• 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!

Stalemate in Libya Increasingly Viewed as Likely Outcome

Marshabar

Active member
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
293
Reaction score
142
Location
United States
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Such a deadlock — perhaps backed by a formal cease-fire agreement — could help ensure the safety of Libyan civilians caught in the crossfire between the warring sides. But it could also dramatically expand the financial and military commitments by the United States and allied countries that have intervened in the six-week-old conflict, according to U.S. officials familiar with planning for the Libyan operation.
Stalemate in Libya increasingly viewed as a likely outcome - The Washington Post

Oh good. Another ongoing commitment in something that is none of our business. It's only money. Only our money. To help al Quaida establish a new training ground.
 
They should just divvy up between East and West and let us leave. This isn't going anywhere. Gaddaffi won't be defeated without the West actively involved in taking him out.
 
They should just divvy up between East and West and let us leave. This isn't going anywhere. Gaddaffi won't be defeated without the West actively involved in taking him out.


I agree it was such a bad move goin in there
 
I'm pretty sure he DOESN'T know what he's doing, Prof. It is becoming more clear every day. And it was already crystal clear the first day when he started crowning Communist czars.
 
I do think Barack is confused about what he is doing, but honestly I think anyone in his position would face the same dilemmas. I have trouble just putting myself in his shoes at this point, thinking about how I would go about it if I were President.
 
I do think Barack is confused about what he is doing, but honestly I think anyone in his position would face the same dilemmas. I have trouble just putting myself in his shoes at this point, thinking about how I would go about it if I were President.

With all of his military advisors, ambassadors, diplomats, the CIA, etc., etc., he can damn well figure out what's in the best interests of the United States. Problem is he has politics on his mind, in my opinion.

I say that because I think they all do. Except George Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan. Because of what had happened in the United States, I honestly believe he thought he was acting in the best interests of the United States. Obama? Not so much. Not so much at all.
 
I do think Barack is confused about what he is doing, but honestly I think anyone in his position would face the same dilemmas. I have trouble just putting myself in his shoes at this point, thinking about how I would go about it if I were President.

I agree with you this one was tough. Except there were very clear considerations. We don't use Libya's light sweet oil. This is an issue for France especially but much of Europe also. We are spread thin and don't need anymore enemies in the Middle East. The mainstream media, most especially CNN in my view, made this one look attractive because they made it a romantic and appealing rescue mission.

Basing this action on humanitarian goals was ridiculous and it set a precident we could never live up to IF anyone believed it was true. No one does. Not even the man who said it.
 
With all of his military advisors, ambassadors, diplomats, the CIA, etc., etc., he can damn well figure out what's in the best interests of the United States. Problem is he has politics on his mind, in my opinion.

I say that because I think they all do. Except George Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan. Because of what had happened in the United States, I honestly believe he thought he was acting in the best interests of the United States. Obama? Not so much. Not so much at all.

Maggie D, I'd like to like your post but somehow I'm not getting the link. Obama has a world of expertise at his disposal. Doesn't seem to want to use it.
 
I agree with you this one was tough. Except there were very clear considerations. We don't use Libya's light sweet oil. This is an issue for France especially but much of Europe also. We are spread thin and don't need anymore enemies in the Middle East. The mainstream media, most especially CNN in my view, made this one look attractive because they made it a romantic and appealing rescue mission.

Basing this action on humanitarian goals was ridiculous and it set a precident we could never live up to IF anyone believed it was true. No one does. Not even the man who said it.

I think it is ridiculous from a purely logical/realist/material interest point of view, but people around the world (including many Americans, and we as Americans often naturally find ourselves identifying with those who struggle for freedom) were clamoring for the West to do something, plus there were all the reports out of Libya about how the rebels would be crushed if a no-fly-zone was not implemented, the rebels themselves were begging for help, etc. He could have done nothing and gotten blasted for it. He did something and the situation still sucks, it was just tough. So in conclusion I don't think his performance and rhetoric are really up to par on this one, but at the same time I fail to see how it could have been done any other way.
 
With all of his military advisors, ambassadors, diplomats, the CIA, etc., etc., he can damn well figure out what's in the best interests of the United States. Problem is he has politics on his mind, in my opinion.

I say that because I think they all do. Except George Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan. Because of what had happened in the United States, I honestly believe he thought he was acting in the best interests of the United States. Obama? Not so much. Not so much at all.

"War is merely a continuation of politics by other means." - Carl von Clausewitz. It is a fact of life that foreign policy and domestic politics are intertwined, even more so in a democracy.
 
I agree with you this one was tough. Except there were very clear considerations. We don't use Libya's light sweet oil. This is an issue for France especially but much of Europe also. We are spread thin and don't need anymore enemies in the Middle East. The mainstream media, most especially CNN in my view, made this one look attractive because they made it a romantic and appealing rescue mission.

Basing this action on humanitarian goals was ridiculous and it set a precident we could never live up to IF anyone believed it was true. No one does. Not even the man who said it.

Qaddafi has made Libya into the most highly rated African country with many social programs that actually work. His track record at "taking care of Libyans" is unblemished. The highly publicized unemployed between ages 18-27 is about the same as in this country. The civilians wouldn't be getting killed if the CIA had not fired up some convenient rebels. Housing, healthcare and education are far ahead of the USA, so who are we to give lectures. If Libya did not have OIL, we would not be there. OIL goes into the Distribution Network andit is always the same players. Multinationals loyal to the strong currency and we are helping them. Moronic. Leave Libyans to Qaddafi because he demonstrated that he can create progress for his own people. Stop believing Mass Media BS and start doing your homework.
 
