Register
Events
Popular
More
Post #641
The resolution also implores member states to do everything possible to protect civilians, short of boots on the ground. Tanks and artillery have been bombarding cities like Benghazi, thus they need to be destroyed. The overall strategy is to lend enough support to the rebels for them to get rid of Gaddafi, who is the greatest threat to the Libyan people.
-
-
you are really believe that?
quite a lot of people ran away from the country
why suddenly Once Egypt rolled over Gaddafi became dangerous?
why the rebellion started near the borders of Egypt?
and the France here what they had interest in there? oh yes they had also problem with the Arabs
May someone provide me a price list of services of NATO, how much it costs disarming of countries.
-
Hey, I didn't know Gaddafi was a member of Facepunch.
-
Some to some swedes, NATO wants Sweden and Finland to take action too.
-
A fitting response to all your posts in this thread:
Lol.
-
Considering he is butchering his own people without mercy, yes. He is a threat to his own people. Or did I miss the memo where we're not allowed to criticise people who order their troops to open fire on protestors, disappear and torture political dissidents, and sponsor terrorism?
The West is inconsistent. The West has sponsored horrible dictators in the belief it would stop the spread of Communism. The West has problems with corporate corruption. I freely concede that. Tell me again how this means we're not allowed to stop this murderous madman, especially when the Libyan people have asked for this help, and the United Nations has given the go-ahead for the mission.
That being said, your post makes very little sense at all.
-
Its OK the UK was selling them guns and other weapons up till like last week. A newspaper here yesterday did a massive story about how Blair had helped set up many weapons deals in 2007 with Gaddafi. Anti tank missiles and surface to air missiles (lol).
They pointed out the irony in the fact that the missile that is being talked about so much in the UK at the moment (the MBDA Storm shadow) is made by a company that had deals with Gaddafi
The BBC live page picked up on a tweet a little earlier that sums it up.
1334: harikunzru tweets:"Turns out UK is mainly blowing up stuff they sold #libya in 1st place. Oh, and #Bahrain is a beacon of democracy."
Edited:
Saying that, Libya does have a lot of modern weapons for a country that has been under an arms embargo for a long time.
(actually, has it? I heard it had been but I can't find any concrete source on it)
-
I also found the cnn reporting of interest, parts of a cruise missile recovered from Gadhafi's compound with manufacture dates of Dec. / 06
-
The fact that Germany isn't partaking in this is a huge nuts kick for our national pride
-
At least they aren't objecting to NATO involvement, and from I have read / heard Germany is willing to step up its participation in Afghanistan if needed to allow things in use there by the US/UK/France to be used else where, if needed.
-
Well, not partaking is just contradictory to what they said earlier. Really, I wish this government would do SOMETHING for once :frown:
-
Pretty awesome, our B-2's took off from the heart of America, flew all the way to Libya, Dropped 45x2,000lb JDAM's on what I guess was 45 different targets, then flew back all the way to Missouri. Non Stop.
-
Those B-2's gonna have like a redbull tank somewhere in there.
-
For the pilots maybe... I wonder if they had a second crew with them on-board, or if one napped while the other was awake... They did re fuel in flight though
-
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2011/03/1...#comment-72665
Some of the comments on this are so hilariously backwards.
-
The B-2 is mostly automatic. There are only two crew members, but still the other can take a nap, have a shit, or make a meal in a microwave while the other is keeping an eye on the flight.
-
Does this plane get any better?
-
As a Finn, I am terribly ashamed that we have no plans whatsoever to take part in this operation D:
-
I know that feeling :smith:
:hf:
:smith:
-
Althou i'm a sick fuck that actually enjoy war, i suddenly started to use my tiny brain. Is really bombing the right thing to do?
War to liberate the people? Sure, but i bet that the hate on gadaffi and his goons is pretty overrated. War will result in refugees, pain and probably more terrorism in the end.
Imagine so much food and blankets a single tomahawk missile would give.
-
Blankets and food are useless if people are going to be attacked by their government.
-
I love the effect this crisis has had on British politics. The parties were at each other's fucking throats over EVERYTHING and it was really pissing me off, but over this they're united.
-
Blankets and food are also useless when the people is being attacked by other governments.
I'm putting mine tinfoil hat on and i'll say there is more then liberating behind this.
-
Have to say one thing though, all this didn't happen because we feel sorry for the rebels and the population. It could have been 10 times worse and even then we wouldn't have intervened unless we had something to gain.
I'm not complaining though, we gain from it, the Lybian people gain from it. Everyone is happy.
Well except Gadaffi, but that's ok.
-
From a military standpoint, everything has a value.
Pilots are extremely expensive both in terms of money and time to train. Aircraft are, obviously, extremely expensive and not easily replaced even if you have the money.
It isn't western values that I'm using here. It is simple math. Suicide runs with fighter aircraft don't come down in your favor.
Especially when you kill the tyrant's brother. That isn't going to stop the conflict, but it will make him more determined to kill as many of the rebels as possible before he is removed from power.
Edited:
Strategic bombers really live up to their name. Most aircraft deal with a few targets at most. Strategic bombers operate on a strategic scale. It isn't "blow up that tank" it is "blow up that armored division". Gotta love 'em.
-
Once again, you are still judging his actions from our Western perspective. To take an example, you know what the US Army in the 1980s believed what kind of commander the Soviet "scientific view of war" breeded? Without typing out an entire lecture, rigid and unflexible officers (a generally unfavorable view) unsuited for the modern battlefield when in reality it was very much the opposite.
It was from that inaccurate judgement that AirLand Battle was formed on (read FM 100-5, 1986 edition). Even though it's now outdated, I can't see it being decisively effective against Soviet doctrine in the late '80s.
Suicide runs with combat aircraft are indeed unorthodox, but it's up to you if you want to dismiss anything that doesn't look right to you as "absolutely stupid".
...as long as said armored division is right out in the open. Iraq loved to do that back in 1991. Giulio Douhet's theories are amusing. Isn't it good that most of America's state adversaries are dumb enough not to think of the many counters out there?
-
Just a note for those who visited the article. I rebutted a lot of the claims there
You know you're wrong when I can refute your claims.
-
Got to love the people trying to protest this.
This is what it must've been like listening to the isolationist durring WWII
Replace America first with Everyone else first.
-
Quite frankly, the UN should do more intervention in such cases. The Rwandan genocide, for example, should not have been allowed to happen. Nor what recently occurred in the Ivory Coast. UN intervention in many African crises has been toothless. That needs to change. For the moment, it's good that at least one case is getting the treatment it needs.
-
Don't forget Darfur.
Ugh. A shameful stain on humanity.
-
Absolutely. Regardless of whether or not the current Libyan intervention has suspicious motives (I highly doubt it's for oil because as mentioned before, Western oil companies already had access to Libyan oil before the crisis), at least something is being done. We just need to start helping more countries suffering from such atrocities.
-
And really the idea that we're invading for Oil holds even less water because the Oil companies are saying that there will be little to no exports from Libya for six Months.
so from that standpoint we just made it worse.
And also agree with everything else you said, the UN was founded to put an end to this kind of shit, not for diplomats to yell at each other and write angry letters while people die.
-
Gaddafi sends someone to bomb British plane, Britain sends British planes to bomb Gaddafi.
It's so good to finally get revenge for Lockerbie.
-
Yeah too bad your government helped free the bomber.
-
I also laughed when he ranted about his country being the victim of terrorism.
"Haha, no Gaddafi, you supported terrorism, you don't get to play that card."
-
So.. you're saying that supply will go down, right?
With same amount of demand?
So, in other words, oil companies will be able to charge more?
Yeah they must be gutted.
-
Yeah, but that was Gordon Brown.
And Gordon Brown was an idiot.
-
Welp there goes arguing with you.
-
Wasn't the Libyan government also helped by non-elected public servants?
Edited:
That's quite the argument.
-
It wasn't Gordon Brown, it was the Scottish government.
Agree x 4
Dumb x 14
Zing x 8
Winner x 5
Informative x 2
Useful x 1
Friendly x 2
Funny x 1
Disagree x 1
