1. We have moved to a new forum system. All your posts and data should have transferred over. Welcome, to the new Serebii Forums. Details here
    Dismiss Notice
  2. We have received legal notice about the sharing of certain images for Pokémon Sword & Shield. Due to this, we have a new rule. If you post said images, you will be removed from the forums until 15:00 UTC on November 14th 2019. We have also killed the leak discussion threads for the time being. Thank you for your patience during this. If you have any queries, use the contact form
  3. Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
    Dismiss Notice
  4. If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders
    Dismiss Notice

Libya and foreign intervention

Discussion in 'Debate Forum' started by kaiser soze, Jun 18, 2011.

  1. kaiser soze

    kaiser soze Reading ADWD

    So due to the recent civil war in Libya as part of the Arab Spring, in March the UN supported a resolution effectively calling for the use of military force to intervene in the defense of civilians. but should the UN/NATO/US/Europe be involved in the conflict? its a pretty blatantly calling for war on Quadaffi. from the US prospective, there arent really any interests there (save oil), and several rebels are rumored to have al-Queada ties. speaker Boehner is now asking Obama to ask congress for a declaration of war [notes irony]. republican candidates are also starting to criticize obama for this.

    so should the west be involved in this conflict or let it solve itself?
  2. CSolarstorm

    CSolarstorm New spicy version

    I think Obama should be impeached, if not just to make an example of a President who declares war without getting authorization from Congress. I remember the last Libya thread where someone was trying to convince me a no-fly zone would not lead to military action of any kind, because "the U.S. knows perfectly well its resources are spread out and we can't afford another military action" and now, here we are.

    Didn't like intervention in the Middle East when it was Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan, don't like it now that it's Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, and Yemen (I'm counting drone strikes) and will not like it when it's Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, Yemen, and Syria.

    The last ten years should teach any reasonable spectator that war is addictive and U.S./NATO is a junkie.
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2011
  3. BigLutz

    BigLutz Banned

    No we shouldn't, there are numerous countries that are acting out against their populous, but unlike Iran there is no long term security interest in stopping these madmen other than safeguarding the rebels, who like you point out could be working for al Qaeda.

    Furthermore Obama neglecting to go to Congress and running over the War Powers Act, and the advice of his own legal council, could and should be considered a crime by the White House.

    Edit: To be fair Sunny C we didn't really choose to go to war with Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Yemen. All three are extensions of the war against al Qaeda, and all three were brought about by al Qaeda killing 2,000 people on a September morning.
  4. Alleviate

    Alleviate Banned

    War Powers Act
    hail obama
  5. .TraX.

    .TraX. Bad and Nationwide

    1. Gadaffi was bombing the heck out of his own people somewhat indiscriminately before the no fly zone was enforced.

    2. Gadaffi has sponsored terrorist organizations in the past.

    3. Gadaffi has had no qualms about selling us his oil to buy mercenaries to kill his own people for wanting free speech and a democracy.

    4. It's very different supporting an actual peoples revolution than forcing a regime change through force (see also: Iraq).
  6. Malanu

    Malanu Est sularus oth mith

    Let's see, back in the 70s we were hated by the Iranian government or the Shaw of Iran so we helped Iraq beat Iran, then we had operation Desert Storm in the 80's (I was a Marine then) and we fought Iraq, now we have the Iranian's rattling sabers again, Libya is having a civil war and we are about to stick our nose into that! The majority of the region has at one time or another asked for our help then wished us dead!

    The Middle East will continue to have wars and civil unrest as long as we keep sticking our nose over their. What we should do, is put troops in Saudi Arabia (with permission from their government) and support our only ally in the region, while everyone else destroys themselves.
  7. kaiser soze

    kaiser soze Reading ADWD

    is it too much to ask the UN to do it themselves? its funny that they didnt like Iraq but now they want help
  8. "Forcing a regime change" is exactly and precisely what we are doing. The military action against Libya is hardly distinctive from that against Iraq.

    "...[T]he study of the facts leads us to affirm that the Libyan 'revolution' is neither democratic, nor spontaneous. We are in the presence of an armed uprising organized in the eastern part of the country, in a spirit of revenge and dissidence. This movement is largely impelled and supported from abroad. We need only see the number of French, American, and Qatari flags in the streets of the towns of Cyrenaica to call into question the 'nationalistic' character of this 'revolution.' It is an insurrection whose leaders hide themselves. The situation thus is not comparable with the popular Tunisian and Egyptian revolts." (see also: this report [in French])
  9. Byzantine

    Byzantine Well-Known Member

    I find irony in that the very people calling him out for it are also the very people who wanted us to put boots on the ground there and start yet another full scale war.

    As it stands we are simply acting as a part of NATO, as we are obligated to do by the treaty.
  10. BigLutz

    BigLutz Banned

    Many people wouldn't have minded a full scale war back when the rebels were on the doorstep of Gaddafi's strong hold it would have been a quick and simple war. Instead we waited around and allowed the UN to go back and forth and Gaddafi got momentum back and proceeded to push the Rebels further and further back, creating a prolonged war.
  11. kaiser soze

    kaiser soze Reading ADWD

    NATOs a lot different than in the 50s. its not an equal partnership, and SoD robert gates recently criticized it in his farewell speech. also theres a whole lot of former soviet bloc countries joining in the last 10 years.

    gaddafi is losing popular support in his country though. many of his officers are seeking asylum. couldnt an arab (or OPEC) country help its fellow arabs?
  12. Blue Harvest

    Blue Harvest Banned

    Are you kidding. Do you really think people would support US / NATO troops invading ANOTHER middle eastern country.
  13. legendarypokemonmaster

    legendarypokemonmaster Well-Known Member

    Perhaps not, if you look at it that way. If they looked at it as helping fellow Arabs get a better government and life, then maybe.

    I don't know what we are doing. We are too involved in other countries problems and affairs. Going from war to war is not smart on any level, whether it's politically or economically concerned. We need to focus on are own borders. However, if there is a true problem, the United States should not be the only country to send help, or be the country with 90% of the forces there. The other nations of the world are smart enough to not get caught up in wars like this. I think the last war Britain got stuck in was the American Revolution, and they have learned since then.

    ALso, I do not like the fact that the rebels are tied to Al Qaeda. This worries me, we should not help them get any more power.
  14. Alleviate

    Alleviate Banned

    England has participated in wars since the American Revolution, clown.
    Also, World War II sure helped our depressed economy.
    Plan: start WWIII
  15. jigsawtimes

    jigsawtimes purple pokemon ftw

    Shah. Shah. Shah.Shah.

    I'm only picking on this because I'm half Iranian.
  16. legendarypokemonmaster

    legendarypokemonmaster Well-Known Member


    They haven't gotten stuck in a war LIKE that.

    Where they are bogged down. The other wars we have started have not helped our economy.
  17. No, it didn't.

    Watch this.
    Then, read this.
  18. SilentMemento

    SilentMemento Lone Wolf

    This is the exact reason why I want the U.S. to go back to isolationism. Every time we go in to another country to try and help them, the people always blame us for intervening. You know what? Let them go screw themselves. Let them tear themselves apart. We have numerous domestic problems, we owe other countries billions upon billions of dollars, we're already fighting in practically every Middle Eastern country not named Saudi Arabia or Israel (yeah, Israel is our other ally in the Middle East. Funny how people forget that they were the first ones to come to our aid on 9/11), and we're going to enter another war in Libya to support rebels that probably hate the evil demons in the West just as much as they hate Gaddafi?

    Eff that. I hate you, President Obama, for going down this road. You proved to every single person in the world that everyone who is involved in your administration are liars and frauds. Your policies were the same as the previous President. It's pretty ironic, actually; you campaigned on change, and yet you didn't change a damned thing. That's why I didn't vote for you, you phony. Thanks for being yet another horrible President in my lifetime.
  19. BigLutz

    BigLutz Banned

    Looking at the poll numbers, the support was there. Now people were expecting a quick in and out mission, and if we had gone in quickly at the beginning that would have happened. Now.. not so much.

    Really what were you expecting? Obama campaigned on change, but in the end when College Professor Liberalism ran up against the real world, the real world is going to win out. The Liberalism Obama was expounding on the campaign trail would never work in the real world, it was a fantasy.
  20. SilentMemento

    SilentMemento Lone Wolf

    To be quite honest, I was expecting the same things you're talking about. I already said that I didn't vote for him for those reasons. This is just me expressing my frustration at our political system and the inmates that run the metaphorical asylum.

    I didn't vote for McCain either. I don't put my trust into something that's fake, and politicians of all kinds top that list. Party affiliation? Who gives a damn? They're still lying to the people.

    So, yeah; I'm pissed at the idiots who run our country. The Founding Fathers must be rolling in their graves.

Share This Page