Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3111213
Results 121 to 129 of 129

Thread: Fighting Erupts in Tripoli

  1. #121
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Fighting Erupts in Tripoli

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    Those of you who are lambasting NATO are turning a blind eye to what you don't want to see/believe, and stretching credulity in your accusations and blamemongering. Telling a lie over and over doesn't make it the truth; it just makes the teller a liar. This is not a "US-led attack." It's a NATO attack, led by France, Italy and Spain, which the US is supporting. US planes aren't flying over Libya; French planes are.
    If the US decided it wasn't going to support this, the NATO intervention would not have happened. Period. The US is the only NATO country with a sufficient fighting force to sustain these attacks. Even the French and British (the European countries with the strongest militaries) are woefully unprepared for even a minor conflict like this and would not have been able to act without the United States.

    It's fine to hate America if you want, because fortunately you live in a country that allows you to hate it. But making **** up on one hand while ignoring inconvenient realities on the other serve only to have others brush you off as crackpots.
    -George W. Bush, describing people who protested the Iraq War

    Bottom line, Khadaffi's compound is now in rebel control, and according to NATO, no NATO bombs or planes have been used in the seige of Tripoli.
    NATO has been bombing Bab al-Azizyah for months.

    Mind you, NATO's spokespeople on the Libyan operation are European, not American.
    Well as long as they find some Italian dude to parade in front of the cameras, I guess Obama is off the hook for his war of choice.

    The Libyan people began this revolution on their own, buoyed by the success of Tunisia and Egypt. America had nothing to do with any of these insurrections, despite some of the ludicrous claims made in this thread. Sheesh. Just... sheesh.
    I have no problem with them rebelling and overthrowing Gaddafi on their own if that's what they want to do. I have a problem with the United States deciding that it is going to determine who should be in power in Libya and then deposing the existing government with military force, under the guise of saving lives.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  2. #122
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Fighting Erupts in Tripoli

    That's not quite true. NATO needed America in the early days to take out Gadaffi's air defenses. Since then we have had a much more limited role.

  3. #123
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,436

    Re: Fighting Erupts in Tripoli

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    If the US decided it wasn't going to support this, the NATO intervention would not have happened. Period. The US is the only NATO country with a sufficient fighting force to sustain these attacks. Even the French and British (the European countries with the strongest militaries) are woefully unprepared for even a minor conflict like this and would not have been able to act without the United States.
    This is a no fly zone, not a full scale war. The German military, the largest in Europe, is prepared enough to help us in Afghanistan, so they are prepared enough to enforce a no fly zone, but hey are not in NATO nor do they want to get involved on their own. I'd say the British has enough fighting force to enforce a no fly zone by themselves. They involved themselves in Iraq and we are in NATO, so if we can do it, I don't see why they can't...


    -George W. Bush, describing people who protested the Iraq War
    He invaded Iraq. You can compare and speculate on their motives, but also be mindful of the obvious differences.

    I have no problem with them rebelling and overthrowing Gaddafi on their own if that's what they want to do. I have a problem with the United States deciding that it is going to determine who should be in power in Libya and then deposing the existing government with military force, under the guise of saving lives.
    The facts are, Gaddafi had more power than the rebels and the rebels were losing, and he was willing to kill them all. Now we can speculate that the rebels knew all this when they decided to rise up against Gadaffi and his military. We can also speculate that they were counting on outside force to give them an upper hand.

    I think that that is a good speculation.

    They even knew what they wanted NATO to do.



    But still, Libya is different. It isn't like Iraq. It's not even like Iran. When the Iranians were protesting after the elections, some people thought America should do something and get involved. America didn't get involved. Iran was actively trying to overthrow their government... they were rioting, but it wasn't a full blown revolutionary war.

    The situation in Libya isn't a simple revolutionary war either, because the leader was attacking and murdering people. Gaddafi's murderous actions is what likely caused the protests to escalate into a full blown rebellion.

    NATO decided to get involved on the legal grounds that Gaddafi was committing international crimes. NATO is protecting the civilians, but NATO is also helping to overthrow Gaddafi by enforcing the no fly zone. It could be very likely that NATO is more interested in killing Gadaffi than saving civilians. I wouldn't doubt it, but at the same time, they have legitimate reasons to enforce a no fly zone. It's not like NATO is breaking international law.

    We have seen presidents issue bombing campaigns for less cause than this.
    Last edited by SheWolf; 08-23-11 at 07:21 PM.

