• 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!

Obama Warns Libya on Allied Action

Chappy

Chappy

User
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
2,443
Reaction score
733
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal

Too little, too late?

Excerpted from “Obama Warns Libya on Allied Action” By ELISABETH BUMILLER, DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK and ALAN COWELL, The New York Times, Published: March 18, 2011
[SIZE="+2"]P[/SIZE]resident Obama ordered Colonel Muammar el-Qaddafi on Friday to implement a cease-fire immediately and stop all attacks on Libyan civilians or face military action from the United States and its allies in Europe and the Arab world. …
Click to expand...
 
Chappy said:

Too little, too late?
Click to expand...

It's not too late, but it is pathetic. The MEU in the Med could have wrecked his military punch by now while the nations of Europe mobilized. Plenty of civilian lives would have been saved and we would not have put one ground troop in. President Obama is so afraid of looking like a hypocrit for his criticisms of Bush that he is willing to watch the murder of people until he has "permission" from an international organization that will take responsibility.

From Clinton to Bush we have seen two Presidents recognize the limitations of the UN and place it where it belongs when it came to doing right. President Obama seems to want the well wishes of an organization that houses the world dictators under one roof to define that. We look weaker than we have looked since 1979 under Carter.
 
Last edited:
President Obama ordered...
Click to expand...

Interesting how he is apparently in charge, even though Britain, France and Arab nations are supposed to be taking the lead.

As for...
The United States is not going to deploy ground troops into Libya...
Click to expand...
...let's hope he stands by that.
 
Whovian said:
Interesting how he is apparently in charge, even though Britain, France and Arab nations are supposed to be taking the lead.

As for...

...let's hope he stands by that.
Click to expand...

There is no strategic value or necessity to deploy ground troops. And without America holding the glue together, those other nations will step all over each other. When it comes to the MENA region we always have to be the conductor of the orchestra.
 
MSgt said:
It's not too late, but it is pathetic. The MEU in the Med could have wrecked his military punch by now while the nations of Europe mobilized. Plenty of civilian lives would have been saved and we would not have put one ground troop in. President Obama is so afraid of looking like a hypocrit for his criticisms of Bush that he is willing to watch the murder of people until he has "permission" from an international organization that will take responsibility.

From Clinton to Bush we have seen two Presidents recognize the limitations of the UN and place it where it belongs when it came to doing right. President Obama seems to want the well wishes of an organization that houses the world dictators under one roof to define that. We look weaker than we have looked since 1979 under Carter.
Click to expand...

libya is not our problem. are you willing to wage yet another war?
 
liblady said:
libya is not our problem. are you willing to wage yet another war?
Click to expand...

Well I am in the Marine Corps and war is job security.

On a serious note, the entire MENA region is our problem. I have a real issue with people who seem to know what is and is not "our problem." Usually this isbecause people don't seem to recognize the down fall of globalization. Too often Americans have to die before these same people decide too late that it is our problem. Like it or not, we have been involved with MENA since the Cold War began. We had been designated the enemy of God before the Cold War began. I bet Afghanistan wasn't "our problem" on September 10, 2001, huh?

My point is that as this region fails, we become more and more the target of choice for all things wrong. The military has been at war against these religious clowns since Somalia. It wasn't until 9/11 that American civilians recognized that they are targetting us. And do you think that Al-Queda is the end? Thousands of Sunni Muslims from all over the region raced to Iraq to kill Americans and Shia Muslims in Iraq. Al-Queda is made up of Muslim citizens from all over the region. And as these dictators slaughter their people and cause waves of immigrants into neighboring and allied nations, it becomes our problem to solve less we see regional escallation that will eventually merely suck us into something bigger and deadlier. Better to deal with these things when they are manageable.

Our security has always depended on the stability and health of foriegn regions. Why can't people see this truth? When our economy and trades were being hijacked, it was our military that had to venture out to the Med to defeat tghe Barbary Pirates. When our economies and trades were being disrupted again, we had to involve ourselves in a World War. When it happened again, we had to venture back out into Europe to deal with yet another unhealthy and unstable situation. Before we gotinvolved in the Cold War, the Soviet Union held influence over most of the world. Any idea what kind of economic and trade mess we would have had to deal with had we decided that the world wasn't "our problem?" Today, with oil being the resource of choice and an entire region full of religious monsters just waiting for a chance or an excuse, we are to pretend that MENA isn't "our problem?"

