• 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!

Arab League backs no-fly zone in Libya

Jetboogieman said:
Explain.



Only if you let it...
Click to expand...

It's not always that simple. If we create a no-fly zone and Qadaffi escalates things with his ground forces, doing way more damage than his air forces could have, we're not going to just sit back and do nothing, especially since we already got the ball rolling with a no-fly zone.
 
StillBallin75 said:
apdst is referring to Iraq here. At least sometimes he gets his history right and can sound like a logical person.
Click to expand...

I always get my history right; especially military history. I'm an actual historian, not a history major. ;)
 
Just send us Marines back to Tripoli. =)
 
StillBallin75 said:
No true historian thinks the people of RVN "chose" democracy. Just sayin'.
Click to expand...

Only a history major would disagree, because of their education in revised and incomplete history.
 
Jetboogieman said:
Explain.



Only if you let it...
Click to expand...

The term "embroiled" comes to mind, Jet. Our excursions in Viet Nam started off with limited enough intentions and exploded from there, and it wasn't necessarily a case of letting it happen as it was one event leading to another, and the making of decisions that seemed supportable at the time when taken individually, but were unwise as a whole and when taken in retrospect.

Because we are a superpower, everything we do is placed under the microscope, and everything we do is spun according to the agendas of others. If we go in, and the final result is anything short of a theocratic state, we will be characterized by the Imams once again as the great Satan implementing yet another American attempt at crafting them in our image. If we fail to do anything, we will be accused of standing with dictatorial oppressors.

The forces at work here have to do with Arab culture, the tendency towards authoritarianism being confronted by these nascent moves towards democracy, and if there is anything truly democratic to come of it, our own involvement needs to be extremely limited; otherwise, we will just be used by the theocrats in such a way as to move the populations away from something that is truly democratic, and towards an Islamist state.
 
apdst said:
Only a history major would disagree, because of their education in revised and incomplete history.
Click to expand...

Each historian has different opinions. But historians are not entitled to their own facts. You have yet to show me how the South Vietnamese chose democracy. I previously showed you plenty of evidence to the contrary. If you're a historian you have an assertion, back it up with some damn evidence.

For once we find some common ground and you sound like a agreeable/logical person to me, and then it's back to your own revisionist history. Do you really enjoy getting a rise out of people? Because you're still invited to the basement.
 
Gardener said:
The term "embroiled" comes to mind, Jet. Our excursions in Viet Nam started off with limited enough intentions and exploded from there, and it wasn't necessarily a case of letting it happen as it was one event leading to another, and the making of decisions that seemed supportable at the time when taken individually, but were unwise as a whole and when taken in retrospect.

Because we are a superpower, everything we do is placed under the microscope, and everything we do is spun according to the agendas of others. If we go in, and the final result is anything short of a theocratic state, we will be characterized by the Imams once again as the great Satan implementing yet another American attempt at crafting them in our image. If we fail to do anything, we will be accused of standing with dictatorial oppressors.

The forces at work here have to do with Arab culture, the tendency towards authoritarianism being confronted by these nascent moves towards democracy, and if there is anything truly democratic to come of it, our own involvement needs to be extremely limited; otherwise, we will just be used by the theocrats in such a way as to move the populations away from something that is truly democratic, and towards an Islamist state.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm...

1 Another Islamic state with sharia law and eventually, the oil states will become ONE and dictate oil prices
 
StillBallin75 said:
Each historian has different opinions. But historians are not entitled to their own facts. You have yet to show me how the South Vietnamese chose democracy. I previously showed you plenty of evidence to the contrary. If you're a historian you have an assertion, back it up with some damn evidence.

For once we find some common ground and you sound like a agreeable/logical person to me, and then it's back to your own revisionist history. Do you really enjoy getting a rise out of people? Because you're still invited to the basement.
Click to expand...

So, 1,000,000 Vietnamese immigrating to South Vietnam, after the Communists took over in the north couldn't be considered, "choosing Democracy"? What about the 2,000,000 boat people that left Vietnam on bamboo rafts in the 70's? Did they chose Democracy over Communism?

After the demarcation line was established, I don't recall there being hoardes of Viets rushing to North Vietnam; vice they chose to stay in the south.

Those are the facts, not opinion.
 
apdst said:
So, 1,000,000 Vietnamese immigrating to South Vietnam, after the Communists took over in the north couldn't be considered, "choosing Democracy"? What about the 2,000,000 boat people that left Vietnam on bamboo rafts in the 70's? Did they chose Democracy over Communism?

After the demarcation line was established, I don't recall there being hoardes of Viets rushing to North Vietnam; vice they chose to stay in the south.

Those are the facts, not opinion.
Click to expand...

Your facts are correct.

Your assessment of causation is not.

There are many reasons people fled from the North to the South.

Alot of it had to do with religious persecution and the fact that Ngo was a ardent catholic and would protect them.

The point is whether or not South Vietnam was a democracy. It was never a democracy.

That is the point.

The people may have wanted to choose democracy.

But they never got it.
 
apdst said:
So, 1,000,000 Vietnamese immigrating to South Vietnam, after the Communists took over in the north couldn't be considered, "choosing Democracy"? What about the 2,000,000 boat people that left Vietnam on bamboo rafts in the 70's? Did they chose Democracy over Communism?

After the demarcation line was established, I don't recall there being hoardes of Viets rushing to North Vietnam; vice they chose to stay in the south.

Those are the facts, not opinion.
Click to expand...

Straw man.
 
The Arab's can then do it. They have a huge air force and they are near by.
 
Gray_Fox_86 said:
The Arab's can then do it. They have a huge air force and they are near by.
Click to expand...

I don't think they really have the resources, much less the inclination, to maintain such operations for a sustained period of time all by themselves.
 
StillBallin75 said:
I don't think they really have the resources, much less the inclination, to maintain such operations for a sustained period of time all by themselves.
Click to expand...
Well if we did it, which everyone is expecting for. People would come out in droves and accuse us of imperiliasm. So all I am saying is. That the situation in Libya affects Italy and the Arabs more than us. And they DO have the money and resources for such an operation. But the inclination part I agree with you.
 
Gray_Fox_86 said:
Well if we did it, which everyone is expecting for. People would come out in droves and accuse us of imperiliasm. So all I am saying is. That the situation in Libya affects Italy and the Arabs more than us. And they DO have the money and resources for such an operation. But the inclination part I agree with you.
Click to expand...

To properly enforce a no-fly zone over Libya, it would take a fifth-generation high-tech air force (meaning it has to be a Western air force, including US/NATO/EU). You need hundreds of combat aircraft, AWACS, tankers etc. The logistical implications themselves are absurd. I don't think the Arabs could do it properly just by themselves.
 
StillBallin75 said:
To properly enforce a no-fly zone over Libya, it would take a fifth-generation high-tech air force (meaning it has to be a Western air force, including US/NATO/EU). You need hundreds of combat aircraft, AWACS, tankers etc. The logistical implications themselves are absurd. I don't think the Arabs could do it properly just by themselves.
Click to expand...

How big do you think Gaddafi's air force is?
 
StillBallin75 said:
To properly enforce a no-fly zone over Libya, it would take a fifth-generation high-tech air force (meaning it has to be a Western air force, including US/NATO/EU). You need hundreds of combat aircraft, AWACS, tankers etc. The logistical implications themselves are absurd. I don't think the Arabs could do it properly just by themselves.
Click to expand...

Here's the Arab Air Forces list.

Algeria- MiG-25, MiG-29, Su-24, Su-30MKA, Il-76/78
Saudi Arabia- F-15C/D/S/SA, Tornado ADV/IDS, Eurofighter Typhoon, E-3 AEW&C, KE-3, C-130, CN-235
Qatar- Mirage 2000, C-17, C-130
United Arab Emirates- Mirage 2000, F-16E/F
Kuwait- F/A-18C/D, C-130
Oman- Jaguar International, F-16C/D
Morocco- Mirage F-1, F-5E/F, C/KC-130
Bahrain- F-5E/F, F-16C/D
Jordan- Mirage F-1, F-5E/F, F-16A/B/ADF, CN-235/295, C-27, C-130
Turkey- F-4E, F-16C/D, Boeing 737 AEW&C, KC-135, C-160, C-130
Pakistan- JF-17, J-7, Mirage III/5, F-16A/B/C/D, Q-5, Saab 2000 AEW&C, C-130, Il-78
Yemen- MiG-21, F-5E/F, MiG-29, C-130, An-12 An-24, An-26
Egypt- MiG-21, J-7, F-4E, F-16C/D, Mirage-2000, C-130, E-2 AEW&C
Syria- MiG-21, MiG-23, MiG-29, MiG-25 Su-22, Su-24, An-26, Il-76
Tunisia- F-5E/F, C-130
 
The Arab League wants a no fly zone? Good.


But, why are they voting on a no fly zone, then telling the UN, "Go do it?"

Why are the war hawks in the US blaming Obama for not enforcing a no fly zone?

Just whose war is it?

If the Arab League wants a no fly zone, then let them enforce a no fly zone and keep us infidels out of it. Don't they want Arabs to solve Arab problems?
 
Gray_Fox_86 said:
Here's the Arab Air Forces list.

Algeria- MiG-25, MiG-29, Su-24, Su-30MKA, Il-76/78
Saudi Arabia- F-15C/D/S/SA, Tornado ADV/IDS, Eurofighter Typhoon, E-3 AEW&C, KE-3, C-130, CN-235
Qatar- Mirage 2000, C-17, C-130
United Arab Emirates- Mirage 2000, F-16E/F
Kuwait- F/A-18C/D, C-130
Oman- Jaguar International, F-16C/D
Morocco- Mirage F-1, F-5E/F, C/KC-130
Bahrain- F-5E/F, F-16C/D
Jordan- Mirage F-1, F-5E/F, F-16A/B/ADF, CN-235/295, C-27, C-130
Turkey- F-4E, F-16C/D, Boeing 737 AEW&C, KC-135, C-160, C-130
Pakistan- JF-17, J-7, Mirage III/5, F-16A/B/C/D, Q-5, Saab 2000 AEW&C, C-130, Il-78
Yemen- MiG-21, F-5E/F, MiG-29, C-130, An-12 An-24, An-26
Egypt- MiG-21, J-7, F-4E, F-16C/D, Mirage-2000, C-130, E-2 AEW&C
Syria- MiG-21, MiG-23, MiG-29, MiG-25 Su-22, Su-24, An-26, Il-76
Tunisia- F-5E/F, C-130
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about types of aircraft per se (although some of the planes on that list are still pretty damn obsolete). I think the more important point is that the Arab League does not possess the logistical and operational capabilities to keep such an operation going for a sustained period of time. Only Western air forces have the real capability to do so, in my opinion.
 
Infinite Chaos said:
Gaddafi's survival has always been on the cards. There never was a point in the US getting involved here and it looks pretty clearly like Gaddafi's forces will be back in control of all major cities by the end of next week.

The Arab league no-fly zone now is very strange - they could also have waited and left it looking like a British and French idea to remove Gaddafi. This will make the next Arab league meeting very strange when Gaddafi walks into the meeting as President.
Click to expand...

Which is why Obamas recent statements are so stupid. First for three weeks they were silent. Now...THERES some great leadership. Then...on Friday when it looks like the Libyan forces are pretty much starting to gain the upper hand...he comes out and says he is "slowly tightening the noose" on Qaddafi. Dood is a day late on EVERYTHING. He is paralyzed by fear. I agre we should NOT have engaged...and we should have DECISIVELY said so from the get-go, while fully supporting immediate action by the UN and AL. His silence certainly didnt contribute to the rebels success, or to a more peaceful resolution of the problem. He has done there what he has done with ALL of his foreign policy decisions. Squat. Vote 'present.' Nothing.
 
StillBallin75 said:
I wasn't talking about types of aircraft per se (although some of the planes on that list are still pretty damn obsolete). I think the more important point is that the Arab League does not possess the logistical and operational capabilities to keep such an operation going for a sustained period of time. Only Western air forces have the real capability to do so, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
YES THEY DO. They have hundreds of fighters and transport aircraft. These are not African countries. These are rich and former sustained Soviet satellites. They have enough aircraft
for logistics, etc. Let them do it.
 
VanceMack said:
Which is why Obamas recent statements are so stupid. First for three weeks they were silent. Now...THERES some great leadership. Then...on Friday when it looks like the Libyan forces are pretty much starting to gain the upper hand...he comes out and says he is "slowly tightening the noose" on Qaddafi. Dood is a day late on EVERYTHING. He is paralyzed by fear. I agre we should NOT have engaged...and we should have DECISIVELY said so from the get-go, while fully supporting immediate action by the UN and AL. His silence certainly didnt contribute to the rebels success, or to a more peaceful resolution of the problem. He has done there what he has done with ALL of his foreign policy decisions. Squat. Vote 'present.' Nothing.
Click to expand...
Yeah Obama's a moron but he can at least speak without stuttering.

The problem with Obama is that he sees inaction as the best action. And when he talks he is hoping that is words of "encouragement" will be suffice. He is trying to hard to compare himself to a great leader without actually being one. Great leaders in our past were decisive and blunt but did it with an intellectualy capability that we have not seen for a long time. I am just saying. We have lost leadership in this nation a LONG time ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom