EPTLibyan Uprising - Page 71
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Off topic discussion and argumentative back and forth will not be tolerated. | ||
|
Copymizer
Denmark2101 Posts
| ||
|
Froadac
United States6733 Posts
On March 20 2011 15:32 Copymizer wrote: Denmark in war again again :| wheres germany also? no puppets of the us in this conflict? Germans are tired of bailing out PIGS. (Actually their policy is it doesn't affect us, let's nto screw with it) | ||
|
overt
United States9006 Posts
On March 20 2011 13:19 Disquiet wrote: Anyone who still believes that this intervention is about saving lives is truly naive. That is simply the rhetoric used to justify th UN mandate, to serve the wests interests. Europe doesn't really care about civilians dying. There have been civil wars raging for decades in Africa in which millions and millions die, they make Libyas uprising seem insignificant. And how many dissenters do you think are killed/tortured/imprisoned every year in places like china, burma and North Korea? Why aren't we bombing the military resources of these countries? No, the west only cares about "saving civilians" when it serves their interests. Its doubtful that this intervention will actually end up saving any lives at all with gaddafi using human shields. Now that the world has committed to attacking Libya gaddafi must lose, for if he were to win he could make al-qaeda seem like small fish. It's true that coalition forces don't care if they kill civilians (well, they do care and will minimize causalities but it isn't about "saving lives") however the way they're handling this is fantastic. They'll bomb and destroy key military installations and then allow the rebels to retake the country. The coalition won't even send in ground forces so there likely won't be any casualties on the side of western forces. And the whole reason for this was because the rebels were smart. The rebels took control of oil rich cities, which is why the international community actually got involved as opposed to Tunisia or Yemen or any of the other countries. This is a win-win situation for the UN and the coalition forces. Honestly, Gadhaffi made it so that causalities were unavoidable. Freedom for an entire country of people outweighs causalities that would've occurred anyway. | ||
|
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
On March 20 2011 15:36 Froadac wrote: Germans are tired of bailing out PIGS. (Actually their policy is it doesn't affect us, let's nto screw with it) Guido Westerwelle spoke on the issue today. He opined that a limited military involvement in Libya was illusory, and there will inevitably be civilian casualties as NATO takes the offensive. Non-interference is backed by all German political parties, ahead of the impending state elections. There are no political profits, and unjustifiable political risks in taking a more belligerent stance. | ||
|
Pika Chu
Romania2510 Posts
Right now, we aren't fighting against Gadafi but we are fighting against Libya. Libyans live in Libya. We are fighting against a part of the libyans therefore (considering a part is welcoming this war). We have no clue (from a rational not emotional point of view) how much of the population is against the regime. Then again we have no clue how much of the population who is against the regime also wants this war because they realize they live in a country that's going to be in deep shit for a longer while because of it. If 50% percent of the population is actively/passively against the libyan regime, we are fighting 50% of the libyan population. The military involvement will be full-scaled, a no-fly zone doesn't mean much, which means there will have to be a serious land war to be had with a complete invasion of Libya. More civilians are going to die at the hand of invaders (by mistake, because it's impossible not to) than Gadafi managed to kill in all his life directly or indirectly. The lives of so many will be ruined, war conditions are truly harsh and it may affect you for life. Then, we will conquer the country judge and hang Gadafi. There will be a constant turmoil for a couple of years which we will need to babysit around to protect the population (is why we need to stay in iraq for so long actually) and given the libyan culture and organization of having a tribal system i can see big problems with organizing a democratic regime and putting a government that isn't a puppet of the west and is viewed as legitimate by libyans. Next, there will still be supporters of Gadafi, people with money who supported him, money will go to terrorist organizations. There will be libyans who had their lives destroyed by this war. They will always hate us for it, some will dedicate to revenge. Years later we see big news "Paris subway suicide attack kills hundreds of people". We cry and regret it blaming people who do such actions. Could we have avoided it? Yes we could have. Is it a direct consequence of our actions? Yes it is. So what are we actually accomplishing now? Nothing than bringing more pain, both to libyans and to us. | ||
|
MamiyaOtaru
United States1687 Posts
On March 20 2011 14:26 angeleyes wrote: Doesn't anyone find it strange the USA and its European allies only care about dictators when those dictators run countries which have oil ? that's, like, mindblowing man | ||
KwarK
United States43380 Posts
On March 20 2011 16:31 Pika Chu wrote: Let's put this another way. Right now, we aren't fighting against Gadafi but we are fighting against Libya. Libyans live in Libya. We are fighting against a part of the libyans therefore (considering a part is welcoming this war). We have no clue (from a rational not emotional point of view) how much of the population is against the regime. Then again we have no clue how much of the population who is against the regime also wants this war because they realize they live in a country that's going to be in deep shit for a longer while because of it. If 50% percent of the population is actively/passively against the libyan regime, we are fighting 50% of the libyan population. The military involvement will be full-scaled, a no-fly zone doesn't mean much, which means there will have to be a serious land war to be had with a complete invasion of Libya. More civilians are going to die at the hand of invaders (by mistake, because it's impossible not to) than Gadafi managed to kill in all his life directly or indirectly. The lives of so many will be ruined, war conditions are truly harsh and it may affect you for life. Then, we will conquer the country judge and hang Gadafi. There will be a constant turmoil for a couple of years which we will need to babysit around to protect the population (is why we need to stay in iraq for so long actually) and given the libyan culture and organization of having a tribal system i can see big problems with organizing a democratic regime and putting a government that isn't a puppet of the west and is viewed as legitimate by libyans. Next, there will still be supporters of Gadafi, people with money who supported him, money will go to terrorist organizations. There will be libyans who had their lives destroyed by this war. They will always hate us for it, some will dedicate to revenge. Years later we see big news "Paris subway suicide attack kills hundreds of people". We cry and regret it blaming people who do such actions. Could we have avoided it? Yes we could have. Is it a direct consequence of our actions? Yes it is. So what are we actually accomplishing now? Nothing than bringing more pain, both to libyans and to us. All of which is better than inaction. | ||
|
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
Agreed. Action is the affirmation of life itself. Blindly though we walk forth, and whether it be into heaven or off a cliff, at least we will be able to boast that we got there on our own two legs. | ||
|
mdb
Bulgaria4059 Posts
| ||
acker
United States2958 Posts
It's amazing how old some of the guns used by the rebellion are. Seriously, Sten Mark IIIs were made 60-70 years ago, and they're still in use over there... | ||
|
Pika Chu
Romania2510 Posts
| ||
Kipsate
Netherlands45349 Posts
On March 20 2011 16:56 Pika Chu wrote: It really is Kwark? Just because we want to sit on our couch and watch the war on television and cheering for our military just as watching a football match? War as entertainment, we feel it's a game, bombs thrown, bullets, tomahawks launched which make for nice pictures. I hope people who think so never get to experience a real war. People who fought in wars hate it more than anything else. I don't think he means that we watch it on the Tv as an entertainment with a can of beer like you are implying, what he means that it is better to do something about the violence there then nothing at all. | ||
|
Pika Chu
Romania2510 Posts
Kipsate i am strongly unconvinced that violence can be stopped with more violence. | ||
|
Kipsate
Netherlands45349 Posts
On March 20 2011 16:56 Pika Chu wrote: It really is Kwark? Just because we want to sit on our couch and watch the war on television and cheering for our military just as watching a football match? War as entertainment, we feel it's a game, bombs thrown, bullets, tomahawks launched which make for nice pictures. [ else. It kind of looked like you were implying it. Also, violence, most of the time can not be solved by anything but violence itself. | ||
|
furymonkey
New Zealand1587 Posts
Edit: Lets modify all the guns to shoot out flowers instead of bullets. Drop bombs made out of cream filled chocolate on top of enemy position, only then, the violence will stop! | ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
On March 20 2011 17:11 furymonkey wrote: Nah Pika Chu is right, we should approach all murders with open arms, we will use our heart and passion to win them over. And they will use our hearts as trophies. There are those who will only respond to force, Might makes right that hold true to this day, the only difference is in our societies our might is a section of the population to trys to make sure no one else uses it as a way to get things, we give understand as a population that we do need to let groups of people use force to stop those who would use force to harm us in general. Without police what makes contracts any valid? only the guns you hire to hunt down and mame or kill anyone who voids the contract, you don't have civil nations without force to back up their beliefs in general non violence, else any smuck with half an army can walk all over your beliefs and do what ever he wants what you gonna do about it? What you gonna do complain out against them try to build support against them? cool get 90% of the population hating them but it only takes the 10% with machine guns and tanks to walk all over that 90% into submission, maybe while they are at it they'll just kill ever leader families and then cripple them as a show. | ||
|
Pika Chu
Romania2510 Posts
On March 20 2011 17:11 furymonkey wrote: Nah Pika Chu is right, we should approach all murders with open arms, we will use our heart and passion to win them over. Edit: Lets modify all the guns to shoot out flowers instead of bullets. Drop bombs made out of cream filled chocolate on top of enemy position, only then, the violence will stop!  cheap jokes are all you can think of?The idea is, as i exposed in previous posts, that even if we may be doing some good, we're definitely doing more bad on the way. It's like killing 5 humans so one can live. | ||
|
furymonkey
New Zealand1587 Posts
Whichever the case here, it is really a personal opinion, especially we are still yet to see the outcome. And it might take years before we can even decide. | ||
|
zalz
Netherlands3704 Posts
West goes in to help, people take a shit on the west and we have lost millions if not billions when this is all over. There seem to be very few people that really care about the Libyan people, a good chunk would gladly see the citizens of Libya get mowed down rather then have them be protected by a UN intervention. We should not have gone in there, no matter how you sell it, no matter how many corrupt middle-eastern dictators stand in the photo-op, people will blame the west for damn well everything. Can't wait till China becomes the superpower, then we in the west can start invading everything we see and blame China and people will actually accept that we have no responsibility at all over our own actions. Ooh to live a life without responsibility, to always blame "The west" or "The american Satan", how grand that must be. | ||
|
Ganondorf
Italy600 Posts
| ||
| ||
