• 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!

Doubts Mount on Libya War

mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2010
Messages
22,676
Reaction score
4,282
Location
DC Metro
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Doubts Mount on Libya War - FoxNews.com

Liberal filmmaker Michael Moore is one of those who have long lamented their support for Obama over establishment candidate Clinton in 2008. Moore jeered Obama via Twitter over the weekend writing “May I suggest a 50-mile evacuation zone around Obama's Nobel Peace Prize?”
 
Wow, such a big war we have so far. How many troops exactly do we have there?

I didn't support going into Libya, but I really don't like Moore =/

Also, hillary probably would have done the same thing he did.
 
Wow, such a big war we have so far. How many troops exactly do we have there?

I didn't support going into Libya, but I really don't like Moore =/

Also, hillary probably would have done the same thing he did.

Only faster. I think every President would have reacted when the protestors began getting shot and bombed. This only turned into a civil war because of the bombings and shootings. It could have easily ended peacefully.
 
Moore is worthless piece of garbage and I don't say that in any way to defend Obama.

Moore is in need of a serious attitude adjustment session with extreme prejudice.

He recently complained that the rich need to pay more tazes then filed suit for millions for a crappy movie he made. What an ass.
 
Wow, such a big war we have so far. How many troops exactly do we have there?

I didn't support going into Libya, but I really don't like Moore =/

Also, hillary probably would have done the same thing he did.

I don't like Moore either, but did you read the whole article? Congress is upset that Obama, after all his shaming of Bush, didn't consult congress at all (and he doesn't have to, I know) about action in Libya.

This "little war" has cost us over 300mil so far, though.
 
First, name calling isn't needed. We all know that Moore's opinion isn't worth what we pay for it...even if it is free.

Second, when good people see evil and do nothing they are accomplices of evil.
 
I don't like Moore either, but did you read the whole article? Congress is upset that Obama, after all his shaming of Bush, didn't consult congress at all (and he doesn't have to, I know) about action in Libya.

This "little war" has cost us over 300mil so far, though.

I don't like reading stuff from fox. Frankly, your snippet "one of those who have long lamented their support for Obama over establishment candidate Clinton in 2008." I thought was a ridiculous claim because of one twitter posting.

I know Congress is upset, but they have no reason to be. Like you said, he doesn't have to consult congress.

300 million isn't that much when compared to everything the government does. As I said, I didn't support this move to begin with, but its really small potatoes.
For Moore to say "May I suggest a 50-mile evacuation zone around Obama's Nobel Peace Prize?”, well, come on. There's plenty of reasons why the peace prize is hypocritical. This is but a small one.
 
Second, when good people see evil and do nothing they are accomplices of evil.

We are not the world's police. We can't stop every tragedy from occurring and we can't afford to try.
 
All that says for sure is that by attacking Obama, Moore has just lost his 'ghetto card.'
 
I don't like reading stuff from fox. Frankly, your snippet "one of those who have long lamented their support for Obama over establishment candidate Clinton in 2008." I thought was a ridiculous claim because of one twitter posting.

I know Congress is upset, but they have no reason to be. Like you said, he doesn't have to consult congress.

300 million isn't that much when compared to everything the government does. As I said, I didn't support this move to begin with, but its really small potatoes.
For Moore to say "May I suggest a 50-mile evacuation zone around Obama's Nobel Peace Prize?”, well, come on. There's plenty of reasons why the peace prize is hypocritical. This is but a small one.

Actually didn't even realize it was fox until you pointed it out. I got linked of a Google search and didn't pay attention to who it's from. Regardless, I find it hypocritical after all the bashing President Obama gave President Bush when he was a senator for military action WITH approval when he does it without. The Moore quote was funny to me for a few reasons....first because of Moore's earlier devotion to Obama and, second, because of the ridiculousness of the Nobel Peace Prize.
 
Second, when good people see evil and do nothing they are accomplices of evil.

So you're in favor of intervening in every country in the world that has human rights problems? Or should I interpret that in the more literal sense, that as long as you don't "see evil" on television, it's out of sight and out of mind?
 

Well, it's gone very far very quick. From establishing a no-fly zone to bombing Daffy's HQ. Anyone want to bet we already have boots on the ground? They don't do tactical bombing of "this force versus that force" without eyes on the ground. Whose eyes?

At any rate, imo, President Obama made a HUGE mistake saying there'd be no boots on the ground. I cannot imagine why he said that. News at eleven.
 
must gadaffi go or must gadaffi not go?

Obama Says Gadhafi Must Go, Sends Transport to Tunisian Border - WSJ.com

Targeting Gaddafi not part of mission - US general | Reuters

if it's a no fly we're enforcing, why the attack on ground forces?

Analysts say Germany and Italy's criticism stemmed from the coalition's targeting of Libyan tanks and forces on the ground, rather than simply limiting their actions to implementing a no-fly zone.

First cracks emerge in military coalition on Libya

does anyone believe the ditherer when he says, "days, not weeks"

Libya Crisis: Obama Gives Moammar Gadhafi Ultimatum - ABC News

chrissy matthews today asks these and a dozen other questions

"Well, that's one question's where there is going to be one heck of an answer because I want to know, a lot of people want to know what are we doing in Libya? Are we going in there to kill Gaddafi? If not, what is the plan for Gaddafi? What is he to do? If you were Gaddafi what would you do? We're going in there with a so called no-fly zone but it seems to have a limited potential for fire power. We're now going after his command and control center, which is basically him. So what's he to do? Are we offering him an escape from the country? Is he going to get safe passage out of the country? What's his end game? What end game are we forcing him to? I wish I knew this. War is politics by other means; what are the politics of this war?Certainly in the short run it's to protect lives of people who would be killed in a slaughter of civilians in Benghazi and other places held by the rebels. What is the end game with our military involvement here? I hope the American people keep asking that. What are we trying to accomplish here? The news reporting has been unsatisfactory in that regard. I don't know if you -- we're even asking the right questions. What do we want to do with Gaddafi? What do we want Gaddafi to do with Gaddafi -- to end this? Because it seems to me it's not going to end until he's gone. Therefore, how are we going to get to that point?," Chris Matthews pondered on MSNBC this afternoon.

RealClearPolitics - Video - Chris Matthews: "American People Deserve To Know Why We're At War"

no wonder hillary was "pushed over the edge" by all the "amateurs" in the white house

OH, HILL NO - WWW.THEDAILY.COM

are you sure this guy knows what he's doing?
 
I don't like Moore either, but did you read the whole article? Congress is upset that Obama, after all his shaming of Bush, didn't consult congress at all (and he doesn't have to, I know) about action in Libya.

This "little war" has cost us over 300mil so far, though.

Lives and idealogy are more important than money. Money can be made but once you're dead, you're dead. Stop sounding like a greedy merchant. There is so much crap that could have been cut to pay for this and no I don't mean cutting teacher's salaries or kid's lunch meals either.
 
Well, it's gone very far very quick. From establishing a no-fly zone to bombing Daffy's HQ. Anyone want to bet we already have boots on the ground? They don't do tactical bombing of "this force versus that force" without eyes on the ground. Whose eyes?

It is extremely unlikely that the U.S. has soldiers on the ground. It would violate the U.N. mandate, probably piss off the Libyans, give credence to those who claim we are invading and risk loosing lives. Obama is rather timid and wouldn't take such an insanely risky move. Ground based recon is useful, but not an absolute requirement.


At any rate, imo, President Obama made a HUGE mistake saying there'd be no boots on the ground. I cannot imagine why he said that. News at eleven.

Obama did the right thing by avoiding land based commitments. It would violate our mandate, ensure we take casualties and risk getting sucked into yet another moronic counter insurgency. Sticking to an air campaign also lets us simply pack up a leave if the whole situation gets fubared.
 
First, name calling isn't needed. We all know that Moore's opinion isn't worth what we pay for it...even if it is free.

Second, when good people see evil and do nothing they are accomplices of evil.

I'm sure that the opposing side would tell you differently. Who's the evil one I mean.
 
Split Libya.

Leave Gadaffi in the West, and let the other tribes have the South and East.


Libyan People & Ethnic Tribes



During this respite, of the No Fly and No Drive Zone, the South East Tribes can form an Army and a Government.



Libya is a fiction, and only created in 1934.

Just re-draw some bounadaries and carve out a new country for the rebels.

Here are some exisitng political boundaries:

http://www.temehu.com/Cities_sites/Libya.htm








//
 
Last edited:
The Arab League must be laughing up their sleeves. It seems they know better at what will eventually happen in the democracies than the democracies do.

And this time it fell apart in a matter of a few days.
 
Lives and idealogy are more important than money. Money can be made but once you're dead, you're dead. Stop sounding like a greedy merchant. There is so much crap that could have been cut to pay for this and no I don't mean cutting teacher's salaries or kid's lunch meals either.

This doesn't make any sense. Where did I say lives don't matter or that money matters more? Greedy merchant? WTF are you talking about?

Don't put words in my mouth.
 
It is extremely unlikely that the U.S. has soldiers on the ground. It would violate the U.N. mandate, probably piss off the Libyans, give credence to those who claim we are invading and risk loosing lives. Obama is rather timid and wouldn't take such an insanely risky move. Ground based recon is useful, but not an absolute requirement.

Obama did the right thing by avoiding land based commitments. It would violate our mandate, ensure we take casualties and risk getting sucked into yet another moronic counter insurgency. Sticking to an air campaign also lets us simply pack up a leave if the whole situation gets fubared.

But he's not stuck to an air campaign.
 
Only faster. I think every President would have reacted when the protestors began getting shot and bombed. This only turned into a civil war because of the bombings and shootings. It could have easily ended peacefully.

So any time there's a protest and somebody gets shot, we should bomb that country?

Doesn't it say somewhere that violence begets violence?
 
So basically, Obama is saying we are doing this because the United Nations told us to.

How pathetic.
 
Only faster. I think every President would have reacted when the protestors began getting shot and bombed. This only turned into a civil war because of the bombings and shootings. It could have easily ended peacefully.

Are you advocating that we should have launched air attacks against Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Bahrain? Should we be imposing no fly zones and pressing for more severe UN sanctions against China and North Korea? It just seems rather selective were we are justifying the use of force.

I dont know about how this could have ended 'peacefully'. Those 'rebels' we are supporting actually seem pretty well armed.
 
So basically, Obama is saying we are doing this because the United Nations told us to.

That's a cop-out answer. Obama knows damn well that the UN wouldn't have requested such a thing unless the US supported it.
 
Back
Top Bottom