TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Libya Situation
Pages (30): « 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 »

How about a no Kadafi Zone? But seriously at this point they need to do more than that. His personally army is better equipped, trained, and is more ruthless. Some sort of military intervention on the ground would be needed to break his control and give the rebels a fighting chance otherwise will end up like Bahrain. His militia is made up of professional mercenaries and are financed in the billions of dollars. They aren't going to roll over to some angry citizens throwing rocks.

It's amazing what money can do, this situation is a prime example. The leaks coming out over the money this country has is astounding, no wonder no country or the UN are willing to step in. It's a sad world we live in

Everything burns

31 days of international dithering, and now the rebel forces are on their last leg. I'd say too little too late for sure. The rebel leader announced that the world has failed them. News is also out today that Hillary Clinton is so incensed at the lack of decision making (one way or the other) that she is stepping down, even if Obama gets reelected. Sarkozy announced he's ready to send in his fighter jets and bomb tonight... we'll see how that goes.

It's actually a lot faster than our involvement in Bosnia-Herzegovina and a lot sooner than I expected. Albeit, it was needed three and a half weeks ago, but...

quote:

Originally posted by EddieZilker It's actually a lot faster than our involvement in Bosnia-Herzegovina and a lot sooner than I expected. Albeit, it was needed three and a half weeks ago, but...

It just sends a bad signal. We say Kaddafi has to go 2+ weeks ago... so announce a damn policy and then commit to it. Don't encourage Libyans to join the rebellion only to then sit back and be slaughtered in huge numbers, as has been the case. That's blood on the hands. If it is our policy to sit back and do nothing, then say so, so people can make potentially life saving decisions based upon the real facts of the situation.

Who's gonna believe they can count on us to help in the causes of freedom and rising up against oppressive dictators if this is our strategy?



EDIT: this was just well articulated by Marco Rubio:

quote:

�So our message to the dissidents,� Rubio said, �the people with the bravery to stand up to Muammar Qaddafi, and then the people maybe thinking to stand up to the Iranian regime, and in other places, our message is: �You guys go ahead and do this stuff, and if we can ever get the Russians or the Chinese to ever come around, we may or may not join you�? �Russia and China don�t care about this stuff,� Rubio continued. �They don�t care that Muammar Qaddafi is going to massacre people. So if Russia doesn�t care, and China doesn�t care, and we care but won�t do anything about it, who is it up to � the French?�

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss It just sends a bad signal. We say Kaddafi has to go 2+ weeks ago... so announce a damn policy and then commit to it. Don't encourage Libyans to join the rebellion only to then sit back and be slaughtered in huge numbers, as has been the case. That's blood on the hands. If it is our policy to sit back and do nothing, then say so, so people can make potentially life saving decisions based upon the real facts of the situation. Who's gonna believe they can count on us to help in the causes of freedom and rising up against oppressive dictators if this is our strategy? EDIT: this was just well articulated by Marco Rubio:

I pretty much agree with you, that we sent a few mixed signals. I wish I could have been a fly on the wall behind closed doors, but the public face on this is downright shambolic.

probably not dolphins.

Why are people saying "we" messed up like the US is the world's police or something. This isn't a war between the US and Libya. I agree that something should have been done sooner, but that is on the UN. Anyone saying that this is in any way Obama's mistake is clearly just using that falsehood to serve their own blatently obvious political agenda.

Saddam massacred his own people for years but everyone was up in arms over the US invasion of Iraq. Now that Obama is hesitant to get involved in another conflict that is not our own, people are up in arms that he didn't involve us sooner without the backing of the UN.

Its pretty nice that the US got a consensus from the UN before initiating armed engagement against a foreign country, you know, one that has no real bearing on the US besides the price of oil.

this bettter bring comodtity prices back to a reasonable level. geez.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss It just sends a bad signal. We say Kaddafi has to go 2+ weeks ago... so announce a damn policy and then commit to it. Don't encourage Libyans to join the rebellion only to then sit back and be slaughtered in huge numbers, as has been the case. That's blood on the hands. If it is our policy to sit back and do nothing, then say so, so people can make potentially life saving decisions based upon the real facts of the situation.

Bay of Pigs anyone?

Brazil abstained from the vote? WTF Man?!

I bet Lira put them up to it. What a dick.

I heard the fighting is going to get DIRTY tonight....
When will all this end?

quote:

Originally posted by chlola I heard the fighting is going to get DIRTY tonight.... When will all this end?

probably when you put the knife and fork down. That would be a good start.

Pretty sure she just buries her face in the trough.

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018 Why are people saying "we" messed up like the US is the world's police or something. This isn't a war between the US and Libya. I agree that something should have been done sooner, but that is on the UN. Anyone saying that this is in any way Obama's mistake is clearly just using that falsehood to serve their own blatently obvious political agenda.

There wasn't a war between the U.S. and the former Yugoslavia either, but at least Clinton had the nutsack to say, "Fuck the UN, they're taking forever while civil war is breaking out... we're going in to save these people." And he did. A fine leadership moment from him.

This is not "solely" Obama's mistake... but look at it this way man. The rebel leader was pleading for the U.S. to help weeks ago... then Obama declared "Kaddafi must go" and "has lost the legitimacy to preside over his country" due to mowing down his own people. He gave those people hope, then promptly went to play 18 holes of golf, give a lecture about bullying in school, hit up fund raising events, and fill out an NCAA bracket on ESPN while thousands have now been killed. It is no secret, even within his own party, that his serial lack of decision making abilities are pissing off a lot of people.

