• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Qaddaffi launches counterattack: "massacre" claimed by witnesses

What about Sudan? Who I think atrocities and deaths eclipses many of the others you mentioned.

Darfur did not call for a intervention and war. Why should Libya?
What makes Libya so special to get the world's attention but Darfur was ignored?

Perhaps it's because the SLM/A and JEM are just as bad or worse than the current 'Government'.

What do you think the reason is? Sudan seems to have plenty of oil.


The Sudanese government uses oil revenues to fund a military capacity that is in turn, used to conduct war in Darfur. Oil revenues collected from companies around the world fund the civil war as well as violations of international human rights and humanitarian law. Sudan’s oil wealth has played a major part in enabling an otherwise poor government to fund the expensive bombers, helicopters and arms supplies which have allowed the Sudanese government to launch aerial attacks on towns and villages and fund militias to fight its proxy war in Darfur.
War in Darfur - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Its very interesting to see some of the most spineless chicken ****s on the planet that post on this site suddenly calling for someone ELSE (not THEM mind you...they would never lower themselves to actually back their words and go do the job themselves) to go to war over a brutal dictator that is killing his people. The same people that would and have called Bush a war criminal for removing the same kind of sadistic asshole. I guess that little party letter behind the presidents name means everything...

With some people, and they know who they are, it certainly matters who's doing the liberating.
 
We would have to go up against the Chinese Army and the Muslim militias that are committing the genocide, if we intervened in Sudan. I don't think anyone is ready to open that can of worms.

You ready for U.S. forces to go into Sudan and start hosing down Muslims with heavy weapons fire? Be honest.

Kill them all if they are committing genocide against Africans.

I have said it before and I'll say it again.
Darfur did not warrant intervention from the World. Why should Libya? Leave it alone.
It is not our problem or business.

When a genocide happens, then the argument may change but until then. :shrug:
 
Last edited:
In what might be an important development, if the story is accurate, BBC reported the following concerning an Al Jazeera report (due to heavy web traffic, I was unable to access the Al Jazeera story in question):

2158: Al-Jazeera has just reported that Col Gaddafi is to hold a people's congress to let him stand down with guarantees. There have been various unverified rumours to this effect on Twitter today.

If the story is accurate, it might indicate that the Gadhafi dictatorship is not in as strong a position as it has claimed in repeated press conferences. It could indicate that the dictator is worried that there is growing risk to his own safety and that of his family.

Needless to say, I believe several things would be necessary:

1. Neither Col Gadhafi nor his family would have any role in government.
2. The Transitional National government would oversee the so-called "people's congress."
3. The Transitional National Council would oversee the political transition toward a new, more representative Libyan government.

If such terms are available and Gadhafi and his followers would assure stability in exchange, then the deal could be reasonable. Of course, that would mean refraining from prosecuting Col. Gadhafi and his family, but the overall benefits of stability and an opportunity to build a new political system in Libya would outweigh foregoing prosecution. Absent those terms, there would be real risk that Col. Gadhafi and/or some of his family members would still retain significant control over Libya's governance and political evolution. I don't believe such an outcome should be accepted, as it would minimize the possible gains achieved from the populist uprising while providing protection to Col. Gadhafi and his family.
 
Apparently, some type of offer was floated, but it was rejected.

From BBC:

2248: The rebels rejected the deal as it would mean an "honourable" exit for Col Gaddafi, Reuters quotes the channel as saying.

Again, there is a lot of uncertainty as to the specific terms involved. But now it is clear that an offer had been made. What is significant is that the Gadhafi regime is now looking for a way out. That suggests that its on-the-ground position is weaker than what has been presented to the media and that the regime does not have absolute confidence that it can or will retain power. Of course, there still remains some possibility that the dictatorship will retain control over a part of Libya for some time to come. There is also a risk that left with no "escape" so to speak, the dictatorship might have little incentive but to roll the proverbial dice and fight for its survival.
 
I wonder if el-Qaddafi will blame it on the SAS arrested there? Or has he already claimed credit for it?
 
I'm getting really fed up with all this "talk" from the Western Powers, do something or don't but I'm tired of all this ****ing "talk".

Jesus, I can talk too... but I don't have a goddamned aircraft carrier at my disposal....
 
I'm getting really fed up with all this "talk" from the Western Powers, do something or don't but I'm tired of all this ****ing "talk".

Jesus, I can talk too... but I don't have a goddamned aircraft carrier at my disposal....

Geeezz, switch to decaf.

There was a time, not long ago, when the 'Western Powers' would be doing much more than talking tough and giving empty speeches.
 
Still, a no-fly zone and plenty of humanitarian aid is a good start. One we've neglected too long. It's time for the U.S. to take unilateral action. Others will fall in line. Who could possibly criticize our decision to intervene in this manner? To wait any longer would be a travesty.

I have this vision in my head of the rebels desperately hoping that their deaths are drawing attention and support from the rest of the world. We've simply got to act before the run out of warm bodies.

Saddam killed 5000 of his own people with WMD's, raped and tortured countless others, and we couldn't even get the liberal left on board to go intervene.

Never underestimate how truly worthless some people are when it comes to stopping a madman. Ron, that was the days before the modern day liberal party, a worthless, cowardly, spineless party that stands for nothing and falls for anything.
 
Last edited:
Why is intervention seemingly so necessary. I mean we will lose good people for a middle eastern country that will just keep spiraling out of control anyway. I mean it would be a waste of time and resources that we could use elsewhere.
 
Why is intervention seemingly so necessary. I mean we will lose good people for a middle eastern country that will just keep spiraling out of control anyway. I mean it would be a waste of time and resources that we could use elsewhere.

1930's Europe suddenly comes to mind.
 
Saddam killed 5000 of his own people with WMD's, raped and tortured countless others, and we couldn't even get the liberal left on board to go intervene.

Never underestimate how truly worthless some people are when it comes to stopping a madman. Ron, that was the days before the modern day liberal party, a worthless, cowardly, spineless party that stands for nothing and falls for anything.

But 0bama is sending a delegation to Europe to having meetings!! He's talking about doing something!!

This strong leadership from 0bama amounts to nothing less than another Nobel Peace Prize winning performance from the leader of the free world.

(See signature below)
 
1930's Europe suddenly comes to mind.

In terms of Gadhafi's ambitions (largely political survival for his dictatorship/family succession) and the region's balance of power implications, things are vastly different from the 1930s. Hitler had huge ambitions, including the rebuilding of an "empire" and Germany's rising power/gaining territory through threats or military action were dramatically upsetting the balance of power in Europe. Things were heading toward German regional preeminence. Libya is not even close to becoming a dominant North African power. One has to look to Iran for genuine balance of power implications that are hostile to U.S. interests and allies.
 
But 0bama is sending a delegation to Europe to having meetings!! He's talking about doing something!!

This strong leadership from 0bama amounts to nothing less than another Nobel Peace Prize winning performance from the leader of the free world.

(See signature below)

Yeah yeah we get it you dislike liberals and don't think they can defend the US, what else is new :coffeepap
 
Why is intervention seemingly so necessary. I mean we will lose good people for a middle eastern country that will just keep spiraling out of control anyway. I mean it would be a waste of time and resources that we could use elsewhere.

That's a respectable opinion but in this case military intervention is the right choice. Military intervention is never an easy decision to make and it shouldn’t be. The people of Libya are fighting tanks, artillery and fighter/bombers with AK's and a few AAA guns. They need help. Now.

We don't necessarily have to send in ground troops but it may, as others have pointed out, be necessary to send in small units to designate targets.

Striking Libyan military bases, especially those being used as offensive staging points and their air assets, would at least severely limit Qaddafi's ability to slaughter his own people.
 
Yeah yeah we get it you dislike liberals and don't think they can defend the US, what else is new

Nothing new. Most liberals still don't understand what it takes to achieve peace and freedom in this world and they sure as hell have no intention to find out.
 
That's a respectable opinion but in this case military intervention is the right choice. Military intervention is never an easy decision to make and it shouldn’t be. The people of Libya are fighting tanks, artillery and fighter/bombers with AK's and a few AAA guns. They need help. Now.

We don't necessarily have to send in ground troops but it may, as others have pointed out, be necessary to send in small units to designate targets.

Striking Libyan military bases, especially those being used as offensive staging points and their air assets, would at least severely limit Qaddafi's ability to slaughter his own people.

There are alternatives to military intervention and even "no fly" zones. For example, the U.S. could covertly provide the anti-Gadhafi forces with a limited arsenal of anti-aircraft missiles to take out Gadhafi's fighter jets and his helicopters. Once the regime starts losing those military assets, its conduct on the battlefield would shift and the anti-Gadhafi forces' military prospects with respect to capturing the rest of Libya would be enhanced.
 
Nothing new. Most liberals still don't understand what it takes to achieve peace and freedom in this world and they sure as hell have no intention to find out.

So since you're a conservative and apperently do have the know how.

Please explain how YOU would achieve peace and freedom in this world? I'm curious since it's one of my ambitions.
 
folks.... this is where we should say "screw national sovereignty", and just go ahead and intervene. and no, a no-fly zone doesn't cut it.



TRIPOLI, Libya — Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s militia stormed the rebels controlling the town of Zawiyah on Saturday morning in what two residents described as a “massacre.”

“I am watching neighbors dying unarmed in front of their homes,” one resident said in a telephone interview, with the sounds of heavy weapons and machine-gun fire in the background. The resident said the militias were using tanks and heavy artillery, attacking from both the east and west gates of the town. “I don’t know how many are being killed, but I know my neighborhood is being killed,” the resident said...

The assault followed a day of brazen counterattacks by Colonel Qaddafi’s militia, which battled rebel forces on two fronts on Friday, firing on unarmed protesters in front of international news media and leaving the rebels seeking his ouster in disarray.

The militia’s actions seemed likely to stir renewed debate over international intervention to limit Colonel Qaddafi’s use of military power against his own citizens, possibly by imposing a no-flight zone.

The latest siege of Zawiyah began on Friday, when the elite Khamis Brigade, a militia named for the Qaddafi son who commands it, surrounded the town and opened fire with mortars, machine guns and other heavy weapons, witnesses said, in two separate skirmishes...

I'm sick of us having to zoom to everyone's 'rescue' after they start and continue their own bull****.

I'm sick and tired of the international 'hatred of Americans' - especially from the Middle East.

there are dozens of countries closer to them, being affected more directly, who have the capabilities to intervene - why not expect them to do this?
 
There are alternatives to military intervention and even "no fly" zones. For example, the U.S. could covertly provide the anti-Gadhafi forces with a limited arsenal of anti-aircraft missiles to take out Gadhafi's fighter jets and his helicopters. Once the regime starts losing those military assets, its conduct on the battlefield would shift and the anti-Gadhafi forces' military prospects with respect to capturing the rest of Libya would be enhanced.

That's reasonable. If it has a good chance to work then I'd agree we should try that before direct US military intervention.

Something has to be done about Qaddafi's tanks and artillery as well. But taking out his air assets would be a positive step.
 
Last edited:
How about South Korea? Will that work as an acceptable example?

If North Korea had succeeded in conquering South Korea, the territory controlled by totalitarian governments would have expanded and the risk to neighboring states would have increased. At that time, the situation in Japan was still quite fragile with reconstruction under way.

In Libya, if the Gadhafi regime prevails (unlikely in the end, though it could hold on to part of the country for an extended period of time if it can gain/hold some of the oil facilities), that status quo would remain essentially unchanged. If Gadhafi's opponents win--and I hope they do--then there may be opportunity for a friendlier Libya (to Western interests), though the transition to political stability could be treacherous.

Even if one applied the 1950s era "domino theory," Libya's revolution and North Korea's invasion of South Korea are not analogous.
 
So since you're a conservative and apperently do have the know how.

Please explain how YOU would achieve peace and freedom in this world? I'm curious since it's one of my ambitions.

Reagan had it right. Read a little about his thoughts on the subject.
 
I'm sick of us having to zoom to everyone's 'rescue' after they start and continue their own bull****.

I'm sick and tired of the international 'hatred of Americans' - especially from the Middle East.

there are dozens of countries closer to them, being affected more directly, who have the capabilities to intervene - why not expect them to do this?

Because the other African and ME nations aren't going to do anything even if they could. The UN is still having meetings.

The Libyan people have little love for the US, but intervening on their side will not be forgotten. Neither will sitting on our hands.

There is a reason the people of Libya are looking toward the US for help. Our enemies are gauging our response as well and so far they have been encouraged.
 
Back
Top Bottom