Is NATO going to help the rebels win in Lybia?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics not related to music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=78627
Printed Date: December 02 2024 at 06:37
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Is NATO going to help the rebels win in Lybia?
Posted By: cannon
Subject: Is NATO going to help the rebels win in Lybia?
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 18:31
|
NATO took over the UN resolution 1973 from the US a couple of weeks after the first attacks on Libya to implement the no fly zone. Do you think the NATO led force will help the rebels win in Lybia by ousting Colonel Gaadafi in some manner? The US has actually taken a back seat in this military campaign leaving it up to other nations of NATO. Personally, I believe it will take a lot longer for NATO and the rebels to oust Gaadafi than if the US took the iniative militarily and led the NATO/UN resolution.
What do you think?
|
Replies:
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 18:38
|
No idea, but glad it's happening. Only way I support use of military is for "humanitarian" reasons and if done by a multinational effort. Given his recent actions, I'd say his removal via force is acceptable and would always prefer it be done by the UN rather than unilaterally As for it taking longer or not, I can't even venture a guess. But the US can't lead the effort. The world is tired of that and I hope we |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 18:57
|
NATO's only objective on the region is plant yet another foothold of US supremacy in the Islmic world. I guess Israel and Saudi Arabia isn't good enough. OR they want to support a regime that won't train and export terrorists using government funds, like the Saudis do. -------------   
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 19:01
|
o hai Caio good entrance no?  |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 19:05
|
IDK, I'm still quite bittered. But I guess that discussing war and death wile listening to death metal helps in these situations. -------------
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 19:08
Well I meant more like "anti americanism" what a way to re-enter  But yes, thrash to Sepultura until the rage is gone! Back on topic, I would kind of hope a UN action would be quicker, since they could deploy more troops to the situation. I have no clue though how it all works so I just have to wait and see. |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 19:13
I don't really see anti-americanism in my post. Just a statement that the US seeks more allies in the region and helping the rebels will be one chance of ammasing one more ally. And Sepultura isn't even heavy enough. CC, Bolt Thrower, Carcass and Augury, here I go! PS: you really think the UN cares? If they did, Africa in general and many other places around the world wound't be how they are now. -------------
|
JJLehto wrote:Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 19:16
|
Caio, the invisible police are coming for you! : O Nah, even if they did care can't do much (efficiently) until they had a real military. |
Posted By: The Neck Romancer
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 19:20
|
Volta pra SR cara, tá faltando mais derpage lá. ------------- 
|
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 19:26
OMFG, conspiracy theories!  And the UN is a joke, really. Not that it isn't important, but it can't do anything in case it really needs to. For starters, it is basically the same thing as the League of Nations, just with one thing different: in case somebody offends the security council there will be thousands of nukes ready to react instead of mere sanctions (which was basically all the League of Nations did against the facists, nazis and commies, and look at how well that worked out!). But I guess that sanctions + nukes work better. . . -------------
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 19:28
|
NO MAN RUN! They are in your town now. And that's what I basically said, can't do much good as it is now. lol It would need it's own legit military so it could actually wield some power. |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 19:31
Dos pontos os quais pretendo participar neste sítio da internê, aquele não será um deles. Lamento. Até porque, estando longe fiz-me notar quanto tempo perdia vendo pessoas meramente lamentar de sua mísera e desimportante existência terrena e o que lá nada ganho além de inércia mental. Se posso oferecer-te uma sugestão, saia tembém.  -------------
|
Posted By: Triceratopsoil
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 19:31
| OMG WHO IS THAT GUY |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 19:32
|
NOT ENGLISH! : O And don't tell me to get back to the SR polo. YOU DONT OWN ME |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 19:35
thing is, it will never get for a number of reasons. First, all members of UN cannot be accountable by law of any country, creating some of the most ridiculous situations ever, like the rape for food case in Africa. (google that sh*t, DEM BLUE PASSAPORTS!) Second, which coultry would harbor a military force or even allow its entrence if the only thing that can judge its crimes is itself? Third, who will ever finace an organization that can interfere in their national interests to the point of military invasion? These are just some of the problems I could pull out of my head. I bet that there are far worse ones. -------------
|
Posted By: The Neck Romancer
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 19:38
I WAS TALKING TO CAIO, MR. GOOGLE TRANSLATE
-------------
|
Posted By: cannon
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 22:24
I agree. I think US foriegn policy makers have finally seen the light.
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 27 2011 at 23:03
Oh boy I wouldn't be nearly that optimistic but time will tell Besides my political belief, there is a tad of bitterness as well  If the US government does continue on a good path, would other governments be able to handle it? Because it goes both ways, I'll leave ya be... but can't come asking for my help! Well, at least you can't just expect it from me. |
Posted By: someone_else
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 02:44
------------- 
|
Posted By: someone_else
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 02:49
|
I would say No. Moreover, I don't think the NATO give a damn for the rebels; they just have their own agenda.
And I seldom approve of international interventions in a nation's internal affairs. -------------
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 04:04
|
NATO is already 'helping' the rebels, by simply being there. If you mean is NATO going to start arming the rebels, or putting troops on the ground, then yes probably. But this is messy. We know there are Islamic militants among those rebels. Do we really want to put additional power in their hands?
The west often seems bemused at why the Arab/Muslim world hates us so much, but I don't think the explanation is really not that complicated. Gadaffi has been portrayed as a 'brutal dictator' and a 'Hitler' figure' among other predictable labels the west applies to despots it inexplicably supports and arms for decades before waging war on them. Gadaffi is no saint, but this war - and it is a war, not a 'limited kinetic military operation' - doesn't stack up for the reasons given to us. Yes, he's a despot, but he was our despot. He had ditched his WMD program, to much western applause. He is ideologically opposed to Islamic militancy, just as we are, and yet here we are running the significant risk of arming militants, to overthrow him. Interestingly Gadaffi's government had been moving towards ceasing trading it's oil to Europe in dollars, replacing it with a new gold based currency. He also refused to sign up to the wests Africom project. This may have more bearing on why we're bombing Libya and not Yemen or Syria, but whatever the reason, I don't buy the official line. Sorry. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: cannon
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 07:47
| Of course every country/alliance has it's own agenda. There has to be self interests for any campaign. |
Posted By: cannon
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 07:51
All good points. I tend to agree with you on most of what you stated.
I think the Arab world has finally woken up to the fact that the US and the west are not the infidels but that it is thier own authoritarian governments.
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 08:21
Indeed, they are waking up. I'm sure if you asked the people of any nation, regardless of the predominant religion and culture there, they would choose freedom over dictatorship any day. We should however, remember what it has taken to get to this point. Libyans tolerated Gadaffi for 40 years. Egyptians tolerated Mubarak for over 30 years. It's come to a head, right across the region at this time, for two reasons, in my opinion. Firstly, the success of the Tunisian uprising was a great inspiration to those who wanted change in Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Syria and Bahrain. But, each revolution has as many individual traits, as they have they have things in common with each other. Different regimes manage the revolutions differently. In Egypt the army stood down. In Libya, Syria and Yemen the army is with the leadership not the revolutionaries. The second reason it's all kicking off now is the soaring cost of living, and record levels of youth unemployment in these countries. Egypt has an ever growing young class of university educated people, emerging from college and having to survive on less than $10 a day, and that is those who are lucky enough to find work. People are struggling to pay their way and to put food on the table. That's why why we're seeing revolution. In relatively good times, people will tolerate bad government, if they can feed their families and have some money in the pocket. Why has living become so expensive in these countries? Largely because the food commodities they import are traded globally in $USD which has been significantly devalued in recent years, driving those prices up. The same goes for the price of oil, compounded by the growing instability of the whole region. If things kick off in Saudi to the extent they have in other countries, we'll see $200 per barrel in no time. Dollar devaluation may have been the principle reason a number of oil producing countries have been seeking an alternative to trade their oil in. Iraq springs to mind, although I don't think this was the main reason we invaded. Sorry, waffling!! I'll go to the pub now..  ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: cannon
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 09:39
I would also say that technology has played a big part in the Arab Spring. No question the devalued $USD has been part of the reason why prices have sored on commodities but I think it's also the speculators on Wall St.
 The Commodity Future Trading Comission(CFTC) needs to get thier ass in gear and do something and limit the excessive speculation by Wall St. firms which has extreme volatility in both the agriculture and energy markets. Hasn't anyone learned yet? Just amazing.
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 10:42
It was economic greed and malpractice that caused the banking crisis, which led to the Fed Reserve and the European central banks having to print trillions of dollars to bail these institutions out. It was this flooding of the system with cheap money which led to the devaluation, which has led to soaring commodity prices, and may ultimately lead to hyperinflation. It is truly a problem which has affected the whole world, including North Africa and the ME. The role of technology has also been a key catalyst in these uprisings. You're quite right. We probably shouldn't overplay the role of the US state dept, in training thousands of young people from the ME, in the Bush years, in how best to use the internet to forment revolutionary movements, but I'm sure the west has played its part. Let's hope that we reap something positive from what we've helped to sow. Right now the situation looks pretty dicey to me. Didn't make the pub BTW. My new Decemberists album got in the way.. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: cannon
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 12:34
I see there was another big protest in Tahrir Square yesterday protesting the Egyption military council. The G-8 countries committed $40 billion to Egypt and Tunisa and other Arab country that embraces the path to democracy. It will help somewhat but like you said, "it's dicey" Could go either way IMO. I hope blood wasn't spilled in vain. I think patience is needed to set up all the institutions of democracy. It's going to take time.
Probably a good thing that the Decemberists album got in the way.
 |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 13:41
^^^ They merely delayed the inevitable. I'm off out now!  ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 15:23
Lol @ Libya being humanitarian in nature. Humanely bomb the sh*t out of them for oil interest. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: cannon
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 15:57
 |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 19:54
^^^  To you too sir. Here's to world peace and endless excellent music.------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:49
Being humanitarian or not, I believe that there are other political interests beyond oil. -------------
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:54
Well, the argument could also be made that Gadaffi is clearly not going anywhere by himself and even you can't disagree he's bad for his people, but yeah as with most cases how "humanitarian" are the intentions is highly questionable (coughs) |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:54
|
I agree, but that's one of the primary ones. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:55
Yeah and the same argument can be made for many other countries towards which the US is completely apathetic. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:59
|
Not sure if this is one of your agreements or another point of argument so I'm going to say "Yeah" |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 21:05
|
I don't think I was arguing. I don't know. Maybe I was? ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 28 2011 at 23:37
Oh I never know with you, I was sincere in letting it go because I just can never read your responses accurately it seems. For what it's worth there are few, if any, times the US or anyone has intervened for the "good" purpose. So you're right about that. Or the flip side: I used to assume the UN was against the war in Iraq due to principle, but then I learned of the Oil for Food program...well it made even more sense after that. |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: May 29 2011 at 01:46
|
When the UN is against a war, it is usually because they won't be getting any $$ with it. -------------
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 29 2011 at 01:51
Precisely my point! The UN was giving food, plus various aid, to Iraq in exchange for allowing the country to sell its oil (curse that liquid!) so the UN had a very real interest to not see Iraq be toppled. |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: May 29 2011 at 01:59
Yeah, it can be a disgrace sometimes. From what I've heard, some economical crisis of the 20th century were fabricated in order to justify oil extraction in expensive places, such as Alaska, the Northern Atlantic, etc. Thank God BR isn't as oil-dependant as the US (anymore) or we would be royally f**ked. -------------
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: May 29 2011 at 02:04
|
It's curious how many people seem to forget that the mighty UN is just a collection of governments, the same governments that can rape and kill to gain power and money. Why people believe there is some kind of moral superiority in a decision coming from the UN is beyond me. It's as if, somehow, a meeting of the Five Families of La Cosa Nostra would be morally impeccable because it comes from a consensus among all five of them... ------------- 
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 29 2011 at 02:05
|
I always thought it'd be lulzy if the ICJ or ICC tried OPEC with collusion. But yeah Caio, like we said man UN is good in theory but just nothing about it in real life makes any sense or is realistic. As you mentioned to me in that PM only way it could really do it's job would involve making them an unstoppable machine! (Which no one wants so chill Teo )As for oil dependence, yeah its a sh*tty situation. Another reason to step up the alternative fuel solution amirite? Besides just from a realistic standpoint, it wont be there in another 100 years. Might as well get crackin now. |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: May 29 2011 at 02:21
I don't find it so unfathomable. After all, it was the UN who was responsible for setting the standars of human rights in contamporary society with the Human Rights bill of 1958. Most other laws on the subject (passed on nations) use that bill of rights as its measiring stick / template. -------------
|
Posted By: cannon
Date Posted: May 29 2011 at 02:37
|
UN=United Nothing
I was very knieve about the UN until I talked to a former employee. At that time I was deeply saddened and dissappointed from what I heard. The UN security council is basically hog tied. Russia and China pretty much vote against the rest of the members.
