|
Off topic discussion and argumentative back and forth will not be tolerated. |
On March 20 2011 05:27 Marradron wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 05:23 Aurocaido wrote:
That depends on what your definition of justice is. If it is launching a war against Libya based on unsubstantiated reports of civilian 'massacres' while it is in the process of fighting an internal civil war, then I guess it is just. I would call it suppresion of the right of people to show their anger of the regime. The moment ghadafi started using military and hirelings to kill demostrating people he commited a crime against humanity. Hardly a civil war of one side has the army and starts bombing citys
What about the right of Libyan sovereignty? Libya should have the right to determine its own future, whether that be a western democratic future or something else. The right to decide that should rest with the Libyan people.
If the rebellion truely encompassed the majority of the civilian support Gadaffi would be unable to hold power. As seen by the numerous pro Gadaffi rallies and the choice of civilians to act as human sheilds for specific infrastructure is a testament to the lack of support the rebels enjoy within Libya.
|
On March 20 2011 05:33 Hans-Titan wrote:
From Denmark: Parliament had unanimous consent to send planes and troops to aid the UN's mission in Lybia. Unanimity has never before occurred when dealing with military questions in Denmark, but the government made promises regarding Lybian sovereignty and oil reserves that made the far left wing support it.
Total force deployed is 6 F-16 fighters, 1 military transport aircraft and a crew for each, 7 in total. If the conflict escalates into a ground war it is very likely that more troops will be committed, especially seeing as the sitting NATO Sec.Gen. is a former Danish PM, who is still popular in Denmark.
Usually military action by Denmark is met with calls to protest, but everything is quiet. A wide majority of the population seems to support the action taken. Calls to 'party for democracy' - throwing street parties in front of the embassies of middle-eastern dictatorships - are widely circulating however.
A military intervention I support - didn't think I'd live to see the day.
Also, thanks to {CC}StealthBlue: I don't now how many conflict/political threads you've been doing live updating for, but I really appreciate it.
Are you saying that if Libya became something of a ground war Denmark would consider sending ground troops?
|
I really don't see why the USA has to be involved in this. One mistake does not warrant another. We're wasting enough lives and money in Afghanistan and Iraq. Should sit this one out and let the UK and France handle this.
|
On March 20 2011 05:27 Marradron wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 05:23 Aurocaido wrote:
That depends on what your definition of justice is. If it is launching a war against Libya based on unsubstantiated reports of civilian 'massacres' while it is in the process of fighting an internal civil war, then I guess it is just. I would call it suppresion of the right of people to show their anger of the regime. The moment ghadafi started using military and hirelings to kill demostrating people he commited a crime against humanity. Hardly a civil war of one side has the army and starts bombing citys
How do you know it's the right people? The libyan authorities (stop believing libya=gadafi) used military to disperse the protesters, that's what happened in hundreds of cases. I strongly disagree with their methods and condemn them for it, but i don't see how declaring a war and libya and destroying the country and the lives of much more civilians is just.
|
On March 20 2011 05:33 Blanke wrote:
General Cortney seems pretty tight-lipped about anything that doesn't involve "critical nodes." I don't who he's trying to fool with not discussing "future operations;" we all know the attacks are going to continue next week.
Discussing future military operations in public is normally a terrible idea, no matter what your political leanings are. I'm a liberal and I understand that much.
|
On March 20 2011 05:27 Marradron wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 05:23 Aurocaido wrote:
That depends on what your definition of justice is. If it is launching a war against Libya based on unsubstantiated reports of civilian 'massacres' while it is in the process of fighting an internal civil war, then I guess it is just. I would call it suppresion of the right of people to show their anger of the regime. The moment ghadafi started using military and hirelings to kill demostrating people he commited a crime against humanity. Hardly a civil war of one side has the army and starts bombing citys
Under such moral circumstances as are prevalent in Libya, it's really academic as to who "threw the first punch," but let me remind you that protests turned violent before the Libyan government implemented crowd-dispersal measures, and national revolt declared before the government took military measures. The slowness of the government reaction and the initial ability of the revolt to seize a large portion of the country suggests that the government's response was improvised, reacting to events beyond its control.
|
On March 20 2011 05:31 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 05:23 Aurocaido wrote:
That depends on what your definition of justice is. If it is launching a war against Libya based on unsubstantiated reports of civilian 'massacres' while it is in the process of fighting an internal civil war, then I guess it is just.
Edit: This is nothing short of a declaration of war, plain and simple. Please read the reports from day 1 (17th February). Thank you. If we call reports by agents of Reuters, FPA, Al-Jazeera and various media "unsubstantiated"... then I guess we don't know much about the world in the end.
The status of a media outlet does not determine whether their reports are substantiated or not.
Edit: Please keep your pretentious 'thankyous' to yourself.
|
I hope you all understand that only reason west is doing this is oil, right? All wars in history started cause of need for resources.
My country ,Serbia received same treatment in 99's cause of Kosovo, USA wanted to get near Russia, they offered same ultimatum...
|
On March 20 2011 05:33 acker wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 05:31 Grettin wrote:On March 20 2011 05:29 acker wrote:On March 20 2011 05:27 Grettin wrote:On March 20 2011 05:25 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Pentagon spokesperson: 110 cruise missiles launched from coalition vessels at targets in #Libya Yep, US started to burn some money. Around half a million per missile. Probably costs a hundred times that for a plane and a pilot. And a civilian is worth around 8 million dollars over his lifetime. Well, in the United States. Not sure how much a Libyan is worth in economic terms. These missiles are launched from a cruiser or submarine, so no need for a plane and a pilot. "Cruise missile" as they are called. Err...what in my post are you replying to? We're on completely different tangents, I think. I'm saying that we're burning a lot of money on cruise missiles to make sure we don't lose even more money on pilots. And that civilian lives are also worth a lot.
Yes, i edited my post after i wasn't sure are we talking about the same thing. Sorry, my bad!
You are totally right though.
|
Spain?
Military forces from Canada, Spain and Denmark are on their way to bases in #Italy to "enforce" the UN's no-fly zone. #Libya #Gaddafi #Feb17
|
On March 20 2011 05:14 Pika Chu wrote:
Unless Gaddafi is getting betrayed by army (and i doubt since the country is under foreign aggression) i don't believe we can end this without a full scale invasion.
Ghadaffi has very few loyal men. A big chunk of his army is composed of mercenaries and I doubt they want to commit suicide. If things turn ugly, they'll just leave to another country where there is a more profitable and less famous conflict.
He actually kept a weak army to avoid being challenged by any tribe/army leader. He mainly relies on his own militia (and even among them, a whole battalion defected at the very beginning).
|
Confirmation of tomahawk missile launch, and name of operation:
A US military chief says a total of 110 Tomahawk missiles have been launched against Libyan sites. He said the Coalition operation has been named Odyssey Dawn.
|
On March 20 2011 05:37 Aurocaido wrote:
The status of a media outlet does not determine whether their reports are substantiated or not.
Edit: Please keep your pretentious 'thankyous' to yourself.
There aren't many other sources for our medias. There are only 5 press agencies all over the world; just wanted to point that out.
On March 20 2011 05:39 asmgrad wrote:
I hope you all understand that only reason west is doing this is oil, right? All wars in history started cause of need for resources.
My country ,Serbia received same treatment in 99's cause of Kosovo, USA wanted to get near Russia, they offered same ultimatum...
And, again, no it's not about the oil, oil production in Libya is minimal in comparison to other sources. There are many other factors but you could find them by yourself with a quick google search.
|
On March 20 2011 05:35 red4ce wrote:
I really don't see why the USA has to be involved in this. One mistake does not warrant another. We're wasting enough lives and money in Afghanistan and Iraq. Should sit this one out and let the UK and France handle this.
In order to fully impose a no-fly zone and the additional measures authorized by the UNSC resolution the United States has to be involved, the UK and France, even with the help of all the arab league don't have the resources to do it all by themselves.
The UK is also quite heavily involved in Afghanistan and elsewhere, the US isn't the only country fighting a war at the moment.
|
Libyan press conference happening.
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
On March 20 2011 05:44 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Libyan press conference happening.
Opposition or Gadafhi?
|
|
|
Libyan state news agency Jana reports that ambulances were rushing to transport "civilian casualties" in Tripoli after Western forces bombarded areas of the city, says Reuters. The report could not be independently verified.
|
On March 20 2011 05:44 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 05:37 Aurocaido wrote:
The status of a media outlet does not determine whether their reports are substantiated or not.
Edit: Please keep your pretentious 'thankyous' to yourself. There aren't many other sources for our medias. There are only 5 press agencies all over the world; just wanted to point that out. Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 05:39 asmgrad wrote:
I hope you all understand that only reason west is doing this is oil, right? All wars in history started cause of need for resources.
My country ,Serbia received same treatment in 99's cause of Kosovo, USA wanted to get near Russia, they offered same ultimatum... And, again, no it's not about the oil, oil production in Libya is minimal in comparison to other sources. There are many other factors but you could find them by yourself with a quick google search.
Exactly which is why it needs to be taken with a grain of salt. To assume that claims are substantiated and fully truthful because of the internation prestige of news source is folly.
Libya is the 10th? (correct me if I am wrong) producer of oil in the world. Not only that it required minimal refinment and is a very high quality crude. Hardly a minimal amount.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
