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, " 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.
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.
The17sss
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 ing 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.
The17sss
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.
Zharen
quote:
Originally posted by The17sss
We are comparing Clinton and Obama... not Clinton and Bush. Nice try with the "Yeah Obama's ing up but... HEY LOOK OVER THERE! BUSH!"
Did someone say Bush?
:haha:
Sorry, just had too...
The17sss
quote:
Originally posted by Zharen
Did someone say Bush?
:haha:
Sorry, just had too...
:stongue:
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.
Joss Weatherby
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 bat 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.
The17sss
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?
Joss Weatherby
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 ing ed 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 ing 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? :nervous: :stongue:
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.
Sushipunk
I wonder if I changed the name of this thread to "The Labia Situation", would there be less bickering, or more?
Joss Weatherby
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?