Giving speeches about how important some things are is not the same as doing anything about it. How can he make a pronouncement about how important it is that Kaddafi must go, and then do nothing about it; how can something be urgent but not worth taking action on? Don't want to get involved at all? Then fine... SAY SO. Commit to something. The idea that strong international peer pressure and UN resolutions are the way to stop tyrants only shows how weak we look.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss There wasn't a war between the U.S. and the former Yugoslavia either, but at least Clinton had the nutsack to say, "Fuck the UN, they're taking forever while civil war is breaking out... we're going in to save these people." And he did. A fine leadership moment from him. This is not "solely" Obama's mistake... but look at it this way man. The rebel leader was pleading for the U.S. to help weeks ago... then Obama declared "Kaddafi must go" and "has lost the legitimacy to preside over his country" due to mowing down his own people. He gave those people hope, then promptly went to play 18 holes of golf, give a lecture about bullying in school, hit up fund raising events, and fill out an NCAA bracket on ESPN while thousands have now been killed. It is no secret, even within his own party, that his serial lack of decision making abilities are pissing off a lot of people. Giving speeches about how important some things are is not the same as doing anything about it. How can he make a pronouncement about how important it is that Kaddafi must go, and then do nothing about it; how can something be urgent but not worth taking action on? Don't want to get involved at all? Then fine... SAY SO. Commit to something. The idea that strong international peer pressure and UN resolutions are the way to stop tyrants only shows how weak we look.

Did you maybe come to think that Clinton had an international community that was receptive to unilateral action by the US and not one that has already experienced a massive war in Afghanistan (almost a unilateral action at the start) and a totally unilateral effort to wage a war in Iraq, which then did occur?

Sorry that the world is not exactly the same all the time Kevin, but situations change, getting the response from the UN was the right thing to do in this case. Besides that, the UK is the one with the large vested interest in Libya, and France is the former colonial power in the region, why did they not jump on this sooner? They have the military power to deploy in that region as well.

All political bickering aside, it's good that something is actually being done now, and we can all agree on that. Let's just hope for a quick and relatively painless resolution to this.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby Did you maybe come to think that Clinton had an international community that was receptive to unilateral action by the US and not one that has already experienced a massive war in Afghanistan (almost a unilateral action at the start) and a totally unilateral effort to wage a war in Iraq, which then did occur?

We are comparing Clinton and Obama... not Clinton and Bush. Nice try with the "Yeah Obama's fucking up but... HEY LOOK OVER THERE! BUSH!" attempt.

quote:

Sorry that the world is not exactly the same all the time Kevin, but situations change, getting the response from the UN was the right thing to do in this case. Besides that, the UK is the one with the large vested interest in Libya, and France is the former colonial power in the region, why did they not jump on this sooner? They have the military power to deploy in that region as well.

Well of course it was the right thing to do in that case... because Clinton was president. But when Bush acts against the UN's wishes (even though Saddam violated 16 UN resolutions and we had the backing of all our allies at the time we went in)? It's gotta be a mistake. You're so transparent.

Those other countries could have acted., yes... but our guy came out to proclaim "Kaddafi must go", remember? The world was then waiting on us like they do in virtually all other times of crisis. Only, he vanished because we have a leader who likes to play president but not make any actual executive decisions that will make him accountable.

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018 All political bickering aside, it's good that something is actually being done now, and we can all agree on that. Let's just hope for a quick and relatively painless resolution to this.

I'm with you on that man.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss We are comparing Clinton and Obama... not Clinton and Bush. Nice try with the "Yeah Obama's fucking up but... HEY LOOK OVER THERE! BUSH!"

Did someone say Bush?





Sorry, just had too...

quote:

Originally posted by Zharen Did someone say Bush? Sorry, just had too...

Unlike Rwanda, who didn't have any oil so a million people got killed in about a month... not that a no-fly zone will really do much at this point as I think most of the anti government forces according to the news, are fairly much finished.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Well of course it was the right thing to do in that case... because Clinton was president. But when Bush acts against the UN's wishes (even though Saddam violated 16 UN resolutions and we had the backing of all our allies at the time we went in)? It's gotta be a mistake. You're so transparent. Those other countries could have acted., yes... but our guy came out to proclaim "Kaddafi must go", remember? The world was then waiting on us like they do in virtually all other times of crisis. Only, he vanished because we have a leader who likes to play president but not make any actual executive decisions that will make him accountable.

Yea, invading Iraq over its UN violations was totally the reason... I mean, good god, what if we hadn't! North Korea and Iran might have not had to violate all their UN sanctions and started blowing off nukes and trying to enrich nuclear fuel!

Just think of what could have happened in Sudan, I mean, there might have been MORE genocide!

Using the UN excuse as the reason to go into Iraq is batshit stupid and you know it. Iraq was a toothless tiger, all talk, while its immediate neighbor and North Korea sat around and worked to acquire nuclear weapons and in the case of North Korea actually did. Like it or not, it was a unilateral action that really put the US in a tight spot in terms of militarily dealing with other crisis.

Luckily though the US doesn't listen to idiots like you, and instead of stretching our forces even thinner we now have the major powers of Europe on board and regional support for the actions that are about to take place, which puts the US in a strong position.

Could it have been run through the UN sooner, probably, but thats not the point anymore, its done, now lets hope our boys (and girls, they can fly combat missions too), and the boys and girls of our allies can get something accomplished over there. Unlike the last two countries we started fights with, Libya has a pretty modern air defense system, it could be a tough fight.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.