Jump to content


Photo

Libya


  • Please log in to reply
118 replies to this topic

#21 azileea

azileea

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 100 posts
  • LocationFinland

Posted 22 March 2011 - 05:24 PM

The West should not interfere too much, ---. Its a fine balance between doing too little or too much. The West can't go round the world fighting peoples battles for them, where will it all end ???

Yeah, finding the balance is very difficult.

There has been news that NATO is interested in Sweden and Finland's role and possible participation. It seems to me weird that what would we have to offer (I'm from Finland) when there's already the Allies, The UK, France, The US. Sure, if we can help save lifes, then yes we should help but it just seems that what we could do that they already can't? And I'm not saying that it's the bigger countries' responsibility to do these things since we have participated building peace in many countries but since they're already there. The only thing we could gain (if we don't count saving lives since the Allies can do that without us) is the experience for the soldiers etc. which to me seems kind of lame reason to go.

Anyway, I hope that this crisis would be over soon so the killings would end and the rebuilding could begin.

#22 Comrade Chris

Comrade Chris

    Advanced Member

  • Earth
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,260 posts
  • LocationProbably in the woods

Posted 22 March 2011 - 05:34 PM

NATO need all the allies they can get, so they can take over the Mission Control from the US, i believe they need 28 NATO territories to back the No-Fly zone before the US hands over the control...


#23 The Midnight Q

The Midnight Q

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,444 posts
  • Mood::giggidy
  • LocationQuahog, RI

Posted 22 March 2011 - 06:26 PM

Considering but unlikely. The coalition only launched an air campaign to maintain air superiority against Gadaffi's military, any ground operations are supposed to be dealt by the rebels. We're only there to ensure Gadaffi isn't committing atrocities against his own people. He used his air force to attack the rebels and protesting civilians; that's what prompted international intervention (France was already involved before this point).

And I agree on the handover. The US is the largest contributor machine and manpower-wise, NATO needs to come up with enough forces to compensate before the US can back off.

Edited by sirbenedictvs, 22 March 2011 - 06:28 PM.

Posted Image
~Thanks Jade~

#24 Comrade Chris

Comrade Chris

    Advanced Member

  • Earth
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,260 posts
  • LocationProbably in the woods

Posted 22 March 2011 - 06:41 PM

Considering but unlikely. The coalition only launched an air campaign to maintain air superiority against Gadaffi's military, any ground operations are supposed to be dealt by the rebels. We're only there to ensure Gadaffi isn't committing atrocities against his own people. He used his air force to attack the rebels and protesting civilians; that's what prompted international intervention (France was already involved before this point).

And I agree on the handover. The US is the largest contributor machine and manpower-wise, NATO needs to come up with enough forces to compensate before the US can back off.



on the troops subject, im only reporting what BBC news have been saying, as well as The House of Commons' debates.

Edited by Reznov, 22 March 2011 - 06:42 PM.


#25 The Midnight Q

The Midnight Q

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,444 posts
  • Mood::giggidy
  • LocationQuahog, RI

Posted 23 March 2011 - 02:34 AM

on the troops subject, im only reporting what BBC news have been saying, as well as The House of Commons' debates.


I highly doubt the British government will deploy ground forces to Libya. They no longer have British nationals in country and there the current objectives of this campaign does not call for conventional ground forces. I would not be surprised however if SAS troops are operating in country however I doubt any information on that would be made public.

Edited by sirbenedictvs, 23 March 2011 - 02:34 AM.

Posted Image
~Thanks Jade~

#26 Comrade Chris

Comrade Chris

    Advanced Member

  • Earth
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,260 posts
  • LocationProbably in the woods

Posted 23 March 2011 - 04:35 PM

i dont think our ground forces will be deployed, we havent got enough to deal with Afgan and Libya


#27 ckravitz

ckravitz

    Devoted Member

  • Fire
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,543 posts
  • LocationSouthern Florida

Posted 23 March 2011 - 05:42 PM

I highly doubt the British government will deploy ground forces to Libya. They no longer have British nationals in country and there the current objectives of this campaign does not call for conventional ground forces. I would not be surprised however if SAS troops are operating in country however I doubt any information on that would be made public.

I agree, I doubt there will be any ground forces, but the SAS is most likely very present in Libya

Sisters: Jade, Kimberley, Ellen, Stef, Sarah Brothers: Ardi


#28 Comrade Chris

Comrade Chris

    Advanced Member

  • Earth
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,260 posts
  • LocationProbably in the woods

Posted 23 March 2011 - 05:52 PM

aparrantly SAS/SBS were operating in Libya weeks before OdesseyDawn began, to pinpoint targets

Edited by Reznov, 23 March 2011 - 05:53 PM.


#29 Ant

Ant

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 32 posts
  • LocationMoscow

Posted 27 March 2011 - 05:34 PM

You really think that murder of civilians is the help? I give you a valuable advice, cease to look news, in them there is no truth.
In my opinion of Kadafi has simply decided to raise the prices for oil
And who buys oil from Libya? Correctly! Italy, Germany, Spain and France.
And who has decided to help insurgents? Italy, Germany, Spain and France. What coincidence... And France helps most actively. In the first day of bombardment 4 tanks and 2 cars with civilians have been destroyed.
I simply am surprised that you think that help! So in what your help consists!? You speak that insurgents never could dethrone Kadafi, at them bad arms. Ridiculously! I will give an example
1917год in Russia dethrone Nikolay 2. To Russian people nobody helped to dethrone the tsar. If it is bad to all people to live at any mode that it can spend revolution though with penknives.
I don't support your so-called help. You interfere with affairs of the sovereign state, not because of that what to help peace citizens, and because of the avidity and feeling of impunity. We will admit in France revolution here Russia begins declares that wants to help the peace population of France and enters the armies. What your reaction!? I doubt that to whom that of you it will be pleasant. All will start to shout that that of type "АААА an empire of evil! 3 world!!!"
I think quite have developed the opinion.
Posted Image

#30 Comrade Chris

Comrade Chris

    Advanced Member

  • Earth
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,260 posts
  • LocationProbably in the woods

Posted 27 March 2011 - 05:55 PM

first of all, the coalition are using missiles that minimize civilian casulties, and Col Gaddafi has had the entire of Libya under his thumb for the past 40 years or so, now that there is means for military action against him and his regime, we have used this opportunity to the full extent, aiding the rebels, and destroying the regimes armaments. if we dont intervene then the mass murder of civilians by gaddafi's forces would begin, i think the right decision has been made by the UN. oh and by the way we are actions are fully backed by the UN RtoP.


#31 The Midnight Q

The Midnight Q

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,444 posts
  • Mood::giggidy
  • LocationQuahog, RI

Posted 27 March 2011 - 06:03 PM

You really think that murder of civilians is the help? I give you a valuable advice, cease to look news, in them there is no truth.


And pay attention to who? The opposition? Surely don't believe everything on the news networks. Do your own research but this is total conspiracy crap.

In my opinion of Kadafi has simply decided to raise the prices for oil
And who buys oil from Libya? Correctly! Italy, Germany, Spain and France.
And who has decided to help insurgents? Italy, Germany, Spain and France. What coincidence... And France helps most actively. In the first day of bombardment 4 tanks and 2 cars with civilians have been destroyed.


Germany and Spain have expressed their opinions on the matter but made no significant action. They've got problems on their own. It's sad that civilians become collateral damage when any sort of military action is taken. But the truth of the matter is, it happens and there's not really much to prevent such things from happening. Most of the time they're accidents. Coalition jets can't see the difference between a uniformed soldier and a civilian from 10,000ft.

I simply am surprised that you think that help! So in what your help consists!? You speak that insurgents never could dethrone Kadafi, at them bad arms. Ridiculously! I will give an example
1917год in Russia dethrone Nikolay 2. To Russian people nobody helped to dethrone the tsar. If it is bad to all people to live at any mode that it can spend revolution though with penknives.


Sure any sort of insurgency will face major difficulties when launching a rebellion against a far superior government. Some rebellions are successful with outside help, others need outside help. If you take a look at the American Rebellion in the better half of the 18th century, the Americans would've lost if it wasn't for France sending military and monetary aid. This in turn influenced the French Revolution (ironically, France was bankrupt from the American Revolution)

When it comes to Col. Gadaffi using his air force to suppress seemingly peaceful protests, that's when the gloves came off any full on combat starts. France was already in the process of aiding the rebellion but the rest of the Western Nations didn't step in until Gadaffi's murder of civilians started. Would you want this to become another Kurdistan? Another Bosnia? Another Rwanda?

I don't support your so-called help.


Good, you don't have to. And by "you", who are you referring to exactly?

You interfere with affairs of the sovereign state, not because of that what to help peace citizens, and because of the avidity and feeling of impunity.


Sovereign state? Haha, the country of Libya may be it's own state but it's hardly sovereign when it's one guy that basically considers himself God.

We will admit in France revolution here Russia begins declares that wants to help the peace population of France and enters the armies. What your reaction!? I doubt that to whom that of you it will be pleasant. All will start to shout that that of type "АААА an empire of evil! 3 world!!!"
I think quite have developed the opinion.


The truth of the matter is, this is the 21st century. The world operates on a global scale now. Whatever happens to one country greatly affects the rest of the world. When that happens the rest of the world does not want to stand by and let such things happen, whether its for the good of the people of a troubled nation or the good of their own.
Posted Image
~Thanks Jade~

#32 Comrade Chris

Comrade Chris

    Advanced Member

  • Earth
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,260 posts
  • LocationProbably in the woods

Posted 27 March 2011 - 06:06 PM

^ couldnt've said it better myself!


#33 Ant

Ant

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 32 posts
  • LocationMoscow

Posted 27 March 2011 - 06:28 PM

Yes, to argue with you it is useless.
Well we will give an example Iraq have found there weapons of mass destruction? No.
As and with Libya you "the all-powerful" NATO doesn't want to help civilians, the reason of intervention oil. All in this world turns round oil. Rescue of civilians the purpose noble, but it is reached absolutely not by noble actions. On me of NATO time has rushed to the aid that land operations would bring much less victims than bombardment, let even the aim.
So to you to listen to the NATO warm and fuzzy.
Don't consider as deviation from a theme, simply wanted to ask for a long time already. How you think armed forces of Georgia has attacked Ossetia and have shot the Russian peacemakers or all has occurred on the contrary? The Russian peacemakers have shot the Georgian military men?
Posted Image

#34 Comrade Chris

Comrade Chris

    Advanced Member

  • Earth
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,260 posts
  • LocationProbably in the woods

Posted 27 March 2011 - 07:13 PM

we all know this is about the oil, so, ha!


#35 The Midnight Q

The Midnight Q

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,444 posts
  • Mood::giggidy
  • LocationQuahog, RI

Posted 27 March 2011 - 07:44 PM

Yes, to argue with you it is useless.
Well we will give an example Iraq have found there weapons of mass destruction? No.


Again with the WMDs... Saddam's Iraq did indeed possess WMDs. How do I know this? The United States has the bill of sale of such weapons to Sadddam Insane during the Iran-Iraq War. He used the weapons against Iranian troops, to end the 10 year war. Not to mention, he used chemical weapons against his own people. He used them in the mid-90s on the Kurds in Northern Iraq, killing an estimated 300,000 people. Whether or not he had weapons during the time of the invasion, who knows. I can tell you however that Saddam neither confirmed or denied possessing WMDs in order to keep control over his people. If the Iraqi people, particularly the Shi'a learned of Saddam's loss of absolute power, there would be an uprising. It just so happened an attack on Saddam's regime came from outside sources, about 6 years too late.

As and with Libya you "the all-powerful" NATO doesn't want to help civilians, the reason of intervention oil. All in this world turns round oil.


I take it you haven't seen the gas prices lately. Hate to break it to you, without oil the whole world will literally stop.

Rescue of civilians the purpose noble, but it is reached absolutely not by noble actions. On me of NATO time has rushed to the aid that land operations would bring much less victims than bombardment, let even the aim.


I will guarantee you that a ground operation will cause the deaths of more soldiers and civilians. Not to mention who knows whether Col. Gadaffi is willing to use his country's armament of chemical and biological weapons on the coalition. When ground forces are committed to a conflict, things get ugly. The NATO involvement in Kosovo became a much cleaner operation because it was fought exclusively from the air.

So to you to listen to the NATO warm and fuzzy.
Don't consider as deviation from a theme, simply wanted to ask for a long time already. How you think armed forces of Georgia has attacked Ossetia and have shot the Russian peacemakers or all has occurred on the contrary? The Russian peacemakers have shot the Georgian military men?


The most recent war between Russia and Georgia was a very, very delicate matter. The US does support the sovereignty of Georgia but if any intervention was done by the US government or NATO, surely World War III would start. The Soviet Union may have fallen, but in my honest opinion, the Cold War between the United States and Russia is far from over. I love Russia and the Russian culture, but tensions still remain between the two nations.
Posted Image
~Thanks Jade~

#36 Ant

Ant

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 32 posts
  • LocationMoscow

Posted 27 March 2011 - 08:07 PM

The prices at us always above than in Europe though we export oil and gas. But aren't subject to sharp jumps of the price for raw materials.

I can't understand one why when 1979 of the USSR have intruded in Afghanistan on purpose to help the peace population of the country and to stop a stream of drugs going to the country. The USSR there and then became an empire of evil, what we observe now?
Than it differs from that that occurs now?
Posted Image

#37 The Midnight Q

The Midnight Q

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,444 posts
  • Mood::giggidy
  • LocationQuahog, RI

Posted 27 March 2011 - 08:19 PM

The prices at us always above than in Europe though we export oil and gas. But aren't subject to sharp jumps of the price for raw materials.


Yup, you've said it. You are not affected by any jump in prices of crude because your country produces enough that you don't import as much oil as most other countries. Unfortunately for the rest of the world, when we experience such spikes, we go mad.

I can't understand one why when 1979 of the USSR have intruded in Afghanistan on purpose to help the peace population of the country and to stop a stream of drugs going to the country. The USSR there and then became an empire of evil, what we observe now?
Than it differs from that that occurs now?


The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 was to sustain the Marxist government in Afghanistan and prevent it from becoming a capitalist state. This is exactly the same reason why the United States became involved in the Korean conflict and the Vietnam conflict- to prevent those countries from becoming fully communist states. The USSR was by no means an "evil" state during the invasion; just the enemy. Just as the United States armed the mujahideen with weapons when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, Russia armed the NVA and Vietcong with weapons in Vietnam. Stopping the inflow of heroin from Afghanistan to Russia would've been a positive externality from success but the main objective of the Soviet involvement was to preserve the Marxist government in Afghanistan.

Edited by sirbenedictvs, 27 March 2011 - 08:19 PM.

Posted Image
~Thanks Jade~

#38 Ant

Ant

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 32 posts
  • LocationMoscow

Posted 27 March 2011 - 08:44 PM

Well if to be exact that not support of socialists. (The term the Marxism has become outdated for a long time, we had a socialism) and for the purpose of the aggression prevention from the outside and strengthenings of southern boundaries by a friendly mode in Afghanistan. Was silently will dethrone the president of Afghanistan Hafizulla Amin and the puppet of Soviet Union is led to the power. (I know the history.) approximately the same picture as in Iraq only the reasons and excuses others.
We have digressed.


Posted Image

#39 Comrade Chris

Comrade Chris

    Advanced Member

  • Earth
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,260 posts
  • LocationProbably in the woods

Posted 27 March 2011 - 08:47 PM

sorry ppl, but can we turn discussion back to Libya plz...


#40 i love emma

i love emma

    Devoted Member

  • Earth
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,997 posts

Posted 27 March 2011 - 08:52 PM

Lol just found this topic - trust you to come up with this Chris :)

Gaddafi's son is dead, he is not happy, we decide to help (correction - make matters worse), This will NOT end well at all.
Posted Image
Emma Watson I Love You
Posted Image
Proud Member of The Earth House!
Earth house badge by Tom
Winner of boys award - Weirdest Member!

My Epic E-family:
Bigger Bro:The Dude Big Bro:Slash Lil Bro:Reznov Amazing Uncle:Dax Cool Cousins:Andrew, Michael, LoverBoy My blood-sister : Hymn




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users