Besides, Libya would hardly be a war. An air campaign and an actual support for the people is all that is needed. And this so called "War on Terror" was never about only Afghanistan. This is generational and there will be much unrest before it is over and this region produces less religious monsters and organizations. The Cold War took almost 50 years and that was between two super power nations and involved fathers and sons. This is between a reluctant West and a failing MENA full of determined zealots. This is not an overnight thing and will also involve fathers and sons.
 
Last edited:
Obama is in over his head in this job and his amateur attempts at it lack leadership and his actions on Libya show it.

Obama was lucky the UN came up with Resolution 1973, and now that it's been adopted he's on the band wagon and playing the follower, at a time when he should be taking a leadership roll and showing he has the situation under control, with a plan.

He doesn't have to say what the plan is or even really have one yet, but try to look less like a weak kneed coward and more like the leader of the free world.

Obama is an embarrassment.
 
Councilman said:
Obama is in over his head in this job....
Click to expand...

I believe you are absolutely correct. He's a Global Leftist who carries himself as a global citizen first before he carries himself as an American citizen. He's playing the role of the leader of the free world from an anti-American's position. It doesn't work.
 
President Obama orchestrated resolution 1973 and persuaded the UN to give him more than Bush ever got in res. 1441. Legal authority to use "All means necessary"
 
Chappy said:

Too little, too late?
Click to expand...

I was very surprised to hear him say "no troops on the ground." Not that I would support that, but why in the world would the leader of the free world tip his hand like that? It makes no strategic sense to me at all. We were coming out and announcing we were in full support of, and would coordinate, a no-fly zone. That's alllll that needed to be said. (If he was worried about what other countries would think, he could have picked up the phone.) Very strange.
 
MSgt said:
We look weaker than we have looked since 1979 under Carter.
Click to expand...

You know, Carter's administration was responsible for sparking off the two most devastating wars of the 80's so if Obama is like Carter it doesn't make him sound all that weak.
 
MSgt said:
It's not too late, but it is pathetic. The MEU in the Med could have wrecked his military punch by now while the nations of Europe mobilized. Plenty of civilian lives would have been saved and we would not have put one ground troop in.
Click to expand...

Civilians... those people are insurgents!

(why does that sound familiar?)
 
Qadaffi's still laughing at Obama.
 
Degreez said:
He wouldn't because he's not Republican.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah he's a golfing fool, you have the nerve to lie about it? Everyone knows it, the whole world knows it.
 
MaggieD said:
I was very surprised to hear him say "no troops on the ground." Not that I would support that, but why in the world would the leader of the free world tip his hand like that? It makes no strategic sense to me at all. We were coming out and announcing we were in full support of, and would coordinate, a no-fly zone. That's alllll that needed to be said. (If he was worried about what other countries would think, he could have picked up the phone.) Very strange.
Click to expand...

Pick up the phone? Who's he gonna call? Al-Queda?

It makes strategic sense if you think about it from a foreigners point of view.

As soon as American boots hit the ground, it's an occupation. That gives the whackos in caves ammo to feed their followers to recruit people to try to kill us. As long as its American bombs and not boots, nobody can call it an "occupation."
 
Fools rush to war, too bad its a lesson unlearned in this country.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
Doesn't matter how he responds or when he responds - they stopped taking us seriously the moment Obama's ass was put in the Oval Office.
Click to expand...

Sense - you're not making any.

Of course you think your rhetoric is witty or even intelligble, but everyone knows that it was Bush who no one could take seriously.
 
Last edited:
American said:
Oh yeah he's a golfing fool, you have the nerve to lie about it? Everyone knows it, the whole world knows it.
Click to expand...

'o noes hes playing golf instead of being on the phone with japan offering his condolences and help!111!!'

Except he's already did both those things and nothing he could do could expediate the process of helping Japan.

But yeah, don't let logic and reason get in the way of your drivel.
 
Councilman said:
Obama is in over his head in this job and his amateur attempts at it lack leadership and his actions on Libya show it.

Obama was lucky the UN came up with Resolution 1973, and now that it's been adopted he's on the band wagon and playing the follower, at a time when he should be taking a leadership roll and showing he has the situation under control, with a plan.

He doesn't have to say what the plan is or even really have one yet, but try to look less like a weak kneed coward and more like the leader of the free world.

Obama is an embarrassment.
Click to expand...


Very well said, so true.
 
MaggieD said:
I was very surprised to hear him say "no troops on the ground." Not that I would support that, but why in the world would the leader of the free world tip his hand like that? It makes no strategic sense to me at all. We were coming out and announcing we were in full support of, and would coordinate, a no-fly zone. That's alllll that needed to be said. (If he was worried about what other countries would think, he could have picked up the phone.) Very strange.
Click to expand...


I agree 100%
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom