• 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:
It is in our national interests to see democracy spread through the Middle East and North Africa (and sub-Saharan Africa).
Click to expand...

Yes, that is much preferable to democracy enforced by military occupation.
 
Catawba said:
Generally, I think there is much truth to that, but I think it is also possible that sometimes we do act for the right reasons. Libya is no huge oil producer, they have a little over 3% of the world's known oil reserves, so I don't think oil is a big motivator in this instance.
Click to expand...

Also, if they become a great friend to the U.S. (like Saudi Arabia), it would allow us much greater power projection over Africa and the Middle East.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Also, if they become a great friend to the U.S. (like Saudi Arabia), it would allow us much greater power projection over Africa and the Middle East.
Click to expand...

Are we somehow lacking the ability to do so now?

And are you seriously suggesting we can make Ghaddafi a reliable friend? I really do think your avatar fits you.
 
reefedjib said:
Are we somehow lacking the ability to do so now?
Click to expand...

Consistently, I'd say we're probably not in the position, but I'm not really all that up to date on U.S./African-Middle East relations.

Having more friends, gives us the ability to project more power over an area.

reefedjib said:
And are you seriously suggesting we can make Ghaddafi a reliable friend? I really do think your avatar fits you.
Click to expand...

That's not what I said.
From a public relations stand point, supporting Ghaddafi would be bad for us.
 
reefedjib said:
Are we somehow lacking the ability to do so now?

And are you seriously suggesting we can make Ghaddafi a reliable friend? I really do think your avatar fits you.
Click to expand...

i don't think he was suggesting that.
 
Manc Skipper said:
He's assisting the UN forces humanitarian effort in protecting civilians, not making war.
Click to expand...

Oh. So when a liberal president blows people up in a nation not presently at war with the United States, he's a humanitarian?

The real fact here is that Obama has wasted 112 or more Tomahawk cruise missiles on people who are not currently enemies of the United States when those assets are needed to defend troops the US has in the field facing the enemy in Afghanistan.

What happened to the liberal mantra that the United States is not supposed to be the world's police force? Is that only applied when US military action would benefit the United States?
 
reefedjib said:
It is a war. No doubt. It is a perfectly legitimate war by the rules of Just War. Humanitarian Intervention.
Click to expand...

The US rules of war require a Congressional declaration of war.

Was that issued?

Which US interests were immediately threatened to require such actions today, and not earlier?

Oh. Never mind. Yesterday was a golf day, wasn't it?
 
Catawba said:
According to several here, Khadafi is just too powerful for the world too handle without the US. :roll:
Click to expand...

Obviously Obama felt the same. Either that or it's a slight of hand to get Libya's oil.

Now doesn't that second line read utterly stupid? That is the retarded crap we had to and still have to listen to about Bush43 going into Iraq... and it wasn't a few guys on keyboards, but the entire mind numbed Left (minus Lieberman), and their leadership, many who voted to send troops... TWICE. A collective of politically motivated dolts that embraced the most hairbrained scheme to do what precisely? Try to bring down a popular president. Idiots.

.
 
Last edited:
Mayor Snorkum said:
The real fact here is that Obama has wasted 112 or more Tomahawk cruise missiles on people who are not currently enemies of the United States when those assets are needed to defend troops the US has in the field facing the enemy in Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

Here's a map of Afghanistan:

Afghanistan-map.jpg


Here's a rough approximation of what those Tomahawk missiles are being launched from:

nikko-r-c-alligator-rubber-dinghy-.jpg


Anyone else see the problem?
 
reefedjib said:
It is in our national interests to see democracy spread through the Middle East and North Africa (and sub-Saharan Africa).
Click to expand...

yeah it would be, but that's not what's going to happen. Cascading revolutions enacted by street mobs rarely produce stable democracies. Look at France, look at ancient Rome, look to the birth of the Soviet Union, look to the failure of the Weimar Republic, not to mention Cambodia, China, and Cuba.
 
Operation Odyssey Dawn is commanded by US Navy Adm Samuel J Locklear aboard the command ship USS Mount Whitney. There are 24 NATO warships in this Mediterranean task force, plus an unknown number of submarines with SLCM capability. French and British theater commanders are also aboard the US command ship.

The cruise missiles used against Libyan air defenses were a mix of old/new. The new models have the capability to loiter over a target and transmit real-time video images to command and control. The US will probably use Global Hawk drones to collect data for a BDA (Bomb Damage Assessment) report. Probably a six hour phase.

Establishing and enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya is not all that difficult. But a no-fly zone is ineffective against Ghadaffi tanks and artillery. It seems to me that allied Western and Arab governments decided at the Paris summit yesterday to fully prosecute Ghadaffi ground forces threatening rebel held cities. If this is so, then the next 24-48 hours of air operations will be crucial, as Ghadaffi will surely strive to punch his ground forces into these cities to negate allied air power.
 
spud_meister said:
Here's a map of Afghanistan:

Afghanistan-map.jpg


Here's a rough approximation of what those Tomahawk missiles are being launched from:

nikko-r-c-alligator-rubber-dinghy-.jpg


Anyone else see the problem?
Click to expand...

Yes.

The problem is apparently that you can't find an image of a Los Angeles class submarine and can't find the mileage scale on your map. Perhaps your ignorance of the abilities of the TLAM are deliberate, but their range has been proven by presdient Clinton to be able to penetrate a camel's ass inside Osama bin Laden's summer vacation camp in, of all places, Afghanistgan, which by some strange coincidence, is where we currently have troops engaged in combat with a real enemy. Given that Tomahawk missiles cost something on the order of a half a million bucks apiece, and so should not be used lightly simply because a president on the golf course wants to save face because he's been upstaged by the French.

Obama blew something like sixty million dollars yesterday for a cause that is none of America's business.

Here:

USS LaJolla on Alpha Sea Trials, 1981.

0870119.jpg
 
Last edited:
Mayor Snorkum said:
Yes.

The problem is apparently that you can't find an image of a Los Angeles class submarine and can't find the mileage scale on your map. Perhaps your ignorance of the abilities of the TLAM are deliberate, but their range has been proven by presdient Clinton to be able to penetrate a camel's ass inside Osama bin Laden's summer vacation camp in, of all places, Afghanistgan, which by some strange coincidence, is where we currently have troops engaged in combat with a real enemy.
Click to expand...

Ok, I was trying to prove the point humorously, but look at it this way, the tomahawk missiles have a range of 2,500 km's, that covers most of Afghanistan (from the closest point, just east of Qushm Island in the Gulf of Oman), it travels at 880km/h, and the closest Afghanistan gets to the ocean is roughly 500 km's, so it'll take it 3/4 of an hour just to cross into Afghan airspace, by the time it reaches where it needs to go, the Taliban would have been shot or have buggered off. Submarines armed with Tomahawk missiles are completely useless in the Afghan war.
 
Last edited:
Degreez said:
LMAO. An opinion piece is how you define something...? That's quite a stretch, even for a conservative.
Click to expand...

Were you an intern apprenticing directly under Bill Clinton? This is another "depends on what the definiion of "is" is" moment. Or, when I stuck my dick in my intern's/apprentice's mouth it wasn't sex. It's getting to the point we can start filing your claims in the "I never had sex with that woman" Dept.

You learned well my friend, but unfortunately it was a bad school to go to.

We are at war with Libya. Even NPR had War in their title and changed it; perhaps someone from DC called them to tell them to knock it off or their funding will be cut from the Left and Right! For what use is NPR if they don't support the home team.

Perhaps we can find compromise. We won't call it "war". We will call it "Waging an Aggressive Response". I'll use the acronym so I don't have to write it out in full all the time. So, Obama has declared WAR against Libya. Better?

The first headline is guaranteed to send the Left in a full fledged Tizzy... ROTFLOL...

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-bl...ne-obama-follows-mama-grizzly-to-war-in-libya
The 'Palin Doctrine': Obama follows Mama Grizzly to war in Libya
Canadian troops face real risk in 'acts of war': Harper | World | News | Toronto Sun
PARIS - Canada needs to move quickly but tread carefully as it engages in "acts of war" against a defiant Col. Moammar Gadhafi and his brutal regime, says Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
Stop the US War Against Libya and Bahrain
Obama's Women Advisers Pushed War Against Libya | The Nation
The war against Libya has begun; US, UK launch cruise missiles - Hindustan Times
LIBYA: Broad German Consensus Against A 'Risky War' - IPS ipsnews.net

.
 
Last edited:
Bullshytz said:
Rules are meant to be broken.
Beside US rules are full of sh!t anyway.
Click to expand...

That's a comment worthy of a fifteen year old. The Constitution should not be violated becuase the President has to save face with the French.

No vital US interests was threatened in Libya until the US commenced bombing raids in Libya today. We had nothing to win, and now we still have nothing to win but we've already lost sixty million dollars and counting, to name just one thing, and now we're enaged in three wars simultaneously, only one of which was justifiable.
 
spud_meister said:
Ok, I was trying to prove the point humorously, but look at it this way, the tomahawk missiles have a range of 2,500 km's, that covers most of Afghanistan (from the closest point, just east of Qushm Island in the Gulf of Oman), it travels at 880km/h, and the closest Afghanistan gets to the ocean is roughly 500 km's, so it'll take it 3/4 of an hour just to cross into Afghan airspace, by the time it reaches where it needs to go, the Taliban would have been shot or have buggered off. Submarines armed with Tomahawk missiles are completely useless in the Afghan war.
Click to expand...

Tomahawks have their place and should not be wasted for trivial purposes in a nation bearing no interests vital to the security of the United States.

The US military WAS NOT founded nor funded to interfere in minor internal squabbles of irrelevant minor nations, and Libya has never been, in it's entire history, anything but a minor pain in the ass. If France wants to play hero in Libya, fine. There's no reason the United States should jump in and help them out once again. That's how we got dragged into Vietnam.
 
Mayor Snorkum said:
Tomahawks have their place and should not be wasted for trivial purposes in a nation bearing no interests vital to the security of the United States.

The US military WAS NOT founded nor funded to interfere in minor internal squabbles of irrelevant minor nations, and Libya has never been, in it's entire history, anything but a minor pain in the ass. If France wants to play hero in Libya, fine. There's no reason the United States should jump in and help them out once again. That's how we got dragged into Vietnam.
Click to expand...

Ok, but Tomahawks are not needed to defend troops in Afghanistan.
 
If this is the right decision today then it was the right decision weeks ago when the rebels still controlled most of Libya. However, now that the US and our allies are finally acting I support the President and his efforts. I hope it isn’t too late.

What happened to “Gaddafi must leave”? UN 1973 doesn’t mention it.

I have lots of problems with the initial stages and especially the lack of US attacks against Gaddafi’s ground forces. Perhaps that is coming. The lack of US carriers in the Med is astounding.

So far we have attacked Quacky’s air defense. The one weapons system he’s not using against the rebels. This is of course necessary to establish a NFZ but it isn’t helping the people fighting in Benghazi right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom