[QUOTE=Bbarnes005;28622554]You fail to consider that the US probably has one of it's most weakest presidents in it's history.[/QUOTE]
Weakest in terms of what? Not wanting to go to war in the ME again?
First they didn't want western intervention, now they want it and it is way too late to help them.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;28622561]As in get who pissed off at the US? Gaddafi? Who gives two shits about him, if the rebels win, it won't even matter.[/QUOTE]
No, he meant the entire middle east. Not because anyone likes Gaddafi, but our actions set a precedent for what the west will do to the east.
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;28622612]No, he meant the entire middle east. Not because anyone likes Gaddafi, but our actions set a precedent for what the west will do to the east.[/QUOTE]
You do have a point.
Well that's wonderful, back when the rebellion was still winning they were saying that they didn't want any western involvement. But now that they're with their backs against the wall it's suddenly the UN's fault because they didn't do anything.
[QUOTE=D33f;28622690]Well that's wonderful, back when the rebellion was still winning they were saying that they didn't want any western involvement. But now that they're with their backs against the wall it's suddenly the UN's fault because they didn't do anything.[/QUOTE]
This is so true.
You lot can scapegoat the UN all you like but when you check the facts you'll see it was the revolutionists who didn't want foreign involvement in the first place.
If the rebels all die, Ghadaffi is still a mass murderer. Will he really just not be brought to justice?
[QUOTE=Ali Legend;28622721]This is so true.
You lot can [B]spacegoat[/B] the UN all you like but when you check the facts you'll see it was the revolutionists who didn't want foreign involvement in the first place.[/QUOTE]
SPACE GOAT
[img]http://www.tojam.ca/games_2007/images/Space_Goat_Screen2.gif[/img]
Soon there will be another, the seeds have been sown in peoples minds that freedom can be achieved by the might of the people, it's only a matter of time...
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;28622884]SPACE GOAT
[img_thumb]http://www.tojam.ca/games_2007/images/Space_Goat_Screen2.gif[/img_thumb][/QUOTE]
haha, good catch.
[QUOTE=croguy;28621126]not even their peacekeepers can keep peace.[/QUOTE]
Cyprus.
But yeah, they are really slow to act - probably due to a maze of beurocracy.
well according to France the rebels are about to overthrow the government...
This sucks.
My only concern of intervention is what would happen afterwards when the rebels win. Didn't work out well for Afghanistan after the Societ invasions and civil war.
I figured that maybe some of their neighbors can give military aid, without intervention of Europe or USA. It would be a real revolution if the Arabs did it themselves. Maybe after Gaddafi, they can take care of the Saudis...
I hope the countries who oppose intervention get fucking hammered if the revolution is crushed. Also Libya will be the first country to have survived the Middle East protests after having the entire world tell them to get the fuck out, so international relations will be interesting.
I wouldn't be surprised if the government collapsed pretty soon anyway, they'll have a tough job recovering from this.
This is fucking stupid. People in UN need to man the fuck up and do something.
I wonder what the public opinion is for an intervention? I mean, Iraq was a mixed bag from the start, but this is a rebellion of clear good and bad guys that is already underway. What would happen to the elected leaders of any country that would intervene?
[QUOTE=Nahyan;28623077]My only concern of intervention is what would happen afterwards when the rebels win. Didn't work out well for Afghanistan after the Societ invasions and civil war.
I figured that maybe some of their neighbors can give military aid, without intervention of Europe or USA. It would be a real revolution if the Arabs did it themselves. Maybe after Gaddafi, they can take care of the Saudis...[/QUOTE]
Egypt has actually deployed their special forces, Unit 777, into Libya. But you have to remember that the Egyptian Army is currently busy governing Egypt, the Tunisian Army isn't big enough, and the rest of the neighbouring countries either can't match Libya's army, or are still facing their own protests and aren't going to go and help some protesters in another country.
Fuck.
They fought the good fight! :sigh:
[QUOTE=person11;28623235]I wonder what the public opinion is for an intervention? I mean, Iraq was a mixed bag from the start, but this is a rebellion of clear good and bad guys that is already underway. What would happen to the elected leaders of any country that would intervene?[/QUOTE]
Polls [i]have[/i] been conducted. Just the ones I've read about, [url=http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3247]one poll[/url] in the UK found strong majority support for a no-fly zone, but is backed up by [url=http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3258]another poll[/url] in showing that there is pretty much no support for full military ground intervention.
It's quite similar in the US.
[QUOTE=smurfy;28623411]Polls [i]have[/i] been conducted. Just the ones I've read about, [url=http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3247]one poll[/url] in the UK found strong majority support for a no-fly zone, but is backed up by [url=http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3258]another poll[/url] in showing that there is pretty much no support for full military ground intervention.
It's quite similar in the US.[/QUOTE]
It makes sense when one thinks about it. I mean, how can a country like the United States seriously be expected in these times to police the world and solve the problems of others when we can't even solve our own problems at home first? It's just not feasible, and the last thing we need to be doing is spending more money on unnecessary interventions. No, this is something the Libyan people are going to have to work out for themselves. If they can't, it's true that it would be a terrible shame, but nevertheless one that we cannot be expected to deal with.
Helping rebels is a double edge sword. It's really their battle first of all, so a lot of times the self-sustaining condition of the country is made worse when intervention is done from a foreign power, such as in Iraq. It's harder to recover from a crisis when you rely on foriegn aid, as aid has a limited use and timespan. It is more difficult to "win the war" on your own however.
It also can cause issues of insurgency later on. Al-Qaeda for example started because the US gave arms and training to some Afgan rebels in the 80's (I believe) to defend against Soviet incursion. 20 years later, that same group the US armed and trained turned into a militant terrorist group bent on preserving the good name of Islam though any means necessary, including mass murder.
Sure helping rebels in manners such as above wins the battle "for the good guys", but does it really help in the long term is the issue.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-qm9U3X3EU[/media]
I'm with him on this one.
[QUOTE=croguy;28621126]Why not just get the UN to organize a full blown army that forcefully stops wars or helps the group fighting for a better cause? Oh right, I forgot, it's the UN, not even their peacekeepers can keep peace.[/QUOTE]
Have fun determining the better cause. Sure Gaddafi is a dictator but that is not really an issue internationally. Really on the international scene you don't see that much support for rebels. Just look at the Tamil Tigers - they essentially held half of Sri Lanka for a pretty large stretch of time before finally being pushed back by the army.
Hell even if you had a no fly zone Gaddafi would have won because a large portion of the army remained loyal. The rebels could just not have matched that. A no fly zone would have probably just made the whole thing a lot more bloodier.
[QUOTE=Pepin;28624300][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-qm9U3X3EU[/media][/QUOTE]
I like most of what Ron Paul has to say but with this he can stick it where the sun doesn't shine.
seriously, can the U.N. speed the fuck up?
Stop blaming the fucking UN for everything. Are you all 14?
yes
Am I the only one drawing connections here between the huge coverage of the "elections" in Iran last year or so and the oppression of the Green movement being completely forgotten about after MJ's death?
This might be a bit of a stretch, but to me I see two major political events being overshadowed by other newsworthy events and almost forgotten. At least this time the second event is deserving of the huge coverage.
[QUOTE=Canesfan;28626753]Am I the only one drawing connections here between the huge coverage of the "elections" in Iran last year or so and the oppression of the Green movement being completely forgotten about after MJ's death?
This might be a bit of a stretch, but to me I see two major political events being overshadowed by other newsworthy events and almost forgotten. At least this time the second event is deserving of the huge coverage.[/QUOTE]
The suppression of the Green movement doesn't sell newspapers.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.