• 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!

France formally recognises Libyan rebels' authority

VanceMack said:
In Egypt AFTER the ouster of Mubarek was certain, he had no problem finding his voice. A few weeks ago several here (including Chappy and a couple of the died in the wool pacifist types) were calling for military intervention to help the rebels against the evil colonel Quackdaffy (maybe it would help if we had a UN concensus on how to spell his name), but no comment from Obama...in fact...the only voice has been from Hillary who has stated...we should..well...wait...to see...before we...you know...decide...what our official position should be...cuz...we...well...you know...ummm...dont really know...what..is going to happen there...and...yeah...

Dood is alternately totally evil at the beginning of the rebellion, to...well..we dont REALLY know who the rebels are and who we will be supporting (like that mattered in Egypt)...

I pity the mindless liberal leftists. I really do (and no...thats not all liberals...some have made their voice very clear from the beginning and it has been consistent and frankly, I agree with them). Its got to suck going through life not sure what position to take and not being able to actually TAKE it until AFTER their beloved leader has finally told them how to think or what position to take.
Click to expand...

Those on the left who don't support the fight for liberty in Libya, should ask themselves what John F Kennedy would have said.

Here let me help..



"Let every nation know... that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
American said:
Those on the left who don't support the fight for liberty in Libya, should ask themselves what John F Kennedy would have said.

Here let me help..

Click to expand...

so profound [/sarcasm]
i did not realize that you were from libya while using the forum name "American"
but you must be to recognize that JFK's words"ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" would properly be directed toward the libyans - and not Americans
Americans should not be expected to fight for another country's independence
America should be expected to come to the aid of the rebels who seek independence. and it appears that is what Obama has offered. or are you indirectly indicating you applaud Obama's pronounced opposition to kidaffi's remaining in office
 
justabubba said:
so profound [/sarcasm]
i did not realize that you were from libya while using the forum name "American"
but you must be to recognize that JFK's words"ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" would properly be directed toward the libyans - and not Americans
Americans should not be expected to fight for another country's independence
America should be expected to come to the aid of the rebels who seek independence. and it appears that is what Obama has offered. or are you indirectly indicating you applaud Obama's pronounced opposition to kidaffi's remaining in office
Click to expand...
The rebels are "doing for their country", and I wasn't commenting on Obama, I was commenting to those who don't support liberty abroad. Who do you think Kennedy meant by "friend"?
 
American said:
The rebels are "doing for their country", and I wasn't commenting on Obama, I was commenting to those who don't support liberty abroad. Who do you think Kennedy meant by "friend"?
Click to expand...

the only ones here i have seen who has commented against the rebels attempt to overthrow the existing government are from the right of the political spectrum
that indicates your observation was quite wrong:
Those on the left who don't support the fight for liberty in Libya ...
Click to expand...
your apology is accepted in advance
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I disagree, taking the side of the winner when they won, is weakness,
Click to expand...

No, it's just what you do in diplomacy. How does it show weakness, and to whom do we need to show strength? It isn't our fight. Our tendency to make things all about us is exactly what gets us into trouble in the Arab world.

ReverendHellh0und said:
supporting democracy and freedom when the chips are on the table, shows fortitude.
Click to expand...

Except diplomatic recognition doesn't actually do anything to "support democracy and freedom." And even if it did, there is no evidence that what emerges in Libya would in any way resemble a free democracy. This isn't Tunisia or Egypt where there is plenty of reason to be optimistic about a serious democratic transformation. This is a country awash in oil, run by a madman, in the midst of a civil war. I'm sure that the rebels would be better than Gaddafi (as they couldn't possibly be any worse), but I see little reason for optimism that the country will become a democracy.

As I mentioned, our recent track record of "supporting democracy and freedom when the chips are on the table" is not very good. We supported Georgia against Russia, and the president of Georgia became an autocratic thug. We supported Kosovo against Serbia, and the president of Kosovo became an autocratic thug. We supported democracy in Iraq against Saddam Hussein, and the prime minister of Iraq is currently busy beating and arresting protesters. What makes you think that we would have better luck in Libya?
 
Last edited:
If France is willing to follow through with humanitarian and military aid to the rebels, more power to them. I would prefer a unified NATO action, because frankly that's the only way the rebels will receive the help they need to win and the only way that the consequences, whatever then are, can be shared by all participating nations.

I can't even stomach watching news footage of Libya because I know what a horrific bloodbath it is. I felt the same way during the wars in the Balkans, while everyone just sat and watched the slaughter while saying, "tsk-tsk".
 
PeteEU said:
Why NATO? It is not NATOs job to be a peace-keeper force, it is to protect its members. No members have been attacked.

If anything it should be the UN that should be giving the go ahead, and then asking NATO or whoever to carry it out. We have to be very very very careful here, and I fully understand the US in this case.. we NEED the Arab nations especially Tunisia and Egypt to be on board if not asking for out-right intervention. Else it will just look like another arrogant western imperialistic for oil a la Iraq intervention. Yes it is horrible what Gadaffi is doing to his people, but to be brutally frank.. other dictators are doing the same or worse and we are not actively considering intervention there.. but Libya has .. OIL.

On top of that, there is the problem of logistics. A lot of aircraft are needed and the closest bases are in Italy which is hours away, which makes in forcing a no fly zone quite hard.. the Libyan Air Force can be off the ground and hitting the target and back before NATO or whoever jets get even near. So the jets have to be in constant patrol far from home and that is never good. It would help if they could use Tunisia and Egypt as bases though, but..

And even if they took out the air force, then the rebels are totally disorganised and they are facing professionally trained troops, so it is far from certain that the rebels would win.

Personally I think the best would be to kill Gadaffi because then the house of cards would collapse.. or so I suspect.
Click to expand...

With China and Russia having veto power in the UNSC, the UN would not vote to do anything substantive. Both Beijing and Moscow want this rebellion to fail and thus would block any move to authorize any action. NATO should set up a no-fly zone independent of any UN decision. Frankly, the UN is a great talking shop and their specialized agencies do some good work, but in the realm of global security and peace, they are useless. Anyone relying on them for that is simply ignorant of the politics involved OR support the right of dictators to bolster and back up other dictators.
 
justabubba;1059341838]share with us exactly what that consists of
Click to expand...

We are doing nothing … think that about sums it up, unless you consider talking about it as something.


please tell us how gaddafi losing this war would cause the USA to be looked on with disdain
and by whom
Click to expand...

Those fighting against Gaddafi, are looking for help from someone. This is a David vs Goliath fight. Without support, their chances are slim to none..... but should they overcome and pull this thing out.. . To say that they aren't going to be happy with the jaw flapping that they got from the country, that is suppose to be the biggest fighters of freedom in the world, in my opinion would be an understatement.


then tell us exactly what should be done by our government concerning the libyan siituation
Click to expand...

At the very least we should get that no fly zone taken care of. Arms should be gotten to those fighting Gaddafi, I'm not advocating ground troops, well I am but also realize the reality that we are understaffed enough already fighting on two fronts.

Does that mean we end up with a government that is friendly to us, no not necessarily but it does mean that we stood up for what is right, rather then what is politically correct. In my opinion, the US has to stand for something. If not supporting people fighting for their freedom from slaughter, from a ruthless dictator then what ?


also, please do not stop posting. in fact ramp up your posts. they are so helpful
Click to expand...

As per ramping up my posts, I really try not to do that .. we have enough people like yourself here doing that .
 
Last edited:
American said:
Those on the left who don't support the fight for liberty in Libya, should ask themselves what John F Kennedy would have said. …
Click to expand...

Personally, Jack Kennedy has always been on my “Worst Presidents Ever” list along with Ronald Reagan, but, I digress.

More important, I believe that America shares strategic interests in Libya with other nations European and Arab and we should match our tough talk with decisive action. Time to kick some dictator-killing-his-own-people butt.

“But let me be as clear as I can about the desired outcome from our perspective, and that is that Qaddafi step down. And we are going to continue to work with the international community to try to achieve that, and we are going to be in close consultation with these opposition groups as they get organized to see how we can bring about that outcome.” — President Barack Obama¹​

See Also: “Obama's Rwanda?”
 
Last edited:
Deuce said:
Obama could eat a hamburger and conservatives would still find a way to convince themselves how its a bad idea, shows lack of leadership, is un-American, etc.


A frightening day indeed when apdst is the voice of reason in a thread.
Click to expand...

Well, Duece, you can't get it wrong all the time. ;)

Stillballin, neither.
 
Kandahar said:
How exactly does this support democracy? This isn't Tunisia or Egypt where there were peaceful protesters demanding democracy from a bumbling autocrat, it's an armed rebellion in a petrostate against an extremely brutal dictator. Who knows what kind of government would emerge if the rebels prevail? Granted, it almost certainly couldn't be any worse than Gaddafi's, but let's not pretend that we're "supporting democracy" if we help them. At best, we'd be supporting a government more inclined to do our bidding, which may or may not happen to become a democracy. We've been down that road before. We supported Georgia in its conflict with Russia, and we supported Kosovo in its conflict with Serbia...under the guise of supporting democracy. Today, the countries that we supported have governments every bit as bad as the ones we opposed.

As for diplomatic recognition of the rebels at this point in time...I see a lot of downside and very little upside. Especially when they don't control the capital. If we recognize the rebels and Gadaffi crushes them tomorrow (which is hardly an unthinkable possibility) it will damage our credibility. And if the rebels prevail, what will we have gained by recognizing them a few days sooner?
Click to expand...

There's no way to tell what kind of governments will emerge in Tunisia and Egypt, either.

The Islamists have already taken the lead in both countries. That's why I think it's a bad idea to jump through asses getting cosey with any of them.

Islamist movement at forefront of Tunisia's protests - Telegraph
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom