Libya No Fly Zone Approved;War Number Three For US (troops, Lincoln)
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.
Yeah but talking and doing are two different things. I guess we will find out how much of a hawk Obama is now.
Wars start over little things and grow, as so the involvement of others We can't just help the rebels and have things stay as they are. We didn't plan on the cruise missles either.
Difference between this and Iraq number ONE is there is an active revolution and aide was requested. Iraq didn't ask us to start a war for them.
Personally, emotionally, I can't say I disaprove. Having "no mercy" promised is pretty clear. So long as we don't try sending in troops I have no problem with aide. In the end, too, its a positive for us in terms of future political considerations. It's one thing when you were ask to come.
The dangers exist though. Its a lot easier to start than to end. As was in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanastan.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTfoWzQ17Sk
The Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi has given an extraordinary interview by phone with Libyan state television blaming the revolt against his rule on al Qaeda's Osama bin Laden.
Bin Laden, he said, was the real criminal.
Gaddafi said he himself had only moral authority in Libya and likened himself to Britain's Queen Elizabeth.
He offered his condolences to those who had died in the fighting uprising.
What's next? Blaming Justin Bieber as the reason for revolts among the youngsters?
Wars start over little things and grow, as so the involvement of others We can't just help the rebels and have things stay as they are. We didn't plan on the cruise missles either.
Difference between this and Iraq number ONE is there is an active revolution and aide was requested. Iraq didn't ask us to start a war for them.
Personally, emotionally, I can't say I disaprove. Having "no mercy" promised is pretty clear. So long as we don't try sending in troops I have no problem with aide. In the end, too, its a positive for us in terms of future political considerations. It's one thing when you were ask to come.
The dangers exist though. Its a lot easier to start than to end. As was in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanastan.
Libya is none of our business. This action makes no sense.
I heard Obama say Gaddafi was killing his own people. That makes it sound like he's insane or something - how could he do that to 'his own' people? But it's a civil war. The people he is fighting are not his people in any sense of the word. They are his enemies, and this is a civil war. Was Lincoln in sane? He fought a war against his own people.
What's with the pretense that Gaddafi is killing his own people?
Libya is none of our business. This action makes no sense.
I heard Obama say Gaddafi was killing his own people. That makes it sound like he's insane or something - how could he do that to 'his own' people? But it's a civil war. The people he is fighting are not his people in any sense of the word. They are his enemies, and this is a civil war. Was Lincoln in sane? He fought a war against his own people.
What's with the pretense that Gaddafi is killing his own people?
He's ALWAYS killed people , his own, somebody else's...nothing new...Halliburtion stock or profits certainly couldn't have fallen so who knows why we're going to kill and mutilate in Libya...??? I have ceased to care....
But Repugs must be happy!! More death, more taxpayer money going to war for other countries instead of to Americans....
Wars start over little things and grow, as so the involvement of others We can't just help the rebels and have things stay as they are. We didn't plan on the cruise missles either.
Difference between this and Iraq number ONE is there is an active revolution and aide was requested. Iraq didn't ask us to start a war for them.
Personally, emotionally, I can't say I disaprove. Having "no mercy" promised is pretty clear. So long as we don't try sending in troops I have no problem with aide. In the end, too, its a positive for us in terms of future political considerations. It's one thing when you were ask to come.
The dangers exist though. Its a lot easier to start than to end. As was in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanastan.
You don't have your cake and eat it to when it comes to war and the military buddy. You bet your ass this is going to require troops. People have no clue how the military works. There are already US special forces and Navy Seals and SAS all over Libya RIGHT NOW! Pull your head out of your ass!
He's ALWAYS killed people , his own, somebody else's...nothing new...Halliburtion stock or profits certainly couldn't have fallen so who knows why we're going to kill and mutilate in Libya...??? I have ceased to care....
But Repugs must be happy!! More death, more taxpayer money going to war for other countries instead of to Americans....
If anything Gaddafi is defending himself and his own people - his followers are his own people.
I suspect the Republicans, like the Tea Party, would be against any war that doesn't involve self defense. The reason they formed in the first place was because no one was representing them, the tax payer, in government. Their view is that their tax dollars should not go to fund their enemies. If they are against the Tea Party, then they are the enemy.
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.
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.