Maggie D, I'd like to like your post but somehow I'm not getting the link. Obama has a world of expertise at his disposal. Doesn't seem to want to use it.

I agree with you. He has a world of expertise at his disposal. Either he doesn't want to use it or he is so intent on knowing which way the political winds blow that he's weighing decisions in his own self-interest. I have absolutely no confidence in him.
 
Maggie D, I'd like to like your post but somehow I'm not getting the link. Obama has a world of expertise at his disposal. Doesn't seem to want to use it.

Sometimes all you need to do is refresh the page.
 
I think it is ridiculous from a purely logical/realist/material interest point of view, but people around the world (including many Americans, and we as Americans often naturally find ourselves identifying with those who struggle for freedom) were clamoring for the West to do something, plus there were all the reports out of Libya about how the rebels would be crushed if a no-fly-zone was not implemented, the rebels themselves were begging for help, etc. He could have done nothing and gotten blasted for it. He did something and the situation still sucks, it was just tough. So in conclusion I don't think his performance and rhetoric are really up to par on this one, but at the same time I fail to see how it could have been done any other way.

You're probably right, Ballin. If he'd had any choice at all, he'd have probably voted present.
 
Qaddafi has made Libya into the most highly rated African country with many social programs that actually work. His track record at "taking care of Libyans" is unblemished. The highly publicized unemployed between ages 18-27 is about the same as in this country. The civilians wouldn't be getting killed if the CIA had not fired up some convenient rebels. Housing, healthcare and education are far ahead of the USA, so who are we to give lectures. If Libya did not have OIL, we would not be there. OIL goes into the Distribution Network andit is always the same players. Multinationals loyal to the strong currency and we are helping them. Moronic. Leave Libyans to Qaddafi because he demonstrated that he can create progress for his own people. Stop believing Mass Media BS and start doing your homework.

Yeah, it's amazing, Dave, this was by far NOT the worst Muslim country and the rebels would have been squashed like bugs if Gaddafi was the monster he's being made out to be. He was forging new relationships in the west. Any leader of a Muslim country who is repressing the ultra religious is probably doing his people a favor. Same with Mubarak. The only places these revolutions stand a chance is against leaders with ties to the west. The others just go ahead and squash the people post haste with no apologies to anyone.
 
Stalemate in Libya Increasingly Viewed as Likely Outcome

Some of us predicted this, before the first round was ever fired.
 
First I can't see Gaddafi allowing this to be drawn out into another Iraq.

Next Obama has already made it clear that he is great at hit and run after you really get the Rebels hopes up.

My way this would have been over in a heart beat or lack thereof.

Gaddafi would be dead and that would signal game over.
 
Qaddafi has made Libya into the most highly rated African country with many social programs that actually work. His track record at "taking care of Libyans" is unblemished. The highly publicized unemployed between ages 18-27 is about the same as in this country. The civilians wouldn't be getting killed if the CIA had not fired up some convenient rebels. Housing, healthcare and education are far ahead of the USA, so who are we to give lectures. If Libya did not have OIL, we would not be there. OIL goes into the Distribution Network andit is always the same players. Multinationals loyal to the strong currency and we are helping them. Moronic. Leave Libyans to Qaddafi because he demonstrated that he can create progress for his own people. Stop believing Mass Media BS and start doing your homework.

Bad troll is bad.

These aren't the droids you're looking for. Move along.
 
First I can't see Gaddafi allowing this to be drawn out into another Iraq.

Next Obama has already made it clear that he is great at hit and run after you really get the Rebels hopes up.

My way this would have been over in a heart beat or lack thereof.

Gaddafi would be dead and that would signal game over.

0bama missed an opportunity early on.

Gaddafi should have had a missile down his pie hole weeks ago.

If that had happened this thing would be over IMO.
 
0bama missed an opportunity early on.

Gaddafi should have had a missile down his pie hole weeks ago.

If that had happened this thing would be over IMO.

We would be better served if we stopped trying to police the world. It gets us few friends and a lot of enemies. We should simplify things. If you aren't against us, you may not be on our friend list, but at least you aren't on the enemy ledger.

America must change its foreign policy across the board. If we believe in individual freedom, then unless we're hypocritical, other nations have the right to decide what form of government they want.
 
If that had happened this thing would be over IMO.

thank you

in my opinion, the removal of gadaffi would spell just the beginning

what we break we own

ie, NATION BUILDING

in LIBYA, of all places
 
We would be better served if we stopped trying to police the world. It gets us few friends and a lot of enemies. We should simplify things. If you aren't against us, you may not be on our friend list, but at least you aren't on the enemy ledger.

America must change its foreign policy across the board. If we believe in individual freedom, then unless we're hypocritical, other nations have the right to decide what form of government they want.

I don't believe we are trying to police the whole world just those parts where we can have a positive effect.

Today the Ivory Coast erupted in violence and the UN sent in French peacekeepers. I don't want the US involved in any part of that conflict. There is no good outcome there. Both sides are worthless. Same goes for Darfur.
 
thank you

in my opinion, the removal of gadaffi would spell just the beginning

what we break we own

ie, NATION BUILDING

in LIBYA, of all places

It would spell the begining.

Hopefully the beginning of a free and peaceful Lybia.
 
Back
Top Bottom