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 »

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby

Who said we invaded Iraq over UN violations as "the reason"? Stop creating straw men. You're still trying to make this about Bush. The original argument was Clinton's Kosovo action vs. Obama's Libya non-acton. You fail miserably again. Let me ask you something- is there a position, a policy, a strategy, or a single thing you won't take a bullet for Obama on? Is there anything of substance you disagree with him about?

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Who said we invaded Iraq over UN violations as "the reason"? Stop creating straw men. You're still trying to make this about Bush. The original argument was Clinton's Kosovo action vs. Obama's Libya non-acton. You fail miserably again. Let me ask you something- is there a position, a policy, a strategy, or a single thing you won't take a bullet for Obama on? Is there anything of substance you disagree with him about?

So we should just ignore the shift in attitude towards the US during the Bush administration and make blind comparisons between Clinton and Obama?

There is a lot of I disagree with Obama about. He handled health care poorly, as did many democrats, he capitulated too much and gave into fear mongering and stupidity by the right. He couldn't commit to closing down Gitmo and moving the trials to the US, where they should have been held (and the people with nothing substantial against them returned to their home countries). He fucking fucked up NASA, now we have to rely on the Russians to get to the space station that we mostly built and there is no alternatives in sight. He seems to keep backing clean coal, which is just a fucking sham, there is no such thing as clean coal. He capitulated on the tax cuts for the wealthy (though he really had no other choice).

There is a lot, probably going the opposite way you'd think is right, but a lot.

Also, you think Iraq wasn't a mistake?

Yea, take the one stable, will sell his soul to the guy with the most money leader in the area, the one who, although brutally, keeps three warring factions at bay in the center of the worlds most important strategic resource, and kick him out, occupy the country for 7 years, fighting people that traveled there to fight you, not even locals, and then leave the country as an unstable democracy that will probably ally itself with your other enemy in the region.

Smart.

I wonder if I changed the name of this thread to "The Labia Situation", would there be less bickering, or more?

quote:

Originally posted by Sushipunk I wonder if I changed the name of this thread to "The Labia Situation", would there be less bickering, or more?

Jenny would start posting in it, so more.

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!" attempt.

i think he's right in this instance though. the US had far more prestige (for lack of a better term) during clinton's years beause he wasn't embroiled in 2 seriously unpopular wars. the US could go rescue starving kids in africa these days and still cop a whole lot of shit for their imperialist agenda. that's not all bush's fault by any stretch but these are certainly different times.

quote:

Originally posted by lilith 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.

it was 800K in 3 months IIRC. i think your barb is a little simplistic too, as far as oil goes. the US was still reeling from having their dead dragged thru the streets of mogadishu (somalia not being a great oil reserve as far as i know) the year before and this certainly tempered the enthusiasm for "pointless" conflicts in africa at the time. not saying it wasn't a huge failure by the US (and everyone else) but i disagree that this was primarily due to oil (or lack thereof).

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby So we should just ignore the shift in attitude towards the US during the Bush administration and make blind comparisons between Clinton and Obama? There is a lot of I disagree with Obama about. He handled health care poorly, as did many democrats, he capitulated too much and gave into fear mongering and stupidity by the right. He couldn't commit to closing down Gitmo and moving the trials to the US, where they should have been held (and the people with nothing substantial against them returned to their home countries). He fucking fucked up NASA, now we have to rely on the Russians to get to the space station that we mostly built and there is no alternatives in sight. He seems to keep backing clean coal, which is just a fucking sham, there is no such thing as clean coal. He capitulated on the tax cuts for the wealthy (though he really had no other choice).

There is no "might"... we will have to rely on the Russians to get into space, and they just jacked the costs up on us too. And Obama is not backing any type of coal; that's just more of his nonsense words. He just shut down some coal operations in WV and KY, and famously said that coal plants can continue to do their thing, but he'll make the cost of operating so high that they'll go bankrupt. He didn't capitulate on tax cuts for the wealthy... there were no tax cuts, Jesus Christ. He agreed to not raise income taxes for 2 years, keeping the current rates where they have been for 7 years. The Left loves to push this horseshit. And you think his mistake on Healthcare is that he didn't push hard enough for what, single payer immediately? He's on the record saying his system will lead to single payer... it's just you impatient lefties who demand it all right now. The whole thing is a clusterfuck anyway, whichever way you slice it.

quote:

Also, you think Iraq wasn't a mistake?