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: May 29 2011 at 04:36
The media and our leaders have made so many people believe for many years, that the UN is on the side of humanity, and when the security council vote to impoverish or bomb a nation, it's for humanitarian reasons. People fall for it. Every time. The double speak is incredible, but so many people feel that the decisions of their leaders alone can not always be trusted on the world stage - and with good reason - so, they prefer leaders with similar such dubious credentials to congregate and make decisions together. It is possible to confuse co-operation with collusion. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: Earendil
Date Posted: May 29 2011 at 09:48
|
In general, the police bullsh*t just needs to stop. America needs to stop lying to their citizens and to other nations by pretending they actually care about freedom worldwide, when their real motives are completely selfish. It's about control over people who hate America, rightfully so, and about oil. It's disgusting to see how people here have actually gotten used to these "conflicts" in the middle-east, and have accepted these wars as normal, along with all the lives lost from it. It's terrible that America, along with much of Europe, is falling apart internally, yet they continue to mess with issues that don't concern them. Freedom is won by the people, not by another government. |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: May 29 2011 at 10:39
I agree there is a certain amount of desensitization to conflict because there is so much of it about. The extent to which we are involved is worrying. The situation in Yemen is now almost as bad as Libya in terms of being perilously close to civil war, but it's barely making the news, although I guess that may change in the days ahead. It's reported there, that rebels, including Al Queada fighters have ceased a southern town. It will be interesting to see how the NATO 'One world army' deals with that one. However the situation to keep a close eye on is Pakistan. Militants stormed a naval facility there last week, and British press reported that Obama has said he would put troops on the ground there, with or without the consent of Pakistan, if their nukes came under threat. This coincided with a warning from China, after the alleged killing of OBL, that the US MUST respect Pakistani sovereignty, and any attack on Pakistan would interpreted as an attack on China. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: May 29 2011 at 11:21
yes, that's because either one of them will have their sphere of influence affected if the US, UK and France decide to do anything funny east of Bosphorus. -------------
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 29 2011 at 11:25
Quite right. As many in the world want...the time of the US being the sole superpower on Earth is quickly coming to an end. The result? Now we can have a bunch of superpowers running the world! YAY! Wait.... But hey freedom is all about choice right? If you are a small or developing country America isn't your only colonizer! You can choose to be indebted to the US, Russia, China, Indonesia in a few years. Hell Caio, even your Brazil will be getting in on it! |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: May 29 2011 at 12:52
It's getting back to the place it was about 150 years ago, during the Empire of Brazil. Back then we were the most powerful nation of the southern Hemphere, had the seventh biggest economy, the third or second most powerful navy and the southern part of the continent (Uruguay, Paraguay and Argentina) were completelly controlled by us (politically). But then the army performed a ridiculous coup on the turn of the century that threw the nation in a descending spiral that we still didn't recover from. -------------
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 29 2011 at 20:30
|
Well you guys are on your way! All other countries in South America thought they'd be politically and economically independent but Brazil is back!  |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: May 30 2011 at 18:39
Yes, most other countries in South America are hugely dependent on us now. Aregentina, Uruguay, Bolivia and Paraguay have at least one third of their exports directed to us, with Venezuela not far behind. The one whoi's most dependent is Bolivia, I think. -------------
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 30 2011 at 18:55
Indeed. I was also being a bit silly of course, modern colonization isn't cool  Though I know the US and Brazil has had a....lukewarm relationship, can we finally be friends in our co-ruling of this side of the Atlantic? |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: May 30 2011 at 19:27
Sure, but you is better gonna share dat nukes then, Merrika ma boi! -------------
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 30 2011 at 19:29
How bout we both run for President? We will have a great relationship, share nukes and dominate the America's. |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: May 30 2011 at 19:37
Sounds like a plan. Now all I have to do is please all the local oligarchies and debunk the four major parties untill 2014 . . . Nothing that I can't do. -------------
|
Posted By: Atkingani
Date Posted: May 30 2011 at 19:46
Let's keep on topic, gentlemen. Please.  ------------- Guigo ~~~~~~ |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: May 30 2011 at 19:54
|
:C OK then, I've seen that NATO is going to provide the rebels with 30 tacticall helicopters and that one of the five defecting generals said that Gaddafi's resourses will last for another 4 months only. -------------
|
Posted By: cannon
Date Posted: May 30 2011 at 20:28
The Colonel is going down.
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: May 30 2011 at 20:38
No other thread is ever asked to stay on topic! You want a part in Caio's and mine empire don't you?
Makes sense. First, how long could he hold on anyway? Whenever a dictator is at the end they may fight like hell, but it is inevitable... Whatever the UN may add, guidance, troops, copters and arms will speed up the process I am sure. |
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: May 30 2011 at 22:35
|
It seems that whacky Gaddafi is losing his edge...and his generals:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43217134/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/" rel="nofollow - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43217134/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/
The worst time to get nepotistic is during a crisis. ------------- ...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
Posted By: Atkingani
Date Posted: May 31 2011 at 06:34
Just to make Caio wake up...
 Also I was eager to use that particular emoticon!  ------------- Guigo ~~~~~~ |
Posted By: CCVP
Date Posted: May 31 2011 at 07:22
Didn't you know Brian? The mods are THE MAN of PA. Row Row, FIGHT THE POWER!
I have seen on the news when the whole thing started that he had huge gold reserves inside his palaces and banks, though it didns't specified how much he had. I guess most of it was in Swizerland and since the Swiss decided to keep the bloody gold from his regime locked in their banks I guess he won't be able to hold out much longer.
NP guigo, we all know Lula is the Emperor of Brazil de facto, we can't fight that anymore now. . .  -------------
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: May 31 2011 at 07:38
|
I like the way the west expects whatever replaces Gadaffi to be the solution to all Libya's problems. It's all very well deposing the 'evil dictator' who we've openly admired, funded and backed for decades, but if a subseqeunt administration is comprised, even in relatively small part of Islamic extremists, then we have potentially created a bigger problem than the one we have solved.
I would have thought thatvwas obvious, although I don't suppose we care that much about stability as oong as we can control the oil. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |