• 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!

Who Supported Military Intervention in Libya? (POLL)

Who Supported Military Intervention in Libya?

  • I supported it in Libya

    Votes: 14 48.3%
  • I did not support it in Libya

    Votes: 15 51.7%

  • Total voters
    29
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
Libya did not pose a threat to its neighbours or to the US or its allies. Therefore, intervention was unwarranted.
 
With all the talk about Syria vs. Iraq, I was curious as to who was on board with Libya.

Didn't support it, but glad that Obama decided to take a supporting vice leading role. With it's proximity to Europe, the Europeans really should have taken the lead roll as they did. Don't ask me about the aftermath though.
 
Didn't support it, but glad that Obama decided to take a supporting vice leading role. With it's proximity to Europe, the Europeans really should have taken the lead roll as they did. Don't ask me about the aftermath though.

This is from an e-mail I recieved from Rep. Mike Coffman yesterday.


>" In 2011, President Obama decided to commit U.S. forces to participate in a NATO-led operation to effect a regime change in Libya. He did so without seeking the prior approval of Congress, which I felt was a clear violation of the War Powers Act, since the stated purpose of our intervention was to prevent an impending humanitarian crisis. I was deeply opposed to our involvement because Muammar Gaddafi had been cooperating with the United States in the War on Terror and the violence, that had erupted in Libya, was largely due to tribal tensions. Regime change was accomplished, but the fall of the Libyan government created a vacuum of power that has, in part, been filled by radical Islamists. I fail to see how attacking Libya served the vital security interests of the United States. "<
 
This is from an e-mail I recieved from Rep. Mike Coffman yesterday.


>" In 2011, President Obama decided to commit U.S. forces to participate in a NATO-led operation to effect a regime change in Libya. He did so without seeking the prior approval of Congress, which I felt was a clear violation of the War Powers Act, since the stated purpose of our intervention was to prevent an impending humanitarian crisis. I was deeply opposed to our involvement because Muammar Gaddafi had been cooperating with the United States in the War on Terror and the violence, that had erupted in Libya, was largely due to tribal tensions. Regime change was accomplished, but the fall of the Libyan government created a vacuum of power that has, in part, been filled by radical Islamists. I fail to see how attacking Libya served the vital security interests of the United States. "<

Not such a big deal 'cept the vacuum of power was filled by the wrong people. We should have been there if we were willing to create the vacuum.
 
Not such a big deal 'cept the vacuum of power was filled by the wrong people. We should have been there if we were willing to create the vacuum.

Have you ever read Obama's book "Dreams From My father." ?

I can almost guess who's on Obama's hit list for regime change after Assad is gone.

Like it or not, Gaddafi has been or correctly was an American ally since 2003 on fighting against Al Qaeda. Who do you think was conducting enhanced interrogations of captured Al Qaeda for the CIA ?

Since Obama has refused to capture the Al Qaeda leadership and fighters, Obama had no need for Libya. As a couple of CIA whistle blowers warned back in 2012 that Obama has been working off of the intelligence that was gathered during the Bush administration and that intelligence on Al Qaeda was drying up fast.

The regime change in Libya was all about renegotiating a cheaper contract for Libyan oil. That's why the Frogs and Italy wanted regime change, for cheaper oil.

Obama's reason for regime change in Libya were different. Read "Dreams From My father."
 
Back
Top Bottom