• 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!

U.S. Tomahawk Cruise Missiles Hit Targets in Libya

reefedjib said:
I wanted to highlight this for all of you who feel UN approval is so damn necessary. Seeking the fig leaf of UN approval had significant costs. It was not necessary.
Click to expand...

The guy who everyone is after was on the UN HRC! The corrppt UN has no credibility whatsoever and the world's democracies need their permission to save lives?

This is what happens when the free world has no leadership, and it makes for very dangerous times.
 
Demon of Light said:
I don't care who you are, when a country's military starts bombing another country's military that's war by definition. Calling it anything else is just propaganda.
Click to expand...

Yes, but what matters is if everyone who could do something about it will let you do it, or if they're going to have a problem. It's war, but it's war everyone who matters is ok with.
 
Last edited:
zimmer said:
Stopping a moron who lost a war from terrorizing his citizens, using WMD on them, and protecting others from WMD finding its way to terrorists was also humanitarian in ways that dwarf this, but it didn't register with the Rote Lib Faktion.
Click to expand...

I will never, ever forgive the ****ing immoral, decayed left for so venomously opposing Bush and the Iraq War, another humanitarian intervention, as you point out. The left are morally decrepit, violating their "principles" to oppose a political opponent.

Canell said:
Hm, I respect the desire of Americans to help but what about sovereignty? Why not leave the Libyans deal with their own internal affairs?
The Vietnam war was undeclared too. So, was it a war or not?
Click to expand...

Gaddafi has no legitimate claim to sovereignty, any longer. Therefor, we do not violate sovereignty by providing military assistance to the rebels, who have setup their own political council, recognized by France as the legitimate authority. They in fact invited us.

pbrauer said:
It's the eighth anniversary of Bush's invasion of Iraq, now there is the real warmonger. He needlessly got thousands of Americans killed or maimed for life with his stupidity.
Click to expand...

Nonsense, he freed the Iraqis from a dictator much worse than Gaddafi. It is the most moral war we have fought since WW II. (edit: actually, I think a case could be made for Korea filling that honor).
 
Last edited:
pbrauer said:
It's the eighth anniversary of Bush's invasion of Iraq, now there is the real warmonger. He needlessly got thousands of Americans killed or maimed for life with his stupidity.
Click to expand...

1. You folks complained Bush 41 didn't go all the way to Baghdad. He should have but the UN Res didn't permit it. What happened? Saddam cleansed those who tried to overthrow him. Where were you Libs then?

2. Clinton, the Dem leadership warned about Saddam and Clinton sent Cohen around to prepare the nation for war. Clinton preferred to watch the Inspectors get their asses kicked out.

3. Blix testified about Saddam's lack of cooperation, the fact they found weaponized WMD when he said they hadn't any, and the unbelievability of Saddam.

4. David Kay reported to the Senate ASC that the state was so degraded the likelihood of a terrorist getting WMD in Iraq was a real possibility, if it didn't happen already.

5. Saddam was going to reconstitute his weapons program.

6. Learn the lessons of history. Had Churchill been listened to in the early 30's WWII may have been averted. We know not what Bush43 averted, but we do know Saddam isn't a threat and they don't have WMD.

7. Two benefits from that war were: the finding and ending of nuke blackmarket and getting all of Gaddafi's nuke technology.

Now, did you want to say something about your Lib Warmonger?

.
 
Last edited:
reefedjib said:
I will never, ever forgive the ****ing immoral, decayed left for so venomously opposing Bush and the Iraq War, another humanitarian intervention, as you point out. The left are morally decrepit, violating their "principles" to oppose a political opponent.
.
Click to expand...

Humanitarian intervention? It cost us a trillion dollars and thousands of lives. We replaced one corrupt regime with one just as corrupt and trained their army to control their civilians. Not only that we ended up killing thousands of innocent civilians in the process. Iraq was a complete waste of lives and resources. It never was never an humanitarian mission. One would have to be a total fool to believe that. You don't bomb power plants, bridges and other infrastructure in a humanitarian mission.
 
Last edited:
Manc Skipper said:
He's assisting the UN forces humanitarian effort in protecting civilians, not making war.
Click to expand...

If those missiles waste a few civilians, will it still be a humanitarian mission?

