Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 51

Thread: The U.S. may not send troops to Libya, but American soldiers could still go

  1. #21
    Educator
    Ron Mars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Last Seen
    02-01-14 @ 04:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,194

    Re: The U.S. may not send troops to Libya, but American soldiers could still go

    Quote Originally Posted by Simon W. Moon View Post
    Have we actually decided yet that we're going "to bring Muammar Gaddafi to justice?"

    Last I heard, we weren't committed to anything of the sort. I know that many in govt have expressed the desire that MomoQ leave Libya, but that's not the same as bringing "Muammar Gaddafi to justice."
    According to 0bama "Gaddafi must leave". As far as I know that is still US policy.
    The national security of the United States can never be left in the hands of liberals.

  2. #22
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: The U.S. may not send troops to Libya, but American soldiers could still go

    Quote Originally Posted by Simon W. Moon View Post
    Have we actually decided yet that we're going "to bring Muammar Gaddafi to justice?"

    Last I heard, we weren't committed to anything of the sort. I know that many in govt have expressed the desire that MomoQ leave Libya, but that's not the same as bringing "Muammar Gaddafi to justice."
    You're right, I don't think we're even headed in that direction right now. And even if we want him to leave, i'm not sure if the West is actively trying to get him to do so. Last I heard, we're trying to get senior members of his circle to defect and weaken him, which would perhaps indirectly induce him to give up and leave.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  3. #23
    American
    cpgrad08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Lakewood,WA
    Last Seen
    10-18-17 @ 07:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,388
    Blog Entries
    10

    Re: The U.S. may not send troops to Libya, but American soldiers could still go

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    You're right, I don't think we're even headed in that diDrection right now. And even if we want him to leave, i'm not sure if the West is actively trying to get him to do so. Last I heard, we're trying to get senior members of his circle to defect and weaken him, which would perhaps indirectly induce him to give up and leave.
    Drop a Bomb on him, let the country collapse, get a bag of popcorn and watch the show. The U.S cannot afford this Money wise.

  4. #24
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: The U.S. may not send troops to Libya, but American soldiers could still go

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    We already have boots on the ground:



    Apparently CIA boots don't count.

    Libya: Obama gives green light for CIA operations - reports - International Business Times
    This is largely a mistake.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  5. #25
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: The U.S. may not send troops to Libya, but American soldiers could still go

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    This is largely a mistake.
    My understanding is that they are there to act as FO's and lase targets.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  6. #26
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: The U.S. may not send troops to Libya, but American soldiers could still go

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    My understanding is that they are there to act as FO's and lase targets.
    That would be my only hesitation, is that I'm unsure of what their actual mission might be. Regime change is not a proper policy for our nation. We should not be in the business of deciding who rules other countries.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  7. #27
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: The U.S. may not send troops to Libya, but American soldiers could still go

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    That would be my only hesitation, is that I'm unsure of what their actual mission might be. Regime change is not a proper policy for our nation. We should not be in the business of deciding who rules other countries.
    I agree. 10 chars.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  8. #28
    Educator
    Ron Mars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Last Seen
    02-01-14 @ 04:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,194

    Re: The U.S. may not send troops to Libya, but American soldiers could still go

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    That would be my only hesitation, is that I'm unsure of what their actual mission might be. Regime change is not a proper policy for our nation. We should not be in the business of deciding who rules other countries.
    I agree with you Boo. Hope that doesn't scare you.

    I firmly believe that if the mission in Libya is successful 0bama will do everything he can to ensure that the Libyan people decide their own government.
    The national security of the United States can never be left in the hands of liberals.

  9. #29
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: The U.S. may not send troops to Libya, but American soldiers could still go

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Mars View Post
    I agree with you Boo. Hope that doesn't scare you.

    I firmly believe that if the mission in Libya is successful 0bama will do everything he can to ensure that the Libyan people decide their own government.
    Ron, I'd go a step further and flip that around and say that the mission will only be successful when the Libyan people are able to decide their own government. Else this will all have been for naught.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  10. #30
    Educator
    Ron Mars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Last Seen
    02-01-14 @ 04:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,194

    Re: The U.S. may not send troops to Libya, but American soldiers could still go

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    Ron, I'd go a step further and flip that around and say that the mission will only be successful when the Libyan people are able to decide their own government. Else this will all have been for naught.
    Excellent point.
    The national security of the United States can never be left in the hands of liberals.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •