- This topic has 8 voices and 29 replies.
-
Posts
-
Can someone tell me what vital strategic interest is at stake for the US in Libya? Also, wasn't it the Democrats that have spent the last 8 years howling about how America should not be throwing its wait around in the world? I find it curious that they are rushing to start another war with Libya while we are still engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan. As a side note, the text of the actual SC Resolution is not available on their website yet. But apparently, all the news orgs have it already, us peons in the public are not allowed to see it yet.Man, my forthcoming retirement is looking better and better all the time.
they'll find someway to blame Bush for this then they can feel good about themselves.So where are all the anti-war Leftists now?
So where are all the anti-war Leftists now?
Apparently calling for war like the hypocrites they are. I still fail to see to see how a dictator being mean to his people is reason to go to war. Heck, three months ago, Gaddafi was our friend and now we want to bomb him? I also think its curious that the rebels are called the "opposition" and not rebels which is what they actually are. Last time I checked, Gadafi was the legitimate ruler of Libya whether anyone liked it or not.
An interesting article about Why is US backing force in Libya but not Bahrain, Yemen?http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12792637
An interesting article about Why is US backing force in Libya but not Bahrain, Yemen?http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12792637
That is the question, isn't it? Can't we also ask the following? Aren't people who opposed intervention in Iraq now seeking intervention in Libya?
Britain and France have an obvious interest in Libya given how much oil they get from there, the US does not. I just find it extremely curious how hawkish the left has become on this issue. The hypocrisy and missing status of Obama's foreign policy is on full display for the rest of the world in his handling of the various Middle East rebellions right now. That BBC piece points it out quite well. I guess Obama thought he could get away with platitudes instead of a real foreign policy and events are now showing him that platitudes and double-speak cause him to be ignored, not respected. Teddy Roosevelt had the best foreign policy advice any president could ever get when he said, “talk softly and carry a big stick.” The current Administration's policy approach seems to be talk softly and threaten to tell the principal.
War on Libya has started by the French!!Just heard Sarkozy on the radio, what a virile declaration of war! (especially after the "funny" incident involving his foreign affairs minister spending her holidays in Tunisia and thereafter suggesting to send French police forces to crush the mob protesting against Ben Ali)
Latest news I have heard is that British and French jets are involved and Obama has so far only used the Clinton policy of launching Tomahawks. Curiously, Drudge highlighted that Obama used almost the same language to justify intervention in Libya as Bush used to justify Iraq and exactly 8 years apart too.
MARCH 19, 2011OBAMA: 'Today we are part of a broad coalition. We are answering the calls of a threatened people. And we are acting in the interests of the United States and the world'...MARCH 19, 2003BUSH: 'American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger'...
I still have not heard which vital strategic interests we are protecting.
TMO It's all about the opportunity to get rid of Gaddafi once for all and at the same time to try to be in a more favourable position with the new coming powers (Tunisia, Egypt) that succeded to take power from West-tolerated leaders. Probably a warning to other regimes to release more democratic reforms and ensure some kind of regional stability to avoid a worse global crisis (oil crisis like in the 70's)
The real question is how is the west pushing the Security Council for a resolution to rubber stamp what they want to do any different than say, what happened with the LoN Mandates after WWI? Isn't this nothing more than colonialism by another name? I mean really, isn't France, Britain, the US and the rest being a little condescending to the Libyan people in all this? I don't think the powers that be really care about the plight of the Libyan man on the street, the3y just want to assert western power. If hey really cared they would be intervening against oppressive regimes all over the Arab World and not just in Libya. The Yemenis ad Bahrainis are being just as oppressive as Qaddafi but I don't hear any calls for intervention there.Well the text of the UN no-fly resolution is finally up on the UN web site. I have been reading several UN resolutions lately and am becoming more and more convinced that the UN does want to be a world government. I guess I owe Donnie an apology, you are right and the UN should be opposed at every turn.
Good one, One World Government Obama. While I dont agree with everything he says, this part struck me.
Now, I well know that in recent postwar conflicts, we don't have declarations of war. But we have Congressional debates. We have funding votes. We have a sense of the Congress or some kind of resolution.This time, zip. Nada. Nothing. Just France and the U.K. and Norway saying that it's time to go to war, and off America goes to war. And off Mr. and Mrs. Obama go to a South American "fact finding" trip for the POTUS and a fun sightseeing junket for the Obama girls.(I wonder if there has ever before in history been a national leader who sent his country to war -- and the same day went off on vacation. Has that ever happened before? )
My emphasis
