Help - Search - Member List - Calendar
Full Version: Libya
Collector Zone > Water Cooler > Politics
yilduz
Has anyone been keeping up on this thing? I've been watching it on the news when I happen to see it on TV, and have a basic idea of what's going on and why Gaddafi is not well thought of - but I'm just kind of curious as to why the French are so angry. It just seemed like they came out of nowhere and starting leading the whole thing. Is there anything that Gaddafi did against France or any French people specifically? I just find it a bit curious and after a few minutes of Googling, I haven't found anything that would make them want to act before anyone else.
sasports
The French had no choice. They are part of the UN and the UN said that this was going to happen. They either had to help or get ousted!

As far the the Libya problem, I am watching it very closely and it is ugly. Ghadaffi is a piece of work, killing civilians (women and children) without any concern. He ordered the fire bombing of an entire community because it was suspected that they were harbouring Rebels.

The U.N. gave him and Ultimatum: Cease fire or We Fire! He called the cease fire and broke it in the same breath! Now he has two choices: Fight until we capture him and try him for war crimes or fight until we kill him, because rest assured, one of the two WILL happen!
2000 rushing yards
As right as it may be to do this. I don't believe the United States should be involved to this, they did nothing to us. Yes, it may sounds selfish, but how thin can we spread ourselves out?
yilduz
Gadafhi is a nutbag and needs to be removed from power. Nothing he did directly effects the United States, but due to our position, we're expected to act under the right circumstances. As far as I know, the US has no intention of putting boots on the ground, but we're bombing the hell out of them from a distance.

As for my initial curiosity about France, I understand that the UN decided to go in, so France should help... what I was wondering about is why they're leading and seem to be so anxious to get stuff done in Libya. During this whole situation, everyone has seemed to be kind of idle but as soon as something happens, it's France leading the way. I just thought it was unexpected to see them in front, leading the charge.
Johnny Number 5
Gadafi is a modern day Hitler, and its sad.
j
RGBII
The French have a long history of imperialism in
western Africa. Attempting to control the Suez Canal
during its construction in 1869 they were outwitted
by the British, who simply surreptitiously purchased
enough stock in the venture to gain majority control.

They have had similar experiences in Morocco and the
Sudan.

Sarkozy's leadership on the use of air power in Libya
may be an attempt at a historical touch-up for his
nations reputation. That is a bit too simplistic and
cynical. The French presidents poll numbers are
dropping and the use of military force by a leader
always reverses that trend (cynical as well, but
probably
a lot closer to the truth).

Collect Hard!,
RGBII
cdoyal
QUOTE(sasports @ Mar 19 2011, 07:39 PM)
As far the the Libya problem,  I am watching it very closely and it is ugly.  Ghadaffi is a piece of work,  killing civilians (women and children) without any concern.  He ordered the fire bombing of an entire community because it was suspected that they were harbouring Rebels. 

The U.N. gave him and Ultimatum:  Cease fire or We Fire!    He called the cease fire and broke it in the same breath!  Now he has two choices:  Fight until we capture him and try him for war crimes or fight until we kill him, because rest assured,  one of the two WILL happen!
*



Hmmm.....
This sounds oddly familiar. Where have we seen this before?
I guess it's all ok now that Obama's at the helm.
edgerrin32
My thoughts on this. It might happening for the right reasons, but the US needs to stop jumping in every single thing that comes along. We are trying to force our way of life on everyone in the world and its wrong. I in no way support the killing of innocent people! I am just saying about the whole over all picture. We have our own problems here that need fixed and yet every time anything comes up we are quick to want to jump on it. As for the guy over there, he does sound crazy and needs to go. Sounds like the whole world wants this guy gone!


But thats just my 2 cents. cool.gif
tj2373
He's been kind of quiet over the last 20 something years since the last time we bombed him (1986). Offering refuge to terrorists. Then after we got Saddam, he saw what could happen to him, opened up to let the inspectors in to show he has no WMD. Now with the uprisings going on over here and spreading as quickly as they did, he reacts like this knowing the international community is going to act to prevent human atrocities.

Sounds like his crazy switch was flipped from 0 to Crazy in 0.06 seconds.
ffman
QUOTE(cdoyal @ Mar 21 2011, 09:33 AM)
Hmmm.....
This sounds oddly familiar. Where have we seen this before?
I guess it's all ok now that Obama's at the helm.
*



I'm not going into the Bush/Obama area (especially since most Republicans said Obama "acted too slow" on taking action in Libya), but:

I am torn on this idea. Ghaddafi is out of control, but at what point do we stop interfering with other countries? We can't be the "World Police" forever. If we are helping in Libya, why didn't we intervene in Darfur and other places where mass genocide was taking place?

In regards to other countries, we are darned if we do and darned if we don't. First the Arab League of Nations supported a no-fly zone, and now they say we are doing too much.
cdoyal
QUOTE(ffman @ Mar 21 2011, 12:08 PM)
We can't be the "World Police" forever.  If we are helping in Libya, why didn't we intervene in Darfur and other places where mass genocide was taking place?
*



When a similar question was posed during the Bush years, the answer was that Bush was doing it all for the oil. Maybe Obama's trying to raise his ailing poll numbers and prove to the world that he's not a wimp?
ffman
QUOTE(cdoyal @ Mar 21 2011, 12:59 PM)
When a similar question was posed during the Bush years, the answer was that Bush was doing it all for the oil. Maybe Obama's trying to raise his ailing poll numbers and prove to the world that he's not a wimp?
*



It would have happened no matter whether it was Obama or McCain in office - both Reps and Democrats left and right (especially Republicans) were wanting this.

cdoyal
QUOTE(ffman @ Mar 21 2011, 02:08 PM)
It would have happened no matter whether it was Obama or McCain in office - both Reps and Democrats left and right (especially Republicans) were wanting this.
*



Wanting what? War with Libya? Obama not being a wimp?

So it's all about who's for it or against it rather than it being the right or wrong thing?
ffman
QUOTE(cdoyal @ Mar 21 2011, 01:33 PM)
Wanting what? War with Libya? Obama not being a wimp?

So it's all about who's for it or against it rather than it being the right or wrong thing?
*



Wanting operations in Libya.

You were the one who brought up the topic of Obama and made comparisons to the perception of the Iraq War. I was just running with that line of thought.
cdoyal
QUOTE(ffman @ Mar 21 2011, 02:37 PM)
Wanting operations in Libya.

You were the one who brought up the topic of Obama and made comparisons to the perception of the Iraq War.  I was just running with that line of thought.
*



I figured but just wanted clarification. Hussein was ten time worse but since Bush was in office at the time...

At our secret Evil Rich Republican meetings (ok, it's really just playing cards at the neighbor's house), we sit around and talk about the unbelievable double standards going on right now. Most of our conversations start out with "Can you believe what would have happened if Bush had been president when this happened?" It really is an amazing thing to see.
RGBII
The focus on the originating post is
remarkable and commendable.

Collect Hard!,
RGBII
cdoyal
QUOTE(RGBII @ Mar 21 2011, 03:29 PM)
The focus on the originating post is
remarkable and commendable.

Collect Hard!,
RGBII

*



Ouch! Sarcasm noted. sad.gif
ffman
QUOTE(cdoyal @ Mar 21 2011, 02:21 PM)
I figured but just wanted clarification. Hussein was ten time worse but since Bush was in office at the time...

At our secret Evil Rich Republican meetings (ok, it's really just playing cards at the neighbor's house), we sit around and talk about the unbelievable double standards going on right now. Most of our conversations start out with "Can you believe what would have happened if Bush had been president when this happened?" It really is an amazing thing to see.
*



The double standards idea goes for both sides.

But, enough of that as Richard pointed out. Who knows what will come of our involvement over there, especially since most of the missiles being fired are ours.
Zimbow
Its ok! We can afford to get involved. I mean our national debt is only 14 trillion. We'll just raise taxes and what not and make our kids and their kids pay for it!

I'm done,

Jon
edgerrin32
QUOTE(Zimbow @ Mar 21 2011, 05:10 PM)
Its ok! We can afford to get involved. I mean our national debt is only 14 trillion. We'll just raise taxes and what not and make our kids and their kids pay for it!

I'm done,

Jon
*




And people will wonder "what happened"? When the dollar crashes and its like world war 3, but here in the US!! That why im buying up what I was talking to you about last night Zimb. wink.gif
sasports
Ok, to tie the original topic into the Bush/Obama: Whos The Biggest Loser topic, Did anyone else feel a little unapreciated by the Prez with this whole thing?

I mean, ok so we jumped into a third war in the past 10 years. But at least with the other two, Pres Bush (who I dont like at all!) took the time to personally tell HIS county what was happening and why (at least what he wanted us to believe why).

But with Libya, the Big O decided it would be a better use of his time to go on vacation and have his Secratary tell the Nation that we jumped into a war! Mind you, this happened after he told reporters that he wasnt sending troops into Libya "On ground or in the Air!".

Maybe I am biased because I have spent 4 of the last 8 years in combat zones, but it seems that we got put on the backburner on this one.
ffman
To make matters worse, we seem to be at odds internally regarding what the mission actually is.

One of the colonels in charge said something to the effect of:

"I don't plan to go after that man" (Ghadaffi).

President Obama remarked earlier:

"It is US policy that Ghadaffi is no longer in power." (or something to that effect.)
cdoyal
QUOTE(sasports @ Mar 21 2011, 07:30 PM)
But with Libya,  the Big O decided it would be a better use of his time to go on vacation and have his Secratary tell the Nation that we jumped into a war!  Mind you,  this happened after he told reporters that he wasnt sending troops into Libya "On ground or in the Air!".
*



There was an informal discussion on Facebook by a local radio station on the subject of why people seem so angry these days. By far, the most common reason people gave was the lack of leadership at the highest level. The mideast is in turmoil, gas prices are soaring, the economy still #####, and all this guy can do is go on vacation or play golf? He spent more time explaining his NCAA picks than what his plan is for Libya!

You're right about Bush. Like him or loathe him, he always spoke to the country in an attempt to explain and/or reassure people and you always knew where he stood on an issue.
aceecards
Bush sadly is in the past.. Didnt any of you listen to old Rifiki in the Lion king.

Obama is the present. Judge him on his own accord.

As for Madmahar GaLaughi.. Figured he would of learned after Reaganbombing not to go messing with civilians and such.

The only good I see of this is his former secretary admitted GaDIEnowfi ordered the Lockerbie bombing which we all knew he did but now we have vindication.

The US is not directly involved under presidents ordered but only part of the NATO "protect the no-fly zone" under UN direction. As our the french, Britain, canada, denmark, spain and any other Nato country.



This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.