  4. #124
    Professor
    Kane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    09-09-13 @ 09:13 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,661

    Re: Fighting Erupts in Tripoli

    This is almost as good as when the USA liberated Iraq

    Explaining the Color Revolutions

    "In fact, the anti-regime movement in Ukraine was funded and organized by the US government, according to The Guardian. They claimed that The Democratic Party’s National Democratic Institute, the Republic party’s International Republican Institute, the US state department and the USAid are the main agencies involved in grassroots campaigns launched by the young activists in Ukraine as well as the Freedom House NGO and billionaire George Soros’s open society institute.[10] Officially, the US government spent $14 million in organizing and funding the operation of anti-regime movements.[11] In addition, Freedom House and the Democratic Party’s NDI helped fund and organize the ‘largest civil regional monitoring effort’ in Ukraine where they sent in 1,000 trained observers and organized exit polls. It is very important in organizing the exit polls because they seize the initiative in the propaganda battle with the regime and put the onus on the authorities to respond. While in Georgia, the US ambassador during the Rose revolution played an important role in coaching Mikheil Saakashvilli in how to bring down Eduard Shevardnadze. Besides foreign influences, the mass media also plays an important role to further stimulate anti-regime forces. During the Orange revolution, despite the government’s nearly total control of political content on national television they also put pressure on independent media, some objective newspapers and local radio stations continued to function. More over, journalists also bristling at government control and censorship, launched strikes and public protests demanding the right to tell voters the truth in the days before the Orange revolution."

    e-IR Explaining the Color Revolutions
    Last edited by Kane; 08-23-11 at 09:04 PM.

  5. #125
    Dungeon Master
    Hooter Babe

    DiAnna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,581
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Fighting Erupts in Tripoli

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    That's not quite true. NATO needed America in the early days to take out Gadaffi's air defenses. Since then we have had a much more limited role.
    At this point, I'm thinking "truth" isn't particularly high on his agenda.

  6. #126
    Professor
    Kane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    09-09-13 @ 09:13 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,661

    Re: Fighting Erupts in Tripoli

    Is Our tyrant better than their "tyrant" ?

    "Uzbekistan's Stalinist strongman, Islam Karimov, brutally clamped down on a mass demonstration in Andijan against corruption and arbitrary detentions in May 2005, killing 500 and wounding 2,000, but Washington echoed the Uzbek government's claim that it was the handiwork of "Islamic terrorists".

    Karimov, at the time of the tulip-revolution-inspired stirrings, had been the US's staunchest ally in the war on terrorism in central Asia, an insurance policy against democratisation pressures."


    Democratisation, NGOs and "colour revolutions" | openDemocracy

  7. #127
    A Man Without A Country
    Mr. Invisible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,957
    Blog Entries
    71

    Re: Fighting Erupts in Tripoli

    Not to give into a lot of fabrications and truth-stretching some people are using, I just want to say that their seems to be this consensus that if everyone is saying something, then it must be true. However, many people argued that the Gulf of Tonkin incident occurred, when it was in reality false. Everyone said that Iraq had WMDs, we all know now that that was false. Many argued that the overthrow of the shah in Iran was due to the people, when it wasn't. In 1962, the US was planning to launch terrorist attacks on US soil as an excuse to blame Cuba (see here as well) and if that had occurred, everyone would have been blaming Cuba but that would not have been true.

    My point being that we need to look at things from outside the box, just because everyone is saying something doesn't mean is true.
    "And in the end, we were all just humans, drunk on the idea that love, only love, could heal our brokenness."

  8. #128
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,063

    Re: Fighting Erupts in Tripoli

    Just heard on NPR that some Italian journalists have been kidnapped. Yesterday I was watching coverage and saw journalists right in the middle of the fighting. I find it highly irresponsible for networks to put reporters at risk. They do the same during hurricanes. Putting reporters at risk is not better coverage.

  9. #129
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,600

    Re: Fighting Erupts in Tripoli

    Quote Originally Posted by SheWolf View Post
    This is a no fly zone, not a full scale war. The German military, the largest in Europe, is prepared enough to help us in Afghanistan, so they are prepared enough to enforce a no fly zone, but hey are not in NATO nor do they want to get involved on their own. I'd say the British has enough fighting force to enforce a no fly zone by themselves. They involved themselves in Iraq and we are in NATO, so if we can do it, I don't see why they can't...
    He invaded Iraq. You can compare and speculate on their motives, but also be mindful of the obvious differences.
    The facts are, Gaddafi had more power than the rebels and the rebels were losing, and he was willing to kill them all. Now we can speculate that the rebels knew all this when they decided to rise up against Gadaffi and his military. We can also speculate that they were counting on outside force to give them an upper hand.

    I think that that is a good speculation.

    They even knew what they wanted NATO to do.



    But still, Libya is different. It isn't like Iraq. It's not even like Iran. When the Iranians were protesting after the elections, some people thought America should do something and get involved. America didn't get involved. Iran was actively trying to overthrow their government... they were rioting, but it wasn't a full blown revolutionary war.

    The situation in Libya isn't a simple revolutionary war either, because the leader was attacking and murdering people. Gaddafi's murderous actions is what likely caused the protests to escalate into a full blown rebellion.

    NATO decided to get involved on the legal grounds that Gaddafi was committing international crimes. NATO is protecting the civilians, but NATO is also helping to overthrow Gaddafi by enforcing the no fly zone. It could be very likely that NATO is more interested in killing Gadaffi than saving civilians. I wouldn't doubt it, but at the same time, they have legitimate reasons to enforce a no fly zone. It's not like NATO is breaking international law.

    We have seen presidents issue bombing campaigns for less cause than this.
    So...Syria huh? And Bahrain? Saudi?

Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3111213

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •