Jump to content

Libya


Joe
 Share

Recommended Posts

The other point is this: if Qadaffi goes, what do you get next? The people of Iran got rid of the Shah and ended up with a fundamentalist Islamic regime. I don't think too many were chuffed with that result. The asumption that getting rid of a dictator assures a smooth transition to a functioning democratic regime is naive in the extreme. Dare I mention Iraq?

Patrick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not the same as Iraq, as a previous poster trying to draw similarities maybe thinks..

You have a country who's population wants change.at this point the international community is just preventing a dictator killing thousands of civilians who want rid of him...

In my opinion, once the threat has been removed, which has pretty much happened now, there should be a kind of level playing field for them to fight it out between themselves. I'm fairly confident there will be no ground invasion which would then lead to the same mess as we have in iraq and afghanistan.

The US has made it quite clear they are not up for it, and as they are the ones who usually storm into places uninvited and then drag the rest of an unwilling nato into some unwinnable situation, I think UK and France + rest will be able to deal with this in the way it was intended, to ensure protection of civilian population from a lunatic with a bigger box of matches....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the other hand Q, perhaps had the British not got involved in WW2, there would have been far less people killed. I'm not saying what the west is doing in Libya is right (they perhaps should have taken Gadaffi out when they bombed Tripoli over 20 years ago, although someone else would have replaced him), and it's interesting how Mugabe did similar things in Zim and the west did nothing about that. Not convinced oil is the reason, there's not a great deal in Libya, and there's none at all in Afghanistan if people are using that as an excuse to go to war.

I think this will all be over within a month.

And it was the Greeks who invented democracy, not the English ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firstly, how do we know the country wants change, because we are told so by the western press, the likes of the BBC for example. What we have seen is several thousand demonstrators that then armed themselves and and are now called rebels. Nobody knows for sure how many actually want change in terms of a percentage of the people that live there. Voluntary human shields, we all assume they are forced to be there but are they, how do we know. The film I saw and I studied the body language did not show them as being terrified people who had been forced, perhaps they are happy to be there (they looked happy enough) and did come of their own free will, who know's?

Gaddafi was born in to the Gaddadfa tribe, Arabised Berbers and can't find anything about his parents other than they were both members of that tribe although I am willing to be corrected.

Richard, perhaps if the UK had got involved in Germany much sooner things would have been different. The Germans were practicing forced euthanasia on mentally handicapped people before the war as were they were also sterilising others with physical deformities. Just like the murder's carried out during the Holocaust the UK government knew what was going on and did nothing, as did the Americans who were one of the sources of the information.

With regards to Libya, I think we jumped too soon but on the other hand did we have a choice, if you are protecting a group of people, the longer you wait the more die. Then there is the claim that we are not after Gaddafi, bit strange that when a cruise missile just blew up his home. Accurate to within two metres they say so I can't believe this was an accident. Why as many others have pointed out, with all the other countries where people either killed each or other or are still doing so do we just limit ourselves to Libya. Also what about protecting the other Libyans from the 'rebels', don't they have human rights as well?

Now they are talking about sending humanitarian aid to the people, how much is this going to cost. Here we have a government that is cutting health, public services, police and military to try and pay back this £4.2 trillion debt and yet we can find money for this. As Thatcher said and I paraphrase a bit, ask any woman who runs the house, when the purse is empty (and the credit card maxed out) you have no more money to spend, it's basic economics yet the Tories, like Labour, seem intent of spending money we don't have and leaving it to the tax payer to foot the bill.

It's not our fight, we don't have the money, if others want to get involved then great but leave us out of it. Think about all this when the next bomb goes off in major UK city because here we are again killing Muslims and we wonder why they don't like us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I usually watch Al Jazeerha news rather than the BBC, but actually don't trust journalists.

As I said, there has been a lot of nonsense these last few weeks and journalists seem to like to thrill and/or scare without the actual truth getting in the way too much. No, I do not have much good to say about that part of the profession that goes into 'news' gathering.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Quillan"]

With regards to Libya, I think we jumped too soon but on the other hand did we have a choice, if you are protecting a group of people, the longer you wait the more die. Then there is the claim that we are not after Gaddafi, bit strange that when a cruise missile just blew up his home. Accurate to within two metres they say so I can't believe this was an accident. Why as many others have pointed out, with all the other countries whAlso what about protecting the other Libyans from the 'rebels', don't they have human rights as well?ere people either killed each or other or are still doing so do we just limit ourselves to Libya. Now they are talking about sending humanitarian aid to the people, how much is this going to cost. Here we have a government that is cutting health, public services, police and military to try and pay back this £4.2 trillion debt and yet we can find money for this. As Thatcher said and I paraphrase a bit, ask any woman who runs the house, when the purse is empty (and the credit card maxed out) you have no more money to spend, it's basic economics yet the Tories, like Labour, seem intent of spending money we don't have and leaving it to the tax payer to foot the bill.

It's not our fight, we don't have the money, if others want to get involved then great but leave us out of it. Think about all this when the next bomb goes off in major UK city because here we are again killing Muslims and we wonder why they don't like us.

[/quote]

I thought the Thatcher "household" economic arguement had been totally, and utterly, proven false and only economic simpletons couldn't see through it to realise how stupid it really is.

I'll try again. Govn borrowing , and therefore debt, is merely a function of ability to pay interest. The capital is irrelevant as it is rolled over to a future borrowing requirement. No debt collectetrs, no bailiffs, no credit card being declined, no repossession. I'd give Japan as the example of what can be acheived by an OECD country! Cost goes up marginally, but the ball will always keep rolling. But, hey#ho the Tories and their Brit media mates can scare the pants off the people, and do lots of nasty things to lots of people. (but not the pensioners, and rich, who vote for them.)

The big figure you quote is the total sum of all the future promises the "baby-boomers", have generously given themselves, loading the cost onto their children and grandchildren. You have my gratitude. In this instance I'd give you France as an outstanding of what can be acheived by an OECD country!

I am a pacifist and a liberal. I find it outragous that we in the rich, powerful OECD countries, could sit idle letting people die through our inaction claiming "We can't afford it". It is a morally bankrupt arguement to a question that is merely requires a moral answer.

Plus The Dwarf needs the votes. He came badly 3rd. He needs to appear macho against the one issue woman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the government does not have any money it merely collects tax's, that's it's income. If it's spending is more than it's income it borrows money and the people are left to pay it back. The interest alone could be spent on things like the NHS for example as that's 'the thing' at the moment. Who is the 'security' on the debt, us the tax payer. It's not rocket science irregardless of what economists say, its simple. Wouldn't it be nice if we could get away with it as individuals, borrow next doors credit card, max it out and let them pay it back for thats what Labour did. The 'baby boomers' never told the government to borrow the money and spend it and that they were quite happy to pay it back. Of course people in the financial industry would be more than happy for the UK to keep borrowing money and pay the interest. As to debt collectors etc your right they won't come knocking at the door but the CEB but more likely, as we are not in the Euro the IMF will and what they will tell you to do is reduce spending in the public sector, devalue the currency and more just like they did under Wilson, Callaghan and Healey in 76. We have been there before and it's not nice. We could also see our credit rating drop as well, mind you that would give the people who lent us the money a kick up the bottom.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever the arguments what it comes down to is this: we are once again meddling in the internal affairs of another country, and, just like Iraq, we have no idea how this will all end. If we are really concerned about human suffering, there have been plenty of occasions in the recent past when we could have taken action to save lives, but have done nothing.

No, the intervention in Iraq is nothing but hypocrisy and dirty politics - as usual.

Patrick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="bixy"]Whatever the arguments what it comes down to is this: we are once again meddling in the internal affairs of another country, and, just like Iraq, we have no idea how this will all end. If we are really concerned about human suffering, there have been plenty of occasions in the recent past when we could have taken action to save lives, but have done nothing.

No, the intervention in Iraq is nothing but hypocrisy and dirty politics - as usual.

Patrick
[/quote]

I take it in the last line you meant Libya, if so I couldn't agree more. I also am a strong believer of pulling our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan.

I forgot to add that I also believe that Blair should be tried as a war criminal as should Bush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="bixy"]Whatever the arguments what it comes down to is this: we are once again meddling in the internal affairs of another country, and, just like Iraq, we have no idea how this will all end. If we are really concerned about human suffering, there have been plenty of occasions in the recent past when we could have taken action to save lives, but have done nothing.

No, the intervention in Iraq is nothing but hypocrisy and dirty politics - as usual.

Patrick
[/quote]

Maybe some politicians have grown some cojones and understand that the world is interlinked. Regime change in Tunisia means hundreds of thousands of the nastier type of supporters of the previous regime coming to France. They have family here and speak French. Civil war in Libya leads to a mass murder in Benghazi. It must be stopped. 

This is the first time the UN has interferred in an internal national dispute. Even an unholy alliance of China, Russia and Germany didn't want to stop the mandate being accepted. Maybe, just maybe, this what the UN should have being doing for the last 70 years. Maybe, just maybe, politicians can act with some honesty at last. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="breizh"]

This is the first time the UN has interferred in an internal national dispute. Even an unholy alliance of China, Russia and Germany didn't want to stop the mandate being accepted. Maybe, just maybe, this what the UN should have being doing for the last 70 years. Maybe, just maybe, politicians can act with some honesty at last. 

[/quote]

here here !!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a believer in troops leaving Iraq, but not Afghanistan. I believe that we should be there. I argue a lot with my Dad about this.

I fear the consequences of leaving Afghanistan. Whilst they are fighting 'us' there and there are a few casualites, I imagine that if we left they would regroup and we would have terrorism and carnage in the West that would make 7/7 and 9/11 look like small incidents.

Staying feels the best policy to me.

We should however be eradicating those poppy fields and making sure that they realise that even if we did leave any sign of poppy cultivation would be destroyed immediately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="idun"]

We should however be eradicating those poppy fields and making sure that they realise that even if we did leave any sign of poppy cultivation would be destroyed immediately.[/quote]

nothing like a little naivity, and by the way I agree with you,

tons of opium is flown into russia and china on US flights ,

Clinton started the period of efforts to destabalise russia particularly,alchohol and drugs are both ideal weapons, flights arrive in russia under US flag on planes purporting to be "aid" and under current agreements is not subject to customs control.

so they have no intention of getting rid of it, otherwise it would have gone by now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Over 2 months down the line and the country is still getting bombed every night , not bad for enforcing a no fly zone which they said they had achieved after 2 days ?

Now they are sending in the apaches ,  I knew this was going to be a "cowboy" event

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="krusty"]

Over 2 months down the line and the country is still getting bombed every night , not bad for enforcing a no fly zone which they said they had achieved after 2 days ?

Now they are sending in the apaches ,  I knew this was going to be a "cowboy" event

[/quote]

Yes, sadly, very sadly, you can see where this is likely to end up. As the door on Iraq finally closes another is about to open. For a start it's 'just over the road', pointless sending all those troops, tanks etc back home only for them to have to come back. When will these people learn, never probably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 'Arab Problem' would probably not exist if Kemal Attaturk had not been so opposed by the British.

I would suggest to you all to read 'The Shock Doctrine' by Naoimi Klein to get an insight into how the West and big business is carving the world up for profit.

I cannot understand why the English do not rise up, they are treated in many ways in a similar manner to the way the despots and royals in the middle east treat the population.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Quillan"]

[quote user="bixy"]Whatever the arguments what it comes down to is this: we are once again meddling in the internal affairs of another country, and, just like Iraq, we have no idea how this will all end. If we are really concerned about human suffering, there have been plenty of occasions in the recent past when we could have taken action to save lives, but have done nothing.

No, the intervention in Iraq is nothing but hypocrisy and dirty politics - as usual.

Patrick
[/quote]

I take it in the last line you meant Libya, if so I couldn't agree more. I also am a strong believer of pulling our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan.

I forgot to add that I also believe that Blair should be tried as a war criminal as should Bush.

[/quote]

Yes Q - despite the fine words and crocodile tears of the politicians for the "Libyan people," this conflict is about oil, (no country has rushed to the aid of Mugabe's victims - no oil at stake).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...