Why don't you ask Joe Biden who is claiming Iraq's current state as a lone democratic middle east country (other than Israel) is a major triumph (of Obama's presidency he said, laughably).

As for me? Definitely some major mistakes- a lot of things I wish we did differently. But I seriously believe we won't know for another 10 years if it was really worth it, as things play out on the world stage in that region and how our relationship develops long term.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby 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.

Especially since all those shiny new F-22s you got are a bit iffy when it comes to flying in the rain Then again its Libya, so rain shoudnt be that much of an issue.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Why don't you ask Joe Biden who is claiming Iraq's current state as a lone democratic middle east country (other than Israel) is a major triumph (of Obama's presidency he said, laughably).

The Bide abides.

Gaddafi still shelling civilians after cease-fire

quote:

Originally posted by Jackson Gaddafi still shelling civilians after cease-fire

yep.... shelling what's left of them.

BBC Live Feed:

quote:

2206: Reuters also says doctors in the city of Misrata are reporting that at least 38 people have been killed today in attacks by Gaddafi forces. 2157: Reuters quotes an unnamed US national security official who says Gaddafi's forces are continuing to make "purposeful" movements toward Benghazi. 2154: US ambassador to the UN Susan Rice tells CNN that by continuing to threaten Benghazi, Gaddafi is violating the UN Security Council resolution. He will face "swift and sure consequences including military action" if he continues to do so, she says.

Why should we even bother with Libya when there is violence towards protestors in Yemen and bahrani .. you don't see western leaders talk of wanting action against them ..

Why because they like to pick and choose afterall Oil contracts are at stake and the US will not move an inch against the Bahrani regime because they DO NOT WANT TO LOSE THEIR STRATEGICALLY IMPORTANT GULF NAVAL BASE ..

And the other US ARSE LICKER the Saudi's are provding the Bahrani regime with forces to quell the protestors by any means ..


Yet what happens when the tibetians protest for independance and the chinese use brute force against them will the west act nope they would rather do business with them ..

look what happend in Burma the Goverment brutally crackdown there .. again the UN sat back and watch typical cowards and there is a human rights activist still under house arrest ..

And thee most Ironic thing of all when those protests started to spread .. you know what the Israeli's did asked America for 10billion in Military Aid ..

What kind of message does that send ????

quote:

Originally posted by colin traveller Why should we even bother with Libya when there is violence towards protestors in Yemen and bahrani .. you don't see western leaders talk of wanting action against them .. Why because they like to pick and choose afterall Oil contracts are at stake and the US will not move an inch against the Bahrani regime because they DO NOT WANT TO LOSE THEIR STRATEGICALLY IMPORTANT GULF NAVAL BASE .. And the other US ARSE LICKER the Saudi's are provding the Bahrani regime with forces to quell the protestors by any means .. Yet what happens when the tibetians protest for independance and the chinese use brute force against them will the west act nope they would rather do business with them .. look what happend in Burma the Goverment brutally crackdown there .. again the UN sat back and watch typical cowards and there is a human rights activist still under house arrest .. And thee most Ironic thing of all when those protests started to spread .. you know what the Israeli's did asked America for 10billion in Military Aid .. What kind of message does that send ????

+1000000

I've been asking the same questions ever since this whole so called "no fly zone" started yesterday. This is big joke and I don�t buy it. The Libyan situation is very similar to what we happened to Saddam back in the 90�s. It all starts with the no fly zone; give it a few years and then you�ll have the full ground invasion.

quote:

Originally posted by colin traveller Why should we even bother with Libya when there is violence towards protestors in Yemen and bahrani .. you don't see western leaders talk of wanting action against them .. Why because they like to pick and choose afterall Oil contracts are at stake and the US will not move an inch against the Bahrani regime because they DO NOT WANT TO LOSE THEIR STRATEGICALLY IMPORTANT GULF NAVAL BASE ..

so what? you cant fix all the world's problems. and its the perogative of nations to choose strategic interests over foreign people, all countries do it all the time.

quote:

Originally posted by colin traveller Yet what happens when the tibetians protest for independance and the chinese use brute force against them will the west act nope they would rather do business with them ..

so, you'd like to invade china?

trade is the fulcrum that will lead to the eventual democratisation of china. the situation in tibet sucks but nothing is going to change it, so i'll have my cheap goods in lieu of idealistic pointless efforts thanks very much.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN so what? you cant fix all the world's problems. and its the perogative of nations to choose strategic interests over foreign people, all countries do it all the time. so, you'd like to invade china? trade is the fulcrum that will lead to the eventual democratisation of china. the situation in tibet sucks but nothing is going to change it, so i'll have my cheap goods in lieu of idealistic pointless efforts thanks very much.

We might not be able to fix all the worlds problems but why in the hell should we have to do what other African nations military can do ??

Why should the Arab league back the call for a NFZ yet do we see any such African state actually take up this without the need for any Western nation to even get invovled in .. NOPE

why ... politics is a game of 2 faces

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer +1000000 I've been asking the same questions ever since this whole so called "no fly zone" started yesterday. This is big joke and I don�t buy it. The Libyan situation is very similar to what we happened to Saddam back in the 90�s. It all starts with the no fly zone; give it a few years and then you�ll have the full ground invasion.

They call for a NFZ with changes so they can attack ground targets because they knew fine well a NFZ is non effective against ground targets ...and air attacks alone ain't enough to beat any nation as you need boots onthe ground another slippery slope of becoming another Iraq /afghanistan and the rally call for foregin milita will come calling like they've done in Iraq and A-stan

Whilst am ashammed of Cameron determination over this when there has been other situations in other Countries that major powers continually failed to act upon .

because those nation have no financial interest in those countries ..


why have a rule for one and rule for another look at Pakistan you get shot for speaking out over the strict blasphemy laws even the Goverment doesn't condone the killings , the ISI is in league with the taleban .. and still the US and the UK give them money why ...
And pakistan has been linked with the attack in Mumbai ..
Now why haven't we seen any large scale presence of forces inside pakistan ..

Because they have Nukes

quote:

Originally posted by Greeny1210 Its only going to get worse and worse, the whole middle east is ready to implode.

QFT

quote:

Originally posted by colin traveller Because they have Nukes

thats slowly becoming a thing of the past. Besides im sure that if lets say US and Pakistani forces engaged in war, im sure that neither nation would want to launch nukes (as the repercussions are far worse then the gains)

it takes alot (and i mean) alot of nerve to launch ICBMs on another country. so much nerve that it hasnt been done for 70 some years now.
and currently theres alot of research being done in counter ballistic defense systems by numerous countries in finding a solution to stop a nuke.


Id personally like to see some action done against these crimes as well, first with a fast and swift blockade, and then targeting military installations and sabotage to get the message across. theres no need for a full scale invasion, because theres nothing a handful of spies and and navy fleet cant do.


the only us president that i think did something right was kennedy. He handled the cuban missile crises and the tension with russia far better and diplomatically then any other leader in terms of any other conflict. while theres things i dont agree with him on doing, his resolve was bold, fast, and intellectually planned out.

if only more leaders had the charisma he had (for the world on a whole- mind you) then situations like these would be handled properly and without large scale loss of life

quote:

Originally posted by Igneous01 thats slowly becoming a thing of the past. Besides im sure that if lets say US and Pakistani forces engaged in war, im sure that neither nation would want to launch nukes (as the repercussions are far worse then the gains) it takes alot (and i mean) alot of nerve to launch ICBMs on another country. so much nerve that it hasnt been done for 70 some years now. and currently theres alot of research being done in counter ballistic defense systems by numerous countries in finding a solution to stop a nuke. Id personally like to see some action done against these crimes as well, first with a fast and swift blockade, and then targeting military installations and sabotage to get the message across. theres no need for a full scale invasion, because theres nothing a handful of spies and and navy fleet cant do. the only us president that i think did something right was kennedy. He handled the cuban missile crises and the tension with russia far better and diplomatically then any other leader in terms of any other conflict. while theres things i dont agree with him on doing, his resolve was bold, fast, and intellectually planned out. if only more leaders had the charisma he had (for the world on a whole- mind you) then situations like these would be handled properly and without large scale loss of life

You don't think Pakistan would use tactical nuclear weapons if a force like the US invaded it? I think thats a bet I would be unwilling to make...

If any country is going to use nuclear weapons in the near future its going to either be Pakistan or North Korea, simply because we do not know who might have ultimate control over them if things go to shit in those countries.

quote:

Originally posted by colin traveller We might not be able to fix all the worlds problems but why in the hell should we have to do what other African nations military can do ?? Why should the Arab league back the call for a NFZ yet do we see any such African state actually take up this without the need for any Western nation to even get invovled in .. NOPE why ... politics is a game of 2 faces

I agree the US shouldn't have to shoulder the entire burden of any global issue.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby You don't think Pakistan would use tactical nuclear weapons if a force like the US invaded it? I think thats a bet I would be unwilling to make... If any country is going to use nuclear weapons in the near future its going to either be Pakistan or North Korea, simply because we do not know who might have ultimate control over them if things go to shit in those countries.

Speaking of Pakistan...

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiap...x.html?hpt=Sbin

quote:

Pakistan's Foreign Ministry summoned the U.S. ambassador Friday to protest a drone strike as the death toll from that attack rose to 44, Pakistani intelligence officials said. The attack also unleashed tribal fury, with regional elders vowing revenge on the United States for the strike. Foreign Minister Salman Bashir summoned Ambassador Cameron Munter to make a "strong protest" regarding the Thursday drone strike in Pakistan's remote tribal area, the Foreign Ministry said in a statement. Pakistan's prime minister and a military leader have already made harsh statements about the attack. Two Pakistani intelligence officials said Friday the death toll had risen to 44, and that the majority of the dead were civilians. Munter was told that such strikes are not only unacceptable but constitute "a flagrant violation of humanitarian norms and law," the ministry said. "Pakistan should not be taken for granted nor treated as a client state," the ministry said. Munter was also told that, under the current circumstances, Pakistan will not be able to participate in the upcoming trilateral meeting between Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the United States, scheduled for March 26. Two intelligence officials said the drone fired two missiles on a jirga meeting in North Waziristan, one of the seven districts of Pakistan's volatile tribal region bordering Afghanistan. Tribal elders from the region where the drone strike happened vowed to take revenge on America, saying they will unleash their family members as suicide bombers because of the drone strike. "Americans don't spare us -- not our children, nor our elders, nor our younger," Malik Jalal Wazir, a tribal elder from North Waziristan, said in news conference. "That is why we have decided we will take blood revenge however we can." A statement from the elders titled "Announcement of Jihad against America" said, "We have given permission to our loved ones to do suicide attacks against Americans. And we will take revenge so that Americans will remember it for centuries." They added that the victims were civilians. "None of the killed were linked to al Qaeda," they said. The drone strike follows the controversial release of CIA contractor Raymond Davis, a U.S. agent acquitted of the double murder of two Pakistani men in Lahore after a total of $2.3 million was paid to the relatives of his victims. That incident had already fueled talks of protests in Pakistan. Based on a CNN count, Thursday's suspected drone strike was the 18th of the year, compared with 111 in all of 2010. U.S. officials rarely acknowledge publicly the CIA's secret drone program in Pakistan.

They mad

quote:

Originally posted by Zharen Speaking of Pakistan... http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiap...x.html?hpt=Sbin They mad

Well I guess the US strike really was preemptive then

Looks like the French are the first in. I really wouldn't mind seeing some aerial combat footage if things were to properly kick off.

Ah damn, i thought the french were Flying Eurofighters as well, totally forgot that they opted out of the project and developed the Rafalle on their own Eurofighters are sooo sweet and perhaps currently the best fighter jets in the world.


Well a Rafalle should still be enough tot ake down any of the 30 year old russian or yugoslav fighters that libya uses.

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