U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-18-2011, 11:17 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,777 posts, read 24,017,954 times
Reputation: 12105

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
If you consider a no-fly zone to be war --- sure. That's what they are doing now, with the U.S. having their backs, are they not?

So why was this unthinkable, 2 weeks ago?

Why was it necessary to wait on the U.S.?
Why do you think nations should take unilateral actions as they choose? Do we have more details on who initiated the resolution?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-18-2011, 11:18 AM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,314 posts, read 38,494,404 times
Reputation: 7106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefly View Post
Why is that our place to say? Who's better than Mubarak in Egypt? I don't know. Let the people decide. I'm pretty sure they can find someone with a few more marbles in place.

All this resolution is doing is providing the ability for the people to oust their dictator, reform government, and, if the trend of surrounding nations continues, build a more democratic system.
It does NONE of that. All it does is supposedly protect the last vestiges of what WAS a rebel force that had been slaughtered by Ghadaffi for WEEKS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefly View Post
We're not picking the next leader. We're picking the right for people to choose their leader because that is what they are demanding with these revolutions. We (the international community) are saying people have a human right to redress their concerns about government without being bombed and gunned down for it. Obama's sided with the people in every uprising so far. Only difference is that this one hasn't proceeded as peacefully.

It's a human rights issue at this point, not just a political one. Waiting for the international community to form a united front on this issue was wise.
Totally wrong. He also sat by while Iranian protesters where shot down in the street - what's the difference here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter View Post
So feeding Somalians in a humanitarian crisis was a mistake, huh? But you want to enforce a no-fly zone in Libya to avert a humanitarian crisis there?

Hmmmmm

And i don't blame Clinton for what happened to our troops in Somalia. I doubt very seriously that that request ever hit his desk. If anyone rejected that request, it was Aspin. I doubt that the President gets armor requests.
It was Clinton/Aspen policy - NO ARMORED personal carriers - it might "provoke" the locals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cruxan View Post
i think this will be a quicky, you know wham bam thank you mam drop a few bombs and pull out.. but you never know it could be long and hard to pull out
Now, why would the UN/US be attacking when there is a cease fire? All they can do now is protect this one last rebel stronghold...or will they lead a rebel contingent into Tripoli?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefly View Post
A dictator is killing his people who want democracy as part of a regional movement that could bring peace to the Middle East. I can't imagine a more worthy cause, but I also see no reason why the US should lead.

Like obama, you're WEEKS short and a dollar shy. Should have been initially if that was the reason. Of course, we have other examples of dictators killing their people - Iran, Sudan, Darfur - why not there as well?


Obama wisely decided to let the international community deal with this one. It's not necessarily our fight to lead. Other fights may be required for us to lead and he will probably send US troops, as he has done in other parts of the world, without going through the UN.

As I said, it's case-by-case. I'm not sure what else I can say without repeating myself over and over.
He didn't "wisely" do anything. By waiting and waiting and waiting, he and the completely useless UN sealed the fate of thousands of rebel fighters AND civilians, as Ghadaffi was ALLOWED to pummel them with air power, tanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
implement a no fly zone, when Muammar Qaddafi started attacking his own people with foreign mercs, for peacefully protesting.
Yes, and now it is too late.

Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
If you consider a no-fly zone to be war --- sure. That's what they are doing now, with the U.S. having their backs, are they not?

So why was this unthinkable, 2 weeks ago?

Why was it necessary to wait on the U.S.?
Is that the mission? Are we supposed to have the backs of the rebels? What if fighting breaks out again - do we fall in with the rebels and fight Ghadaffi?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 11:20 AM
 
2,413 posts, read 2,562,007 times
Reputation: 2030
Quote:
Originally Posted by pollyrobin View Post
Polls show American public not sold on Libya intervention - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theenvoy/20110318/ts_yblog_theenvoy/polls-show-american-public-not-sold-on-libya-intervention - broken link)

The most striking early-survey finding: A whopping three-quarters of Americans--74 percent--said the United States should "leave it to others" to attempt to resolve the situation in Libya

Similarly, a Pew Research Center poll conducted last week found that 65 percent of respondents think the United States doesn't have the responsibility to do something about the fighting in Libya, compared with 27 percent who responded that it does.

More worrying for the U.S. administration: More than three-quarters of respondents in the Pew poll (77 percent) said they oppose the United States bombing Libyan air defenses.

Similarly, according to a Fox News poll conducted March 14-16 found, some two-thirds of American registered voters--65 percent--oppose "the U.S. military getting involved with the situation in Libya," compared with just 25 percent who favor it.

SO? When has the US government ever cared what you or I think? Hellooooooooooo...........they don't! They only care what the top 1% of the population thinks........because those are the people that run the government and who the government answers to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 11:23 AM
 
2,413 posts, read 2,562,007 times
Reputation: 2030
God forbid a REAL threat ever presents itself to the world or the USA. It would take us weeks to make a decision...........do we or don't we..........lol...........that's the kind of spineless leadership you get in a white house with a idiot like Obama.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 11:26 AM
 
8,801 posts, read 5,341,991 times
Reputation: 3673
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
There was/is no reason for this to become "another war". The Gaddafi problem could have been solved when he was off-balance during the first 72 hrs. of the revolt. This is PR by Obama trying to pretend that he is a leader without actually being one.
Yes, this IS another war. The Libya revolt was an US/British intelligence operation to begin with (read: bay of pigs), and creating a no-fly zone is an overt act of war. So we have the covert act of war, leading to an overt act of war .... and the ink wasn't dry on the UN resolution before talk had turned from "No Fly Zones" to "Air Strikes" .... under the auspices of stopping a Libyan government genocide? So says the United States as the US massacre of Iraqis and Afghan civilians continues for a decade, while also funding the defending Israeli genocide in the West Bank and Gaza for decades. That's real rich.

How many I ask? Just how many of these "humanitarian interventions" to "DEFEND FREEDOM" is it going to take before the American people get a freaking clue ... as they are sexually molested by the Gestapo in our nation's airports?

Apparently, it is now US policy to create WW III, one country at a time ... all we need now is for the Russians and Chinese to participate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 11:29 AM
 
2,413 posts, read 2,562,007 times
Reputation: 2030
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas View Post
Yes, this IS another war. The Libya revolt was an US/British intelligence operation to begin with (read: bay of pigs), and creating a no-fly zone is an overt act of war. So we have the covert act of war, leading to an overt act of war .... and the ink wasn't dry on the UN resolution before talk had turned from "No Fly Zones" to "Air Strikes" .... under the auspices of stopping a Libyan government genocide? So says the United States as the US massacre of Iraqis and Afghan civilians continues for a decade, while also funding the defending Israeli genocide in the West Bank and Gaza for decades. That's real rich.

How many I ask? Just how many of these "humanitarian interventions" to "DEFEND FREEDOM" is it going to take before the American people get a freaking clue ... as they are sexually molested by the Gestapo in our nation's airports?

Apparently, it is now US policy to create WW III, one country at a time ... all we need now is for the Russians and Chinese to participate.

I agree but why the hell dont the damn young boys and women serving this country get a fricking clue???????????????? I mean seriously......what is it going to take for the ACTUAL military personnel to say enough is enough? Or are they all that brainwashed to see how they are being used as pawns for a corrupt corporate elite run government? There is only so much the US people can do nowadays short of violent revolt........(which I'm all for) without the military standing up and defending the people instead of the government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 11:30 AM
 
Location: A great city, by a Great Lake!
15,908 posts, read 9,651,702 times
Reputation: 7449
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas View Post
Yes, this IS another war. The Libya revolt was an US/British intelligence operation to begin with (read: bay of pigs), and creating a no-fly zone is an overt act of war. So we have the covert act of war, leading to an overt act of war .... and the ink wasn't dry on the UN resolution before talk had turned from "No Fly Zones" to "Air Strikes" .... under the auspices of stopping a Libyan government genocide? So says the United States as the US massacre of Iraqis and Afghan civilians continues for a decade, while also funding the defending Israeli genocide in the West Bank and Gaza for decades. That's real rich.

How many I ask? Just how many of these "humanitarian interventions" to "DEFEND FREEDOM" is it going to take before the American people get a freaking clue ... as they are sexually molested by the Gestapo in our nation's airports?

Apparently, it is now US policy to create WW III, one country at a time ... all we need now is for the Russians and Chinese to participate.

And those are the 2 countries that I don't trust, and in fact would be more worried about!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 11:31 AM
 
Location: Miami, FL
58,519 posts, read 31,902,789 times
Reputation: 9412
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
If you consider a no-fly zone to be war --- sure. That's what they are doing now, with the U.S. having their backs, are they not?

So why was this unthinkable, 2 weeks ago?

Why was it necessary to wait on the U.S.?
Yes, it is war. You will have to invade their air-space and kill people to establish a no-fly-zone. I don't know what you mean by 'waiting on US'. What does that even mean? Now that there is agreement to go in, many countries are planning on going.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 11:34 AM
 
22,770 posts, read 25,209,535 times
Reputation: 14506
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Why do you think nations should take unilateral actions as they choose?
Because sometimes it is a good thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 11:35 AM
 
22,770 posts, read 25,209,535 times
Reputation: 14506
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
Is that the mission? Are we supposed to have the backs of the rebels? What if fighting breaks out again - do we fall in with the rebels and fight Ghadaffi?
Is what the mission? Who is "we" ?

I don't understand what you are asking me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top