Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 101

Thread: Obama' libyan coalition Falls apart

  1. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    melbourne florida
    Last Seen
    09-24-15 @ 12:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,156

    Re: Obama' libyan coalition Falls apart

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    No one knows for sure. Problem is Gaddafi claims so, so automatically the accusation looses a lot of credibility. You have to also factor in that the people of Eastern Libya are of a different tribe than Gaddafi, and have been in conflict with his tribe and the other major population group of Libya for hundreds of years.

    Now is it possible that there are AL Q from Eastern Libya? Of course there is, but there are Al Q from everywhere.. US, UK, Israel, you name it. Chances are also good that Gaddafi himself sent people on Jihad against American interests in Afghanistan and Iraq and used the cover of Al Q as an excuse.

    Basically we do not know.
    Al Qaida commander backs Libyan rebels in message

  2. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    melbourne florida
    Last Seen
    09-24-15 @ 12:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,156

    Re: Obama' libyan coalition Falls apart

    Quote Originally Posted by The Prof View Post
    meanwhile, he accomplished SQUAT in latin america



    Big trip short on progress - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com

    the president just can't catch a break these days, with local, national or international media

    why do you think that is?
    He encouraged Brazil to do off shore oil drilling while he has a moratorium on it here

  3. #33
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: Obama' libyan coalition Falls apart

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    Yet we must recall the incredible yet failed effort to retrieve and account for stinger missiles after the Soviet pullout from Afghan. Are we to arm people who may very well use those arms against us or others in the future?
    That's why I believe arms aid should have been limited. I am assuming that the military has developmed mechanisms to address the flaws associated with the Afghan effort. If not, then the overall costs and benefits would have to be weighed carefully. Then, it might well be prudent to do nothing.

    given the amount of "aid" we pony-up to keep Libyan nuclear scientists "busy" doing medical research rather than making weapons indicates that our interest in Libya is of importance.
    Right now, that's a theoretical problem. In any case, I do not believe direct military intervention in a civil war is the best way to address such an issue.

    And what of the pirating off the coasts of Somalia? Unattended soars can fester--sometimes they go away on their own. But that is a whole other debate.
    I don't think there is much that the U.S. could have done to prevent Somalia from descending into a failed state. Moreover, in the whole scheme of things, piracy is a minor geopolitical risk. Rather than worrying about providing security for all shipping, the U.S. could narrow its approach to providing security only to ships carrying vital cargoes (mainly oil). Other ships would need to make alternate plans i.e., re-route, hire security personnel, or help defray the costs associated with naval intervention. Recreational vessels should avoid the waters altogther. There is no justification for pleasure craft to sail those waters under the current circumstances.

    So you believe the rebels can overcome Gadhafi's army and mercs with such limited US assistance? It would seem that if we are going to support one side we should do our best (within reason) to ensure they win. Otherwise why should we bother at all?
    Early on, supply of select weapons probably could have made the difference. Then, Gadhafi's forces were reeling and his regime was putting out feelers for an exit. Now that time has passed and it has become clear that the revolution is actually a much narrower uprising (Gadhafi still enjoys significant domestic support) and the anti-Gadhafi forces' battlefield gains have been largely eliminated, the opportunity to topple the dictatorship may have passed. That's something the military would need to assess. If, in fact, the opportunity has passed, then the U.S. should only provide such support that would be necessary to avoid losing credibility, namely to lend some concrete actions to its earlier-stated position that it is U.S. policy that Gadhafi leave. Then, salvaging U.S. credibility would be the sole basis for providing some support, and if the regime survived, few could argue that the U.S. didn't at least make some concrete effort to advance its official policy.

    I'm not inclined to believe that a democracy would result from this civil war rather than any other type of government. Civil wars often result in years of further bloodshed and violence. Some countries never fully recover. America was one of the few exceptions.
    I don't believe democracy is assured or perhaps even the most likely outcome should Gadhafi be driven from power.

  4. #34
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Obama' libyan coalition Falls apart

    Quote Originally Posted by rathi View Post
    Germany was never involved, so there leaving isn't really important. That said, the inability to get a unified command together is pathetic. NATO is the wrong organization to use as many member states have doubts and Libya is outside the traditional mission scope. The French have the right idea in creating a separate unified command.
    Yeah, they're only the biggest economy in the EU. Their pulling out is symbolically huge.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  5. #35
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Obama' libyan coalition Falls apart


  6. #36
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Obama' libyan coalition Falls apart

    House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) escalated his critique of President Barack Obama’s handling of military operations in Libya Wednesday, sending the president a scathing letter that demands answers to the run-up to engagement in the region and hits the White House for first consulting the United Nations and the Arab League, but not Congress.

    Boehner wrote in the letter that he is “troubled” the United States military has been engaged in the attacks on Libya “without clearly defining” what the mission is and what America’s role is in achieving the goal.

    Given Boehner’s methodical, and deliberate messaging strategy, the questions he posed are likely to keep surfacing until sufficient answers are given to Congress.
    John Boehner rips President Obama on Libya - Jake Sherman - POLITICO.com

    the speaker of the house asks the president:

    1. does the mission include the removal of gadaffi or doesn't it?

    2. which nations are to lead?

    3. what are the lines of authority and responsibility?

    4. does the mission include land based targets?

    5. if coalition members drop out, how will that effect our role?

    6. when are we to turn over control?

    7. if gadaffi survives, how long will nfz last?

    8. what's our relationship with the opposition, what standards must they meet to achieve recognition?

    9. what's the cost, what's the payfor?

    10. how does this action fit into our broader middle east policy?

    now you might call the orange dude partisan, which is fine, fair

    but most your neighbors would say he's right

    his questions deserve answers

    party on

  7. #37
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: Obama' libyan coalition Falls apart

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    That's why I believe arms aid should have been limited. I am assuming that the military has developmed mechanisms to address the flaws associated with the Afghan effort.
    I'm not aware of any mechanisms available to poof weapons out of people's arms.

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    If not, then the overall costs and benefits would have to be weighed carefully. Then, it might well be prudent to do nothing.
    It would seem to me that American air power would avoid the issues of distributing, training, and reclaiming those arms. It would allow the US to play an IMMEDIATE role in assisting the rebels by destroying heavy targets and grounding gadhafi's air force. Which is exactly what we have witnessed and what the rebels needed.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Right now, that's a theoretical problem. In any case, I do not believe direct military intervention in a civil war is the best way to address such an issue.
    Supporting a Libyan faction to power that is sympathetic to US desires would achieve those results.

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    I don't think there is much that the U.S. could have done to prevent Somalia from descending into a failed state. Moreover, in the whole scheme of things, piracy is a minor geopolitical risk. Rather than worrying about providing security for all shipping, the U.S. could narrow its approach to providing security only to ships carrying vital cargoes (mainly oil). Other ships would need to make alternate plans i.e., re-route, hire security personnel, or help defray the costs associated with naval intervention. Recreational vessels should avoid the waters altogther. There is no justification for pleasure craft to sail those waters under the current circumstances.
    My point was that we don't live in a vacuum. Our actions and inactions have consequences.

    Perhaps there was nothing that could be done for Somalia.


    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Early on, supply of select weapons probably could have made the difference. Then, Gadhafi's forces were reeling and his regime was putting out feelers for an exit. Now that time has passed and it has become clear that the revolution is actually a much narrower uprising (Gadhafi still enjoys significant domestic support) and the anti-Gadhafi forces' battlefield gains have been largely eliminated, the opportunity to topple the dictatorship may have passed. That's something the military would need to assess. If, in fact, the opportunity has passed, then the U.S. should only provide such support that would be necessary to avoid losing credibility, namely to lend some concrete actions to its earlier-stated position that it is U.S. policy that Gadhafi leave. Then, salvaging U.S. credibility would be the sole basis for providing some support, and if the regime survived, few could argue that the U.S. didn't at least make some concrete effort to advance its official policy.
    What good will come from this "credibility"? Is it more important than a libya (and a world) without Gadhafi? What do you propose we save this "credibility" for?

    Is a Bay of Pigs repeat acceptable?

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    I don't believe democracy is assured or perhaps even the most likely outcome should Gadhafi be driven from power.
    I don't know enough to say. But given the location I'd agree.
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

  8. #38
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Obama' libyan coalition Falls apart

    Quote Originally Posted by Infinite Chaos View Post
    France and Germany have been at serious odds over this mission from the start. Russia (via Putin) has been against it from the start and Medvedev has been pro.
    yup

    All this is old news given a dramatic twist by the Daily Mail.
    it is what it is

    The World from Berlin: 'Gadhafi Is Facing a Coalition of the Unwilling' - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News - International

  9. #39
    That European Guy
    GarzaUK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Belfast, Northern Ireland
    Last Seen
    11-30-15 @ 02:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,675

    Re: Obama' libyan coalition Falls apart

    Hmm whatever happened to the US conservative approach that everyone who is against US military operations is a traitor (Iraq war era)? Is it because that Democrats are in charge you wish to politicise the whole thing.

    Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic, considering all the crap you put the "left" through over the Iraq war.
    "Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." ~ Isaac Asimov

  10. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    melbourne florida
    Last Seen
    09-24-15 @ 12:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,156

    Re: Obama' libyan coalition Falls apart

    What happened to the US telling the UN we would take the leadership role. Thats right!!! We have Obama who does not know what a leader is. He would rather see the UN be our leader

Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •