U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
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 03-20-2011, 01:41 PM
 
509 posts, read 609,668 times
Reputation: 404

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in SC View Post
Because those nations are 'allies' of the USA....
Gaddafi should announce that he will sell his Oil for 50% less to the West, boom instant "Ally" and the Rebels could become the enemies instead. Its probably the same tactic our current "Allies" use, but Saudi also allows us to have a Military base in their country. Guess Gaddafi could let us build a base there to for extra brownie points.

The "Freedom" part for the people could come later, just like how Saudi Arabia and Bahrain are A'ok with us despite being ran by tyrants and slaughtering their own people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-20-2011, 01:41 PM
 
5,160 posts, read 6,620,881 times
Reputation: 3520
F'ing unreal.

Oz maybe you should make this a new thread so it doesn't get lost here. Want to hear from other posters who kept insisting the Arab League was involved and for this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2011, 01:42 PM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,556 posts, read 18,756,717 times
Reputation: 2497
So it appears that other Arab nations do NOT support the attacks upon Libya...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2011, 01:44 PM
 
5,160 posts, read 6,620,881 times
Reputation: 3520
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTOlover View Post
umm those drone attack are against taliban training camps in the northren afghan/pakistan border.

but hey if pakistan wants to try and attack the U.S. and take on american and NATO forces full on with our full might that would be pretty stupid for them.as we right next door in afghanistan and can be there in no time and take out eevry nuclear weapons site the have.
I talking more about the philosophy of the action. In your mind is it alright for another country to demand the ousting of another country's leader and use military might to do so?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2011, 01:49 PM
 
509 posts, read 609,668 times
Reputation: 404
Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in SC View Post
So it appears that other Arab nations do NOT support the attacks upon Libya...

The Arab-League only supports the original draft, which was a simple No-Fly zone.

By No-Fly zone, the original resolution simply meant if Gaddafi's airforce lifts off and enters that zone the "allies" will intercept them and bring them down...Nothing more and nothing less than that. Ground forces would not be touched.


The "revised" No-Fly zone that was approved hours before the "Allied" attacks on Libya is different.

For one, Ground targets in any part of Libya are fair game. Tanks, Artillery, Jeeps...Small band of Libyan Army personal on foot ? Bomb them its ok. Dropping bombs in Tripoli ? Thats fine to. More or less nothing is off limits with the revised No-fly zone draft, with the exception of allied ground troops on Libyan soil. But who knows, at the rate things are going now maybe ground troops will be called in.

But bombing Ground forces as we are doing now, and bombing Tripoli is definately going a few thousand miles beyond what the Arab league called for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2011, 01:51 PM
 
8,324 posts, read 8,605,753 times
Reputation: 25996
Quote:
Agreed. The only thing worse than doing nothing at all is going in too late to keep others from being slaughtered and losing the lives of our own men and women in uniform as a result of being way late.

Obama catches hell from one group for supporting action by an international body like the UN. He catches hell from another group for not going in sooner, despite the absent of a UN or international mandate to do so at that time.

Have you heard the expression "You can't win for losing?"

The reality is that there were both good arguments for intervening in this crisis and not intervening at all. Only when the whole thing is over will be able to see who was right.

The arguments for intervening are that:

1. Gadaffi is a bad guy who should be removed from power;

2. Gadaffi may massacre thousands more of his people if we do nothing;

3. We need a friendlier, safer, government in power in Libya;

AND (lets be honest)

4. We want to safeguard the supply of oil we all get from Libya.

The arguments against intervening are:

1. This is not our problem. Its a problem that is internal to Libya, or at the very most to the Arab World. Those groups, not us, should resolve these problems.

2. Our commitment is open-ended. We don't know where or when it will end;

3. Our country is virtually broke and one big reason are all these wars and foreign policy fiascoes that politicians keep getting us into.

4. The war could escalate and could harm the image of the USA in the minds of some Arab and Muslim countries.

Take your pick. I don't fault Obama at all. Any leader in this situation should be cautious. I know one "reckless" President who needlessly cost us $1 trillion dollars and about 4,500 lives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2011, 02:02 PM
 
Location: Vancouver, B.C., Canada
10,715 posts, read 22,365,010 times
Reputation: 5137
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonaos View Post
Gaddafi should announce that he will sell his Oil for 50% less to the West, boom instant "Ally" and the Rebels could become the enemies instead. Its probably the same tactic our current "Allies" use, but Saudi also allows us to have a Military base in their country. Guess Gaddafi could let us build a base there to for extra brownie points.

The "Freedom" part for the people could come later, just like how Saudi Arabia and Bahrain are A'ok with us despite being ran by tyrants and slaughtering their own people.
we really don't want the 1% of the worlds oil reserve that comes from libya seeing as we get our main supply of ME oil from Saudi Arabia.


Also we have huge reserves here in north america and both russia and north ameica are just using up all the ME oil then once it dries up it goes broke since it does not sell anything but oil.

we do have the arctic shelf and huge reseves in north america (second largest in the world behind Saudi Arabia) with canadian tar sands and huge amounts of untapped natural gas in alaska and the candian arctic.

russia also has alot of untapped resouces the onlt one that needs the ME oil is china and the EU
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2011, 02:04 PM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,556 posts, read 18,756,717 times
Reputation: 2497
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonaos View Post
The Arab-League only supports the original draft, which was a simple No-Fly zone.

By No-Fly zone, the original resolution simply meant if Gaddafi's airforce lifts off and enters that zone the "allies" will intercept them and bring them down...Nothing more and nothing less than that. Ground forces would not be touched.


The "revised" No-Fly zone that was approved hours before the "Allied" attacks on Libya is different.

For one, Ground targets in any part of Libya are fair game. Tanks, Artillery, Jeeps...Small band of Libyan Army personal on foot ? Bomb them its ok. Dropping bombs in Tripoli ? Thats fine to. More or less nothing is off limits with the revised No-fly zone draft, with the exception of allied ground troops on Libyan soil. But who knows, at the rate things are going now maybe ground troops will be called in.

But bombing Ground forces as we are doing now, and bombing Tripoli is definately going a few thousand miles beyond what the Arab league called for.
I do believe that is called a war....and the leftist warmongers fully support it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2011, 02:07 PM
 
Location: In a van, down by the river.... LOL
21,338 posts, read 7,362,357 times
Reputation: 33301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
UN approves no-fly zone over Libya (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110317/ap_on_re_us/libya_diplomacy - broken link)

We should have made it six.
Totally agree with you!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2011, 02:12 PM
 
Location: Columbia MO
1,459 posts, read 1,743,241 times
Reputation: 1791
Quote:
Originally Posted by NSHL10 View Post
F'ing unreal.

Oz maybe you should make this a new thread so it doesn't get lost here. Want to hear from other posters who kept insisting the Arab League was involved and for this.
Well, it looked like they were, until they weren't. This undercuts what little moral authority "the allies" had, down to a negative number. It was also utterly predictable, given the makeup of the Arab League.

Look, there are a gazillion reasons to hate what was done in the name of the United States, so picking one and harping on it is silly. The people who could actually do something (i.e., the Obama admin) have done it. Now, let's hear what the Republicans have to say about it. Unless I hear serious condemnation from Republican leadership, I will assume that they would have done approximately the same thing, "approximately" meaning variations on a theme, maybe like sending in a land army first, or bombing Qaddafi's palace or wherever he lives, that sort of thing. All variations on a theme, once you decide to stick your fingers in the chinese finger trap.
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