Just thought of something: who thinks there will be the biggest media blackout since WW2 during this operation?
 
reefedjib said:
I will never, ever forgive the ****ing immoral, decayed left for so venomously opposing Bush and the Iraq War, another humanitarian intervention, as you point out. The left are morally decrepit, violating their "principles" to oppose a political opponent.
Click to expand...

Yep... I have stated on here several times that it was an act of treason and political expediency.

After 911 the Libs realized how weak they looked on national security after decades of hostility. So they vote to send troops, and in the senate the Libs asked for and got a 2nd meaningless vote. Then when things got tough and the troops needed their support the most, they turned their backs, grabbed their daggers and slashed away... another move of raw political expediency.

That constitutes one of the most sickening chapters in American history. And people wonder why I have a low threshold of tolerance for these people and their lying deceitful ways.

.
 
Last edited:
USA_1 said:
Humanitarian intevention? It cost us a trillion dollars and thousands of lives. We replaced one corrupt regime with one just as corrupt and trained their army to control their civilians. Not only that we ended up killing thousands of innocent civilians in the process. Iraq was a complete waste of lives and resources. It never was never an humanitarian mission. One would have to be a total fool to believe that.
Click to expand...

Clearly I not only believe that, but I rationally think that - it is not just a belief. There is ample evidence which you ignore just to feed your view of the world. We didn't go for oil, we didn't go for creating a puppet government nor to establish permanent bases. Crucial question: why did we go?

Since I obviously support what we did, you are clearly calling me a fool. I want an apology.
 
reefedjib said:
Clearly I not only believe that, but I rationally think that - it is not just a belief. There is ample evidence which you ignore just to feed your view of the world. We didn't go for oil, we didn't go for creating a puppet government nor to establish permanent bases. Crucial question: why did we go?

Since I obviously support what we did, you are clearly calling me a fool. I want an apology.
Click to expand...

WMDs...revenge and future oil company profits. Had McCain won we would have permanant bases in Iraq. He even said so.
Only a complete fool believes the invasion of Iraq wasn't a costly mistake and a no win situation for the US.
 
reefedjib said:
Gaddafi has no legitimate claim to sovereignty, any longer.
Click to expand...

Really? Says who?
Come on, people, get real! In the name of moral certanty are comited the greatest atrocities.
If somebody would come to America to impose his worldview and judge you under the threat of a wepon, how would you feel? Wouldn't you say "mind your own bussines, it's for me to decide how to live in my country!"?
 
USA_1 said:
Humanitarian intervention? It cost us a trillion dollars and thousands of lives.
Click to expand...

The equipment and ordnance being used in Libya is free, or something? Oh, wait, the stimulus package paid for it, huh?


We replaced one corrupt regime with one just as corrupt and trained their army to control their civilians. Not only that we ended up killing thousands of innocent civilians in the process. Iraq was a complete waste of lives and resources. It never was never an humanitarian mission.
Click to expand...

This fight is only twelves hours old, so don't speak too soon.



One would have to be a total fool to believe that. You don't bomb power plants, bridges and other infrastructure in a humanitarian mission.
Click to expand...

Do you know how to stop an army from crossing a river? Blow up the bridge.

Do you know how to cripple a command center's communications, thereby denying it the ability to command and control it's forces? You kill the electricity.

Do you know what happens when you launch a 750 pounder into an ADA position that is sitting on the roof of a building? You destroy the building.

Don't worry, that's all going to happen here, too.
 
If I respond to that idiocy, I will get points. ****ing moron.
 
USA_1 said:
WMDs...revenge and future oil company profits. Had McCain won we would have permanant bases in Iraq. He even said so.
Only a complete fool believes the invasion of Iraq wasn't a costly mistake and a no win situation for the US.
Click to expand...

Where is the 5th fleet based?
 
Canell said:
Really? Says who?
Come on, people, get real! In the name of moral certanty are comited the greatest atrocities.
If somebody would come to America to impose his worldview and judge you under the threat of a wepon, how would you feel? Wouldn't you say "mind your own bussines, it's for me to decide how to live in my country!"?
Click to expand...

We aren't killing unarmed civilians. Do I really need to point that out?
 
pbrauer said:
It's the eighth anniversary of Bush's invasion of Iraq, now there is the real warmonger. He needlessly got thousands of Americans killed or maimed for life with his stupidity.
Click to expand...

A better example of "fools rush in" could not be found.
 
Last edited:
USA_1 said:
WMDs...revenge and future oil company profits. Had McCain won we would have permanant bases in Iraq. He even said so.
Only a complete fool believes the invasion of Iraq wasn't a costly mistake and a no win situation for the US.
Click to expand...

So Gulf War 1 was a mistake too, and what do you do after your nation is hit by terrorists? Do you leave a threat that had WMD, used them, hated America, tried to assassinate a US President to call the shots beyond the 12-years he'd already had. Shall he tell us when or if he will disarm? What message does that send to despots?

Then there is the humanitarian aspect of which 1 million Iraqi's died... 500,000 children and for what? They didn't die for freedom that's for damn sure.
Now Libya is a humanitarian mission? Was Iraq not? 1 million died there before Bush 43, and 100 people a day were being executed.
Nw are you going to tell me Bush caused 1 million deaths? No... that was Clinton's Invisible Testicle foreign policy.

You see... this is where you Libs are ****ed badly. There is no consistency in your beliefs... it's a shady, intellectually bankrupt shell game.


.
 
Last edited:
reefedjib said:
We aren't killing unarmed civilians. Do I really need to point that out?
Click to expand...

No but that's not the point. The point is, why are foreign countries interfering with the affairs of a sovereign nation? To save the people? May be but with that excuse they can do whatever they want and fire any war on whoever they want with accusations of nonhuman behavior. :doh
 
reefedjib said:
Clearly I not only believe that, but I rationally think that - it is not just a belief. There is ample evidence which you ignore just to feed your view of the world. We didn't go for oil, we didn't go for creating a puppet government nor to establish permanent bases. Crucial question: why did we go?

Since I obviously support what we did, you are clearly calling me a fool. I want an apology.
Click to expand...


His assessment was spot on. The Iraqi people is who should receive an apology!
 
Demon of Light said:
I don't care who you are, when a country's military starts bombing another country's military that's war by definition. Calling it anything else is just propaganda.
Click to expand...

Err, no. By your lofty logic, when Pearl Harbor was bombed, America was at war with Japan. We weren't at war with Japan on December 7, 1941. We were at war with Japan on December 8, 1941.

Learn what the terms state of war means in context of numerous international conventions. Aggression is not always war. It is casus belli for war.
 
Canell said:
No but that's not the point. The point is, why are foreign countries interfering with the affairs of a sovereign nation? To save the people? May be but with that excuse they can do whatever they want and fire any war on whoever they want with accusations of nonhuman behavior. :doh
Click to expand...

Not at all. Learn about UNSCR that are under Chapter VII... AKA threats to peace and security. I have no idea why you are defending Libya's dictator in the first place.
 
Catawba said:
His assessment was spot on. The Iraqi people is who should receive an apology!
Click to expand...

Could you please provide a link where the Iraqi people have sought an apology?

They were pro-rape rooms and genocide??
 
Canell said:
No but that's not the point. The point is, why are foreign countries interfering with the affairs of a sovereign nation? To save the people? May be but with that excuse they can do whatever they want and fire any war on whoever they want with accusations of nonhuman behavior. :doh
Click to expand...

Yes, that's the standard dilemma presented when the sanctity of sovereignty is ameliorated. Certainly, sovereignty has never stopped a county from invading another when a bad actor starts war without the wellbeing of that other country's people being uppermost in their mind. The Korean war for instance, or Iraq invading Kuwait. It makes no sense to bind ourselves to rules others do not follow - especially when we do desire a good outcome for the people.
 
Degreez said:
Err, no. By your lofty logic, when Pearl Harbor was bombed, America was at war with Japan. We weren't at war with Japan on December 7, 1941. We were at war with Japan on December 8, 1941.

Learn what the terms state of war means in context of numerous international conventions. Aggression is not always war. It is casus belli for war.
Click to expand...

WRONG and WRONG.
a) Casus belli is the justification for going to war. Dropping 112 bombs on a nation in an act of aggression is war.

Using your logic, the entire aggressive act of Gulf War II was casus belli, and any war for that matter.

b) We were at war the moment those Japanese started bombing us.

In your case here, since we were not at war until December 8, 1941 our troops should not have attempted to defend themselves, but being at war they did... on December 7.

.
 
Last edited:
zimmer said:
WRONG.
Casus belli is the justification for going to war. Dropping 112 bombs on a nation in an act of aggression is war.

.
Click to expand...

Christ, will you people never learn? They are 3000 lb guided missiles, not rockets or bombs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom