Libyan Civil War

[Sovereign]

I ****ing hate hippies

http://stopwar.org.uk/content/view/2299/27/

 

[Viggy]

Why the talk of intervening in Libya, but not the Congo, for example?

This is actually a valid point. We (NATO and other allies) only seem to intervene when we are directly attacked or when it affects us economically.

 

[Sovereign]

This is actually a valid point. We (NATO and other allies) only seem to intervene when we are directly attacked or when it affects us economically.

Not really. We can easily save thousands of lives in Libya just by moving around a few aircrafts a bombing targets. The situation is far different in Congo. Militias there aren't exactly using aircrafts to bomb civilian centres. If we wanted to stop the conflict in the Congo, we would need to deploy thousands of troops and fight our way through a climate that is a 100 times more hostile than Iraq or Afghanistan. The whole point is senseless anyway. Just because we aren't intervening in the Congo, doesn't mean we shouldn't intervene in Libya. This sort of logic is sick.

On another note, I've been reading major newspaper from France, U.K, U.S and Germany and so far everyone (whether left or right) seems to be in support of intervention in Libya. Sarkozy and Cameron are really going to be the biggest winners politically. They've come out of this conflict looking rather skillful. Obama too has done well. It's really because of the U.S efforts that air strikes against ground forces were included in the resolution. Although his dithering in the beginning was odd. On the other side, Germany looked utterly incompetent with its vote of abstention. Lots of germans are talking about a lost of "german prestige." I honestly hate her now. She's a weak leader, I hope she'll get trounced in the elections.

 

[Santoro]

I ****ing hate hippies

http://stopwar.org.uk/content/view/2299/27/

Well yeah, it's something to blame the Republicans for.

Edit: Before someone flips their shit, this was a joke.

 

[Sovereign]

This is actually a valid point. We (NATO and other allies) only seem to intervene when we are directly attacked or when it affects us economically.

I found a nice quote to fight against this useless thinking;

[This thinking] is the result of a tendency to conflate the reasonable demand for a proper degree of consistency and impartiality in the application of moral principles with the not at all reasonable demand for people to display an impossible amount of energy, time, command over resources and so on, by generalizing their actions for the good so as to benefit all parties who might be thought appropriate objects of them. This tendency is wrong-headed, requiring as it does superhuman levels of capability from those of whom the generalizing actions are demanded. It's as common as it is, not because of any real belief in such impossible levels of capability, but because it's a quick method of trying to embarrass people you disagree with. But it's also a useless one.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

I think a good comparison to this is Rwanda. Qaddafi is bombing the shit out of his people to push them back, and while it's not to level of Hutus killing Tutsis he's still murdering people who don't want some nutjob dictator ruling their lives. Right now, this is happening in the aftermath of Iraq and our continued involvement in Afghanistan.

Back in the 90s, when we went into Somalia, it didn't work out so well from a public morale standpoint, so when Rwanda happened we shit our pants and ignored it. The United States didn't even want to call it genocide because, in a genocide, the world is legally required to act to prevent it. We were suffering from what's called "Somalia Syndrome," which was defined as the fear of getting involved in a conflict unless there was some sort of mythical guaranteed win that can never and will never be a certainty.

So without that mythical guarantee, we didn't stop the genocide in Rwanda. What we had instead was United Nations peacekeepers running around in their baby blue hats and guns they couldn't fire facing down machete-wielding militias they weren't allowed to kill. Rather than a full international cooperation and resolve, it was Canada running around trying to save a whole population while the world pretended they couldn't hear anything.

In the end, nearly a million Rwandans were killed in a period of three months. We didn't want to get involved because we were scared of a repeat of the conflict that happened before Rwanda, yet now Bill Clinton says that not doing something about Rwanda is more or less the biggest regret of his entire life -- because international involvement could've saved lives.

So in short, right now we're seeing a reluctance to even bomb a tinpot dictator's air defenses and fly over his country to protect people who want nothing more than to overthrow their government themselves and build a new one themselves because we're scared of the ghosts of 9/11. It's immature and it's complete moral cowardice.

The United States is a country that is here only by the grace of those who chose to fight against an empire that controlled their lives, and the western world is the way it is precisely because of overthrowing and doing away with dictators and monarchs.

We have a moral obligation to help the Libyans. We don't need to commit ground troops, we don't need to be involved in nation building, but these rebels want a no fly zone. With a no fly zone, they have a chance at winning.

Without a no fly zone, they're destined to lose.

 

[Sovereign]

The United States is a country that is here only by the grace of God

fixed

 

[Brandon Rhea]

My apologies, next time I won't egregiously neglect to mention that the Declaration of Independence was indeed written by our Lord, the Christ Jesus, to blaze the way towards the Kingdom of God.

 

[Sovereign]

I wonder what would have happen if France had decided not to arm the Americans because its economic situation at home was too dire.

 

[Matt]

Bloke has already broken the ceasefire.

 

[Random Hero]

Bloke has already broken the ceasefire.

You had to know that was coming. A no fly zone cannot do much against soldiers fighting with small arms.

 

[Matt]

You had to know that was coming. A no fly zone cannot do much against soldiers fighting with small arms.

Of course it can.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12795971

 

[Brandon Rhea]

You had to know that was coming. A no fly zone cannot do much against soldiers fighting with small arms.

A no fly zone doesn't guarantee a cease fire. They just called a cease fire after the west approved the no fly zone. A no fly zone can work very well.

 

[Sovereign]

France has 20 jets flying over Libya.

Apparently, the first strikes are going to take place either tonight or tomorrow, with Danish, U.K, French and Canadian aircrafts along with U.S support from AWACs, Spy-planes, and Tomhawk cruise missiles fired from warships.

This is an international effort all the way.

 

[Garuga]

i must ask, why is France being particularly 'motivated' to this event? What is it about Libya that influenced France to essentially take the most outspoken/active role?

 

[Ser Gregor]

i must ask, why is France being particularly 'motivated' to this event? What is it about Libya that influenced France to essentially take the most outspoken/active role?

France gets (or at least used to get) a lot of it's oil from Libya. Whether that's the case in recent years I have no idea.

 

[GABA]

France gets (or at least used to get) a lot of it's oil from Libya. Whether that's the case in recent years I have no idea.

That would make sense to me, I was surprised France was the first to make a move.

 

[Sovereign]

France was also recently involved with a scandal with the Tunisian dictator Ben Ali. The current administration in Paris is trying to distance itself from these regimes by appearing hawkish. Elections are to be held next year.

 

[Garuga]

France was also recently involved with a scandal with the Tunisian dictator Ben Ali. The current administration in Paris is trying to distance itself from these regimes by appearing hawkish. Elections are to be held next year.

Ah i see. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Sovereign]

Gadaffi wrote the following to Obama;

“I have said to you before that even if Libya and the United States enter into war, God forbid, you will always remain my son and I have all the love for you as a son, and I do not want your image to change with me,” he wrote. “We are confronting Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, nothing more. What would you do if you found them controlling American cities with the power of weapons? Tell me how would you behave so that I could follow your example?”

LOL