View Poll Results: Who Supported Military Intervention in Libya?

Voters
35. You may not vote on this poll
  • I supported it in Libya

    14 40.00%
  • I did not support it in Libya

    21 60.00%
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34

Thread: Who Supported Military Intervention in Libya? (POLL)

  1. #21
    Dungeon Master
    Hooter Babe

    DiAnna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,699
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Who Supported Military Intervention in Libya? (POLL)

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post




    Wait a minute. What harm was Libya going to do to the U.S.?

    And our allies were with us in the invasion of Iraq. We had more partners in Iraq than we did in Libya.

    The only thing that seems to change between the two wars (under the issues you have highlighted) is who happened to be President at the time.

    Methinks you may want to think through your approach here a bit more thoroughly...
    Really? Comparing a massive boots-on-the-ground invasion of an entire country that lasted nearly a decade, with supporting allies that had a UN Resolution by knocking out targets inside Libya for a few months? That's what you're going with? You're ignoring the fact that I've repeatedly stated I didn't support the Libyan action either.



    ....Except for France, Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia, etc, etc, etc....

    You seem to be utilizing a highly selective concept of what qualifies as "allied support".
    Which countries are actually going to be lobbing bombs into Syria, and which are sitting on the sidelines hoping we'll take care of their border problems? Not that it matters. If it's important to Turkey, Israel, SA and France to bomb Syria because it serves their national interest to do so, let them do it. In my opinion, it does not serve the USA's national interest, and even Obama claims that we'd only be doing in because in the course of slaughtering 100,000 Syrians, Assad slaughtered 1400 of them with chemical weapons. Well if the UN the majority of our European allies don't want to be bothered, then neither should we.
    Actually we have huge national interests in Syria. Not only is it Iran's chief ally in the region, but it is responsible for enabling the deaths of thousands of American servicemembers. It's provides aid to Hezbollah and (until recently) al-Qaeda, has WMD production and stockpiles, and has the ability to destabilize a high-impact portion of the globe. It also serves as Iran's early-warning network and second-strike capability in the event of a move against a nuclear program. Geography and politics both require that we maintain our interests in the middle east, and Syria is a big piece of that.
    I feel like Charlie Brown... all I hear is "Whah, Whah, Whah." We are not going to agree on this. America cannot fix what is broken in the ME. They either fix it themselves or die trying.

    Yup. Unfortunately, doing nothing will produce significant repercussions as well. As Christopher Hitchens put it to well: "Nonintervention does not mean that nothing happens. It means that something else happens."
    Then I'm quite willing to let something else happen, because as I've said, it is not our job to fix what is broken in the ME.

  2. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Last Seen
    01-30-15 @ 01:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    15,633

    Re: Who Supported Military Intervention in Libya? (POLL)

    Quote Originally Posted by aberrant85 View Post
    Dang, this is a tight poll.
    Maybe if the people knew what was the real reason behind why the Frogs (France) and a few other European countries wanted a regime change in Libya it wouldn't be so tight ?

    It was all about wanting to pay less for Libyan oil. The Frogs wanted to renegotiate a new contract for Libyan oil. Libya wasn't going to renegotiate a new oil contract as long as Qaddafi and his Oil Minister was still in power.

    Remember, in 2003 Qadaffi joined America as an ally against Al Qaeda. Qadaffi destroyed his WMD's and dismantled his nuclear weapons development project. Qaddafi also stopped sponsoring terrorist. Qadaffi was no longer a threat to America or western Europe. Qadaffi was only a threat to Al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist facist and fanatics.

    While Obama's cruise missiles were still taking out Qadaffi's military and before Qadaffi was analy sodomised and executed, the black flag of Al Qaeda was already seen flying all over Libya.

  3. #23
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Who Supported Military Intervention in Libya? (POLL)

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    Really? Comparing a massive boots-on-the-ground invasion of an entire country that lasted nearly a decade, with supporting allies that had a UN Resolution by knocking out targets inside Libya for a few months? That's what you're going with? You're ignoring the fact that I've repeatedly stated I didn't support the Libyan action either.
    You gave an argument in favor of Libya that equally applies to two conflicts you mention you oppose without adjusting for that fact, and appear to shift back and forth on how you define "allies" based on your level of support or opposition to the action being considered.

    Which countries are actually going to be lobbing bombs into Syria
    If we go? France, Israel, and probably Turkey. Britain if we'd been smarter, but likely not now (though they may still support in non-kinetic ways - sharing intelligence and the like). If we don't? Probably just Israel.

    Other nations will also probably support in more covert ways. As an example, I would be astonished if mixed in with those 'volunteers', the Saudi Intelligence services didn't have a few case officers.

    Not that it matters. If it's important to Turkey, Israel, SA and France to bomb Syria because it serves their national interest to do so, let them do it.
    Israel will and has - but it is a far worse solution. Syria still has a powerful military relative to the Middle East, and the other nations lack the force-projection and sustainment power to do so without being part of a U.S. - led coalition.

    In my opinion, it does not serve the USA's national interest
    Then I would urge you to read up on the area - we have a huge national interest in the conflict in Syria.

    even Obama claims that we'd only be doing in because in the course of slaughtering 100,000 Syrians, Assad slaughtered 1400 of them with chemical weapons
    That is indeed what he said. I have no idea if that is what he thinks. It is not what I think, although I think that the use of CW is in particular going to be something that gets far worse if we do nothing now.

    Well if the UN the majority of our European allies don't want to be bothered, then neither should we.
    Because we require the approval of others in order to do the right thing?

    I feel like Charlie Brown... all I hear is "Whah, Whah, Whah."
    Really? That's your response to the national interests I laid out for you? .

    America cannot fix what is broken in the ME.
    Nope. Just as you cannot fix what is broken in the American populace with the State. But you can lock up serial killers.

    Then I'm quite willing to let something else happen
    ...and what, precisely, do you imagine that "something else" is?
    Last edited by cpwill; 09-07-13 at 12:38 AM.

  4. #24
    Finite and Precious
    Jredbaron96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    With you.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    7,891
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Who Supported Military Intervention in Libya? (POLL)

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    ...
    Alright, first I was agreeing with apdst, now I'm agreeing with cpwill.

    Strange bedfellows indeed.
    "Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough."
    -FDR

  5. #25
    Whoa, daddy!
    MadLib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,225

    Re: Who Supported Military Intervention in Libya? (POLL)

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    Well if the UN the majority of our European allies don't want to be bothered, then neither should we.
    The UN is not a reliable indicator of how many of our allies support us or not, because the United Nations Security Council - the only part of the UN that can do anything - is ****ed up. There are five permanent members - the US, the UK, France, Russia, and China - and 10 nonpermanent members, who cycle through alternating 2-year terms. The permanent members have a veto power that they can use to block any resolution that they do not like but which gains support from the other nations. So all 10 of the nonpermanent members plus 4 of the permanent members can wish to pass a resolution, but the fifth permanent member can simply block it.

    This wasn't quite how it worked out with Syria, but our allies - including Britain - supported intervention on the SC. Russia and China didn't, so nothing happened.
    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Hah. If someone put me in their sig, I'd never know. I have sigs off.

  6. #26
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Who Supported Military Intervention in Libya? (POLL)

    Quote Originally Posted by MadLib View Post
    The UN is not a reliable indicator of how many of our allies support us or not, because the United Nations Security Council - the only part of the UN that can do anything - is ****ed up. There are five permanent members - the US, the UK, France, Russia, and China - and 10 nonpermanent members, who cycle through alternating 2-year terms. The permanent members have a veto power that they can use to block any resolution that they do not like but which gains support from the other nations. So all 10 of the nonpermanent members plus 4 of the permanent members can wish to pass a resolution, but the fifth permanent member can simply block it.

    This wasn't quite how it worked out with Syria, but our allies - including Britain - supported intervention on the SC. Russia and China didn't, so nothing happened.
    Precisely. The argument basically boils down to the claim that we should allow the moral judgement of vladimir putin and the ChiComs to supplant our own.

  7. #27
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:01 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,309

    Re: Who Supported Military Intervention in Libya? (POLL)

    Quote Originally Posted by APACHERAT View Post
    Casp was an excellent Sec. of Def.

    President Reagan had a very professional and competent administration. Reagan surrounded himself with individuals who weren't yes men. I think that's one of the secrets of having a proficient and competent White House administration. Look at Clinton's White House, it was compared to National Lampoons "Animal House." Or look at the Obama White House, Obama surrounded himself with nothing but incompetent, second rate people who are mostly yes men.
    Eight of Reagan's cabinet were indicted. Then GHWBush did WHAT? He was lucky Slick Willy didn't prosecute.

  8. #28
    Whoa, daddy!
    MadLib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,225

    Re: Who Supported Military Intervention in Libya? (POLL)

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Precisely. The argument basically boils down to the claim that we should allow the moral judgement of vladimir putin and the ChiComs to supplant our own.
    While I wouldn't necessarily support every UNSC resolution simply because it was voted for by the majority, the blatant unfairness of the veto power prevents me from even considering the passage or blockage of a resolution as a legitimate indicator of how good a resolution it is.
    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Hah. If someone put me in their sig, I'd never know. I have sigs off.

  9. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Last Seen
    01-30-15 @ 01:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    15,633

    Re: Who Supported Military Intervention in Libya? (POLL)

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post
    Eight of Reagan's cabinet were indicted. Then GHWBush did WHAT? He was lucky Slick Willy didn't prosecute.
    Being indicted is one thing, being convicted is something different.

    Who and what were these Reagan "cabinet" members indicted for ? I'm unaware of eight Reagan "cabinet" members being indicted.

    It 's interesting that Ronald Reagan said the biggest mistake he made while POTUS was signing the 1986 Immigration Reform Acr (aka Amnesty) into law.

    Richcard M. Nixon said after his retirement that the biggest mistake he made as POTUS was not Watergate or recording his personal telephone conversations but not bombing the #### of Hanoi, invading Laos and Cambodia and mining Haiphong Harbor. If he would have done that in 1969 instead of 1972/1973, the Vietnam war would have ended in 1969.

  10. #30
    Educator
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    09-30-13 @ 04:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    698

    Re: Who Supported Military Intervention in Libya? (POLL)

    Libya did not pose a threat to its neighbours or to the US or its allies. Therefore, intervention was unwarranted.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 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
  •