Now the western allies are at it again. This time using protecting people from Gadhafi's troops from commiting genocide. Is it about oil again?
France has launched air strike on Libya
- Thread starter ManWearPants
- Start date
Coalition operation code name Odyssey Dawn. Countries involved France, UK, US, Italy, Canada, etc.
20 Mirage and Rafale flew into Libya,
110 Tomahawk missile launched from US aircraft carrier.
Libya is fighting a civil war. Can other nations get involved unprovoked?
20 Mirage and Rafale flew into Libya,
110 Tomahawk missile launched from US aircraft carrier.
Libya is fighting a civil war. Can other nations get involved unprovoked?
Hmmm, it's so obvious it's about the oil. i can't believe the idealistic garbage that's coming out from Sarko's and Cameron's mouths. there are other troublespots in the world where foreign intervention seems more just and urgent, but the lure of black gold is too irresistable. heck, why not just carve up the whole of the Middle East and share the spoils among the three of you?! and since, Sarkozy's the frontman of this latest boyband to hit the scene, why not ban the burqa throughout the region as well?
France's interference in Libya's matters downright disgusts me. From recognizing the rebels as the legitimate govt of Libya to leading the airstrike, it's been such a frenetic period for the French President and his Foreign Ministry. I certainly wont believe any of the BS reasons to justify the strike. If Sarko is such a champion of human rights, then why expel the Romas from France? and France doesnt exactly have a spotless record in their dealings with their African ex-colonies eg. France's involvement in the Rwandan Genocide of 1994.
And Sarkozy's probably gonna use a possible victory in Libya as his platform for reelection in 2012's presidential elections.
Other than the lure of oil, it's geopolitics through and through...I mean Ben Ali's been deposed in Tunisia, and the new regime seems more pro-American than pro-French. Sarko probably thinks, "we might have lost puny Tunisia, but we'll have rich and vast Libya soon". staking their claim in Libya now, France hopes to reap dividends in the future... France could one day have a new member in their Francophonie organization of nations. and by being 'francophone', Libya will also truly be a more complete member of the Maghreb.
And French travel agencies will surely salivate at the thought of adding Libyan seaside towns to their list of summer destinations - almost every French jet-setter worthy of their name has probably been to Agadir or Djerba, and these two have probably lost their appeal to French holiday-goers who travel abroad for the summer.
Dont get me wrong here fellas...I firmly believe Gaddafi's a megalomaniac, of the same vein as Idi Amin, Pol Pot and Kim Jong Il and Im totally against persons or political parties who usurp power and rule the country forever and treat it as if it's their fiefdom. But in recent years, hasnt there been a thaw in relations between Libya and the West? And hasnt Libya been removed from the list of terrorist (or terrorist-friendly) nations? and Gaddafi's son, Saif has been instrumental in producing a document that rejects unequivocally the kind of terrorism championed by Al-Qaeda.
I hope this foreign intervention will be a watershed in the wave of political unrest sweeping the Arab world. The Arabs will need to ask themselves what they truly want...do they want democracy but live under the tutelage of foreign powers (Iraq, Afghanistan)? or can they live with limited freedom but be ruled by their own? either way, freedom is relative and never absolute.
on hindsight, i also hope that they are able to distinguish between political freedom per se and prevailing social and cultural mores that have been around in their societies for millennia.
sorry for the looong post, but i just needed to vent....
France's interference in Libya's matters downright disgusts me. From recognizing the rebels as the legitimate govt of Libya to leading the airstrike, it's been such a frenetic period for the French President and his Foreign Ministry. I certainly wont believe any of the BS reasons to justify the strike. If Sarko is such a champion of human rights, then why expel the Romas from France? and France doesnt exactly have a spotless record in their dealings with their African ex-colonies eg. France's involvement in the Rwandan Genocide of 1994.
And Sarkozy's probably gonna use a possible victory in Libya as his platform for reelection in 2012's presidential elections.
Other than the lure of oil, it's geopolitics through and through...I mean Ben Ali's been deposed in Tunisia, and the new regime seems more pro-American than pro-French. Sarko probably thinks, "we might have lost puny Tunisia, but we'll have rich and vast Libya soon". staking their claim in Libya now, France hopes to reap dividends in the future... France could one day have a new member in their Francophonie organization of nations. and by being 'francophone', Libya will also truly be a more complete member of the Maghreb.
And French travel agencies will surely salivate at the thought of adding Libyan seaside towns to their list of summer destinations - almost every French jet-setter worthy of their name has probably been to Agadir or Djerba, and these two have probably lost their appeal to French holiday-goers who travel abroad for the summer.
Dont get me wrong here fellas...I firmly believe Gaddafi's a megalomaniac, of the same vein as Idi Amin, Pol Pot and Kim Jong Il and Im totally against persons or political parties who usurp power and rule the country forever and treat it as if it's their fiefdom. But in recent years, hasnt there been a thaw in relations between Libya and the West? And hasnt Libya been removed from the list of terrorist (or terrorist-friendly) nations? and Gaddafi's son, Saif has been instrumental in producing a document that rejects unequivocally the kind of terrorism championed by Al-Qaeda.
I hope this foreign intervention will be a watershed in the wave of political unrest sweeping the Arab world. The Arabs will need to ask themselves what they truly want...do they want democracy but live under the tutelage of foreign powers (Iraq, Afghanistan)? or can they live with limited freedom but be ruled by their own? either way, freedom is relative and never absolute.
on hindsight, i also hope that they are able to distinguish between political freedom per se and prevailing social and cultural mores that have been around in their societies for millennia.
sorry for the looong post, but i just needed to vent....
ya......when tunisia when into uprising, the west din lift a finger. when egypt has all those protests, americans congratulate them for a job well done in ridding themselves of a despotic regime (which the usa has tacitly supported for the entire 30 years-go figure!). then it's libya's turn...actually, there's bahrain, and jordan and syria...but not a mention of sending in troops...hmmm....saudi arabia must be having them by the balls to deny them entry into its sphere of influence.
but back to libya...gadaffi's an arse, the rebels are scums (really, so many movies says so, even the Empire), but the western nations supports them...i wonder if the civil war were to happen again in the us, and chinese or japanese troops were deployed to free those rebels of washinton's 'oppresive' regime, what would other ppl think.........
but back to libya...gadaffi's an arse, the rebels are scums (really, so many movies says so, even the Empire), but the western nations supports them...i wonder if the civil war were to happen again in the us, and chinese or japanese troops were deployed to free those rebels of washinton's 'oppresive' regime, what would other ppl think.........
the basis of the assault is based on the Security Council passed Resolution 1973. with the blessing from the Arab nations.
they aren't sending in ground troop; the western countries try to capitalize the situation and don't want to jeopardize their support in their own country (if there is any troop fatalities) . this is a case of coward against coward. moreover, Gaddafi say ceasefire but continue to bomb those rebel.
now the Africa Union step in to halt the bombing.
the smarter and cunning ones like China, Russia abstain votes...
the whole world is screwed up now.. everybody for themselves, for power, for oil, for land, for woman...
they aren't sending in ground troop; the western countries try to capitalize the situation and don't want to jeopardize their support in their own country (if there is any troop fatalities) . this is a case of coward against coward. moreover, Gaddafi say ceasefire but continue to bomb those rebel.
now the Africa Union step in to halt the bombing.
the smarter and cunning ones like China, Russia abstain votes...
the whole world is screwed up now.. everybody for themselves, for power, for oil, for land, for woman...
A long time ago, before the Mujaheddin and Taliban. It was easy to enforce a no fly zone by providing Stinger Missiles to the folks.
Such as those given to Afghans to fight the Russian Hind helicopters and planes.
But after the Russians left, the US tried to buy back the Stinger missiles. But some of them found their way into Croatia, Iran, Qatar and North Korea.
So the US learned a lesson there.
Now they are using their own planes and cruise missiles to enforce the no-fly-zone.
Not providing Stinger missiles to the Libyan folks.
Such as those given to Afghans to fight the Russian Hind helicopters and planes.
But after the Russians left, the US tried to buy back the Stinger missiles. But some of them found their way into Croatia, Iran, Qatar and North Korea.
So the US learned a lesson there.
Now they are using their own planes and cruise missiles to enforce the no-fly-zone.
Not providing Stinger missiles to the Libyan folks.
Last edited:
Soon, a new Libyan leader who will sell cheaper oil to the West.
All these western leaders will enjoy higher political rating....
And all these reconstruction projects after massive bombing and oil contracts will be given to you know who... When they(politicians) retired, they will receive very generous salary package as consultants.
Can deflect all the scandals/financial crisis/problems at home. :bsmilie:
All these western leaders will enjoy higher political rating....
And all these reconstruction projects after massive bombing and oil contracts will be given to you know who... When they(politicians) retired, they will receive very generous salary package as consultants.
Can deflect all the scandals/financial crisis/problems at home. :bsmilie:
:bsmilie: as usual.
what else is new.
but of course. the west doesn't draw into armed conflict with N Korea because *ba da dum!* PRC and Motherland Russia will be up in arms. africa? it's too big to actually send in troops. you'll end up creating a larger mess.
so why not target the arab states? honestly, the west should stop meddling...
but think of it this way: surely this benefits us as well?
Today Libya! Tomorrow your or my 'backyard' :bsmilie:
Surely, it benefits us all. Leftover lor :bsmilie::bsmilie:
I'm not into speculation, nor do I know enough about this issue to comment, but genocide, I know that word...
Here's another genocide: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_Genocide
For those who don't know, here's a quick description from the link:
US response then:
6 years later, UN admits failure in handling the event:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/714025.stm
From a military point of view, this is a good arena to test the entire war machinery.
Be it intelligence, real life testing of their new fighter jets, weapon testing, and once in a lifetime training for the pilots and others in the air force and navy.
After firing off their old stock of weapons, they can produce new ones to replenish their stock. Not sure if weapons have got shelf life.
When the war is over, there might be more orders for the Mirage and Rafale fighter planes.
Be it intelligence, real life testing of their new fighter jets, weapon testing, and once in a lifetime training for the pilots and others in the air force and navy.
After firing off their old stock of weapons, they can produce new ones to replenish their stock. Not sure if weapons have got shelf life.
When the war is over, there might be more orders for the Mirage and Rafale fighter planes.
IMHO
its rather easy for some of us, safe & sound in Singapore
far away from the fighting, to make comments or theories on why the West is doing what its doing
but I don't think the civilians trap in the city of Benghazi
after being hammered for weeks and days by Gadhafi's fighter jets, tanks and artillery
care about our theories. :think:
Neither do I remember protesters in Egypt and Tunisia being 'attack' by anything worst than local police and govt hired thugs NO Fighter Jets, Tanks or Artillerys was used against them surely this reason is better in explaining why the West didn't interval in both country militarily than just because they don't have Oil.
Lets not forget both UN and Arab League supports the no fly zone and wants a stop to Gadhafi killing his own people.
Neither do I remember protesters in Egypt and Tunisia being 'attack' by anything worst than local police and govt hired thugs NO Fighter Jets, Tanks or Artillerys was used against them surely this reason is better in explaining why the West didn't interval in both country militarily than just because they don't have Oil.
Lets not forget both UN and Arab League supports the no fly zone and wants a stop to Gadhafi killing his own people.
okay...hmm...that leaves somolia...but i digress.
the rebels knew what will happen. they knew gadaffi willnot go down quietly. the situation is different in egypt. the army in egypt does not support the then present government, but in libya, they do support gadaffi. so, on one hand, the army does nothing, hence, no use of tanks or bazookas or any air assets. and on the other, well...u poke a porcupine, u'll gonna get poked back, and gadaffi is a big assed porcupine.
consider also, if similar situation were to happen closer to home. say, some ppl in malaysia or indonesia decides enough is enough, and launches an armed rebellian...do we support the incubant government and condemn the rebels, or do we go in and help the rebels? remember, one man's rebel is another man's patriot.and HYPOTHETHICALLY SPEAKING what if, god forbid, the same thing happen in singapore? and some ppl decides to rebel becoz of 'political oppression'? does anyone prefer outsiders to come and make merry hell here?
it's quite easy to say the ppl needs to be help, in fact, they do, BUT, by walking a mile in their shoe, would they prefer to exchange one tyrant with another?
[vid]ePSqOsMskWQ[/vid]
YouTube Video ID No. EPSQOSMSKWQ
Legendary comedian Charlie Chaplin's famous speech in his most successful production "The Great Dictator" where he was cast in dual roles as a dictator resembling Adolf Hitler and a Jewish barber also resembling Adolf Hitler.
YouTube Video ID No. EPSQOSMSKWQ
Legendary comedian Charlie Chaplin's famous speech in his most successful production "The Great Dictator" where he was cast in dual roles as a dictator resembling Adolf Hitler and a Jewish barber also resembling Adolf Hitler.
Therefore is it better, in your opinion to let the civilians of Benghazi be kill because they poke the porcupine ?? :think: Do the people there deserve to die because ''they should have know better''
Is there going to be another tyrant after Gadhafi I really don't know. But I DO know that if UN or the Arab League do nothing alot of people will die inside the City of Benghazi.
Last edited:
Rwanda did not have massive OIL reserves.
Libya does have.
Iraq did have.
Closer to home, Myanmar does not.
Action to save the helpless is selective. Where they choose to do so, noble principles are stated to explain why.
Good luck to the western powers. Unlike Saddam, Gadaffi is actually an experienced field commander who has survived even when the CIA was at their strongest.
Libya may lose in the long run but it will be at terrible cost to the "liberators".
Notice that the news doesnt elaborate on just how many of the jets sent actually made it back and 110 tomahawk missiles to take out 20 targets seems a tad excessive so its either 20 targets required 100+ tomahawks or of the all tomahawks sent, only 20 targets were hit.
Libya may lose in the long run but it will be at terrible cost to the "liberators".
Notice that the news doesnt elaborate on just how many of the jets sent actually made it back and 110 tomahawk missiles to take out 20 targets seems a tad excessive so its either 20 targets required 100+ tomahawks or of the all tomahawks sent, only 20 targets were hit.
