
I am of two minds on this. On the one hand I was appalled at the loss of lives and apparent outright genocide going on in the country. On the other, as others above me observed, the U.N. has ignored the same in other African nations for decades.

Upshot of it all is that we've once again been drawn into some mess (not entirely someone else's either, since the U.S. government has always had a hand directly or indirectly in the affairs of these regimes), after which, those who we've rushed in to defend will hate us for it, toss us their shoes, and burn us in effigy.

Damned if we do or don't.
 

houtx48

Cherished Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2006
Posts
6,900
Media
0
Likes
308
Points
208
Gender
Male
I hope Obama's 15 minute war does not turn out like W's 15 minute war. Kind of makes one wonder what this 4.00 dollar a gallon gas is really costing.
 

midlifebear

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Posts
5,789
Media
0
Likes
174
Points
133
Location
Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
Well, since I don't whine about $5 a gallon or even $8 a gallon automobile fuel (everything spent on fuel for running my ranch in Nevada is tax deductible), I do have an issue with the US expected to become involved in another war. I think the UK, France, Italy, Spain, Les Pays Bays, and all those other fun places in Europe (remember: my primary residence is in Spain) should gather together and have their own little 15 minute war in Libya and pay for it with bonds backed by Euros. (Jason, at this point you're supposed to bgin laughing at my post.)

Last I checked, the USA had a serious debt problem to take care of and couldn't afford to spend money it does not have on any more wars -- or the NEA, NEH, NPR, PBS, etc.

That being said, I've always maintained Obama could fuck a baby lamb on the White House Lawn and I would still support him. But if he dragged the US into a third war (how many troops does the UK have in Afghanistan compared to the US?), well, my tenuous support of for Obama would no longer exist, no matter what the UN thinks the USA should do.

You see, that's why Sarah Palin should be president. She'd invade unilaterally at the drop of a hat and then try to write it off as a moose hunt. Then she could pay back the cost of the war by starting a world-wide chain of fast food moose chili franchises using her "exclusive" moose chili recipe. And think of the copies of her personal war scrap book she could sell to even further offset the cost the USA's involvement in Libya?

The mind woggles.*

So, today color me grumpy. And while your at it, get off of my fucking lawn!

*I would have written "boggles", but I suspect I can feel the Earth's axis wobble more than usual. There's a big moon swinging close on Saturday.
 
Last edited:

D_Joseba_Guntertwat

Experimental Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2006
Posts
807
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
163
I am of two minds on this. On the one hand I was appalled at the loss of lives and apparent outright genocide going on in the country. On the other, as others above me observed, the U.N. has ignored the same in other African nations for decades.

Upshot of it all is that we've once again been drawn into some mess (not entirely someone else's either, since the U.S. government has always had a hand directly or indirectly in the affairs of these regimes), after which, those who we've rushed in to defend will hate us for it, toss us their shoes, and burn us in effigy.

Damned if we do or don't.
d
Well said. One thing nobody can disagree with is that the rebel forces against Gaddafi have a good cause, and it is also true that that the only ones who can help them are the "Western powers".

And once again, just like Iraq, we have a situation whereby an evil dictator is destroying his own people and the West must act.

I think this is a perfect opportunity where the West can show that we are a force for good in the world. Unfortunately as soon as the first civilian casualties come out they will be branded as opportunist oil-hungry villains.

Sadly, wars always have casualties. I think it is better that the UN shows some backbone and proves that Gaddafi cannot continue his regime of oppression, than that we tippy-toe around the issue and dare not attempt any act that might endanger lives. Let's stop the oppression now.

(I'm a bit drunk, by the way, but in this case I think I know what I'm talking about)
 

B_crackoff

Experimental Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Posts
1,726
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
73
The problem we have in the West is that our media all seems gung ho. If anyone has a memory, remember the unrelenting crap uncritically spewed forth before the invasion of Iraq.

Its like being brainwashed. The powers that be want to do x, so we're fed a diet that just supports it. Just 2 weeks ago we were being told that Gadaffi had lost the plot, it was completely over for his regime, & he would be fleeing the country, whereas in actual fact, he was well on the way to crushing the revolt.

At least some well known commentators demur, & another former ambassador made the point that there was no critical mass behind the rebellion, elsewher in the Mail.
PETER HITCHENS: Why can't we just let the Libyans fight it out (...and then make friends with the winners) | Mail Online

In Europe anyone can pick up Russia Today news (I think Freeview 85 in the UK), which certainly at least gives a different perspective, including tonight:

Details of how the UN is not enforcing the resolution when it comes to the rebels. The Egyptian military has been supplying large quantities of small arms & ammunition.

Details of the scores of shot dead daily in Bahrain. (but that's OK, the US fleet has a base there!)
Details of scores of protestors summarily executed in Yemen.
Pointing out that Gaza was shelled by the Israeli military for 3 weeks, killing over a 1,000, & there was bugger all humanitarian concern then.
Details of atrocities by rebels in Libya.
Illustrating that the demands of Obama & others, far exceed the scope of the UN resolution.
Analysing the pressure bought to bear on the Arab League to majorly, but not unanimously, support the No fly zone.
Pointing out the various factions in the rebel camp include at least one known CIA financed group, & another financed by George Soros.

It's worth viewing, if only just not to believe the hype.
 

houtx48

Cherished Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2006
Posts
6,900
Media
0
Likes
308
Points
208
Gender
Male
Next they will give it a cutesy name "Operation Libyan Freedom" or some such thing and say we need troops on the ground there. Long live Exxon/Mobile.
 
7

798686

Guest
I think this is a perfect opportunity where the West can show that we are a force for good in the world. Unfortunately as soon as the first civilian casualties come out they will be branded as opportunist oil-hungry villains.
Yeh, I know.

There's been a spate of 'why Libya and not Bahrain?...oh, oil!' comments, on facebook and elsewhere. I personally think this is a bit simplistic. Entering Bahrain would mean taking on the Saudis also, which is nigh on impossible. Also, the treatment of Bahrainis doesn't seem (so far) on the same scale as what Gaddafi has been doing to his citizens (and in addition...Bahrain hasn't been/isn't a threat to worldwide security in the same way as Libya).

If it were all about oil, we'd intervene in places such as Nigeria, I think?
 
7

798686

Guest
Not to mention preventing the stuff that happened in southern africa was near impossible...
Not sure what we can do there? :(

With many African nations on board, would be a non-starter to intervene currently (apart from backing Tsangirai).

Also, we're kinda reaching the end of the UK's ability to intervene. I think we had a moral obligation to try and help Libya, but our resources (and political standing) won't sustain any more ventures, imo.
 

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,237
Media
213
Likes
31,758
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I've been finding that Al Jazeera English has the best and most up to date coverage of the Libyan Conflict:

Libya Live Blog - March 20 | Al Jazeera Blogs

Actually, I've been finding I like getting my news from Al Jazeera which avoids a USA-Eurocentric slant. They've been great to follow the Tragedy in Japan.
 

simbasa12

Experimental Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2005
Posts
227
Media
0
Likes
6
Points
163
Age
34
When oh when will an alternative to petroleum be found? How many more innocents must we claim in our insatiable thirst for that nasty, pollutive shit before we find an alternative?

.
This made me LOL, because in the California Bay Area and L.A. area there are more gas guzzling luxury cars on the road than in any conservative regions of the USA (really, does anyone need a V8 with 400 hp?) driven by the same people who detest and protest the Bush Iraq invasion. Kinda puts them down on the Palin level of intellectual integrity, as far as I am concerned.

I guess as long as it's a liberal president entering more conflict, it's ok for most libs, because I have not seen any protests by the same groups in my area since Bush left office.....they would be lining the streets already if that was Bush striking against Libya.
 

vince

Legendary Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Posts
8,271
Media
1
Likes
1,674
Points
333
Location
Canada
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
This made me LOL, because in the California Bay Area and L.A. area there are more gas guzzling luxury cars on the road than in any conservative regions of the USA (really, does anyone need a V8 with 400 hp?) driven by the same people who detest and protest the Bush Iraq invasion. Kinda puts them down on the Palin level of intellectual integrity, as far as I am concerned.

I guess as long as it's a liberal president entering more conflict, it's ok for most libs, because I have not seen any protests by the same groups in my area since Bush left office.....they would be lining the streets already if that was Bush striking against Libya.
I agree with you about the 400hp gas guzzlers and the hypocrisy of people who drive them while regarding themselves as environmentalists. Personally, I don't know anyone like that, so I wonder if you just pulled that out of thin air. Pretty hard to know someone's politics by observing what kind of car they drive. And since when was California not a conservative area??

The difference between the Libya action and the Iraq War is that French agreed this time. So there.
 
Last edited:

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
I guess as long as it's a liberal president entering more conflict, it's ok for most libs, because I have not seen any protests by the same groups in my area since Bush left office.....they would be lining the streets already if that was Bush striking against Libya.

I most certainly don't want to see the US initiating a third war. We already have two that need to come to an end. Although something needs to be done in Libya, our country doesn't always have to be the first one on the scene with troops and bombs ready to play "peacemaker" whenever there is a crisis. If the UN can collectively agree on a No-Fly zone on a 10-0 vote, they can also collectively agree using the resources from all the countries that agreed on it.
 

houtx48

Cherished Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2006
Posts
6,900
Media
0
Likes
308
Points
208
Gender
Male
Just as soon as they start calling it "Operation Libyan Freedom" everything will be alright and the the people will throw flowers for our efforts. chortle.
 

Bbucko

Cherished Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2006
Posts
7,232
Media
8
Likes
322
Points
208
Location
Sunny SoFla
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Let the Arabs pay for it and maintain it.

It appears as though the Arab League has withdrawn its support for the Allies over Qaddafi.

Oil's a factor in all sorts of mismanaged places (Nigeria, etc), but at this point I'd think Libya more urgent, since they pose the greater threat to the wider world if allowed to evolve into a rogue state. Also, we're actually in a position of being able to help, with fairly widespread support.

How long has it been since Libya hasn't been considered a "rogue state"?

This made me LOL, because in the California Bay Area and L.A. area there are more gas guzzling luxury cars on the road than in any conservative regions of the USA (really, does anyone need a V8 with 400 hp?) driven by the same people who detest and protest the Bush Iraq invasion. Kinda puts them down on the Palin level of intellectual integrity, as far as I am concerned.

FWIW, I've lived car-free for the vast majority of my life; though it was easy to do so in Boston or Manhattan, living car-free in South Florida (where transit is a kind of sick joke) involves some serious adjustments and compromises. But I've managed for six years now.

Way back when Hummers were the American wet-dream, I remember certain communities in LA County trying to ban them because they were technically classified as commercial trucks rather than as regular passenger vehicles due to their weight and high emissions. Limbaugh made quite a bit of hay over it at the time, as I recall, as yet another incursion from "the left" into people's "freedom".

And can you really back up a claim that there are more gas guzzlers per capita (LA is the US's second-largest city, after all) in the communities you'd mentioned than...say...Dallas or anywhere in Alaska or New Hampshire? At least harsh climate and poor driving conditions help to justify SUVs and the like.

I guess as long as it's a liberal president entering more conflict, it's ok for most libs, because I have not seen any protests by the same groups in my area since Bush left office.....they would be lining the streets already if that was Bush striking against Libya.

1) Obama is a pragmatic centrist;

2) Can you cite a single Lib/Lefty/Progressive member of this board supporting this action, taken without Congressional discussions of any kind whatsoever? As to no protests, a 5-second Google search brought up this:

An anti-war demonstration in Times Square that was meant to mark the eighth anniversary of the Iraq invasion quickly became a protest against the military strikes on Libya on Saturday. About 80 protesters gathered near the U.S. military recruiting center in Times Square, chanting "No to war!" and carrying banners that read, "I am not paying for war" and "Butter not guns." A quartet of women in flowered hats who called themselves the Raging Grannies sang: "No more war, we really mean it!"
Other protesters carried placards showing pictures of women with bleeding children in their arms.
U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., joined the protesters, saying he was angry that Congress was not consulted before the military strikes.
 

B_crackoff

Experimental Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Posts
1,726
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
73
The African Union has called for an end to all military actions in Libya. Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz, President of Mauritania, ... “the African Union rejects the idea of foreign military intervention in Libya, regardless of its form.”

More criticism & opinion...

Opinion split over Libya attack — RT

Regime change, mission creep...

Gaddafi may become target of air strikes, Liam Fox admits | World news | The Guardian

Slaughter of 70-80 blacks by heroic pro democracy rebels, & discussion of the severe racial problems in the Arab world!

De-racialising revolutions - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

Funnily enough, Mark Wahlberg was in a movie on tonight called "The Shooter", in which the protagonist senator claimed that the US secretary of Defense will go on TV & say that they are fighting to protect freedom & democracy, but it's always about giving to the haves, & not the have nots.

Joll, Nigeria is a country severely ethnically & religiously divided, with massive petrochemical pollution. It's easy to divide & rule, & bribe any official, when a nation is that divided itself. Libya just didn't want to ramp up oil production. Gadaffi did what he wanted, not what the world powers, & powerbrokers demanded.

Nigeria's agony dwarfs the Gulf oil spill. The US and Europe ignore it | Environment | The Observer

Oh, & we appear to be turning a blind eye to Egypt arming "rebels" Egypt arming Libya rebels, Wall Street Journal reports | News by Country | Reuters

...in direct contravention of the UN resolution, which is now showing just how non humanitarian it is in implementation.

The most oppressed Arabs in the world are the Palestinians. Does anyone think that an uprising there would get support in the West? They got democracy, then elected Hamas:rolleyes: & got all aid & funding cut.

So much for supporting free democratic choice:biggrin1:. We've heard it all before, seen the media whipped up before, half truths reported before - & for what? Some bastards will gain from this, but not you, me, or the Libyans.
 
Last edited:

vince

Legendary Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Posts
8,271
Media
1
Likes
1,674
Points
333
Location
Canada
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
About 4 years? :p

By who? BP and and Whitehall? Tony Blair and Cameron? You are joking I hope. It's been a disgusting show to watch the British government go down on that old terrorist to suck a bit of crude oil. If eastern Libya wasn't sitting on a lake of oil, the coalition would give two shits about the Colonel's repression of the revolt. They never ceased being a rogue state.