Thread: Looks like Ghadafi has won...

Originally Posted by Occam's Razor

So the general gist I'm getting from you right wingers is that you're all fine and well with smaller government until you see a war you'd love to enter.

No one is talking war or would support a war.

We are talking a strictly limited action that will save Libyan lives and force Quack-daffy to retire.

But no. Lefties feel that's not possible.Even with Obama's vast military knowledge?:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by smurf

I'm not a "right winger", and I don't think that we should openly go to war with Qaddafi. That being said, the world is a cruel place at times, and I believe that it is going to become much crueler. The reality is that those on the left don't want to live like those in a third world country, but they denounce some of the underhanded, vile, dastardly things that our government has done to try and keep us from that fate.

I would argue that the vast majority of what our intervention does has nothing to do with our safety and everything to do with profit for special interests.

Intervening in Libya has no relevance whatsoever to my safety or quality of life, for example.

Originally Posted by GeorgeLaw

No one is talking war or would support a war.

We are talking a strictly limited action that will save Libyan lives and force Quack-daffy to retire.

But no. Lefties feel that's not possible.Even with Obama's vast military knowledge?:rolleyes:

We didn't care about Libyan lives a few years ago, so why do we care now?

Originally Posted by Occam's Razor

We didn't care about Libyan lives a few years ago, so why do we care now?

You can call it special interests.

I call it doing the right thing and BTW showing the world that USA cares about the people and not an evil crazy dictator.

Originally Posted by CSA

I think a no fly zone with targeted air strikes would have done the job and given the rebels the opportunity to organize.

This should have been organized by Obama using NATO as the front man.

Wow, and maybe Obama could have sent Captain Marvel and Superman to help the rebels, or supplied them with an invisibility potion.

A no flight zone wouldn't have made much of a difference, tanks and artillery and trained forces still beat disorganized groups of well intentioned lightly armed untrained , undisciplined volunteers.

Originally Posted by GeorgeLaw

You can call it special interests.

I call it doing the right thing and BTW showing the world that USA cares about the people and not an evil crazy dictator.

Well, we cared enough about Gadhafi to become friendly with him when he started disarming his country.

You can't go from aiding a dictator to pushing to oust him when his people decide to remove him without people noticing how Machiavellian American policy truly is.

It's not about freeing people and it probably never will be.

Granted, I'm not saying that other countries are any different. I just wish we'd be more honest with ourselves about this stuff.

Originally Posted by Occam's Razor

Well, we cared enough about Gadhafi to become friendly with him when he started disarming his country.

You can't go from aiding a dictator to pushing to oust him when his people decide to remove him without people noticing how Machiavellian American policy truly is.

It's not about freeing people and it probably never will be.

Granted, I'm not saying that other countries are any different. I just wish we'd be more honest with ourselves about this stuff.

Alliances are cyclical.

At one time or another, we were enemies with England, Japan, Germany and Italy. Should we not now be allies with them because, once upon a time, we were enemies?

It follows the same logic you're using, and it's equally silly...

Originally Posted by Steve

Alliances are cyclical.

At one time or another, we were enemies with England, Japan, Germany and Italy. Should we not now be allies with them because, once upon a time, we were enemies?

It follows the same logic you're using, and it's equally silly...

Alliances are indeed cyclical, but when the cycle is only a few years long, that makes a country look about as trustworthy as a terrorist.

It's just very disingenuous for so many conservatives to be flag waving about intervening in Libya when their past president had no interest in doing something like that and did quite the opposite in exchange for disarmament.

Originally Posted by GeorgeLaw

No one is talking war or would support a war.

We are talking a strictly limited action that will save Libyan lives and force Quack-daffy to retire.

But no. Lefties feel that's not possible.Even with Obama's vast military knowledge?:rolleyes:

*holds up his index finger and interrupts Dr.Law*

ahoy GeorgeLaw,

but matey, would it not be less costly and more expeditious fer our forces to just enter Libya and assassinate the Mr. Ghaddafi? surely ye would sanction this plan?

- MeadHallPirate

Originally Posted by goober

Wow, and maybe Obama could have sent Captain Marvel and Superman to help the rebels, or supplied them with an invisibility potion.

A no flight zone wouldn't have made much of a difference, tanks and artillery and trained forces still beat disorganized groups of well intentioned lightly armed untrained , undisciplined volunteers.

Yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

But, of course - this is what they would have wanted:

1) start with a no-fly zone. The extremely limited Libyan Air Force stays grounded. Artillery, rocket, and tank attacks continue against untrained individuals with small arms and RPGs. Said individuals continue to lose ground

2) demand airstrikes against Libyan army positions. Now US forces are more deeply involved, and start taking casualties as the Libyans start shooting back.

3) eventually - US invades Libya, at the cost of several trillion dollars (but we won't talk about that), and we sit in the middle of yet another civil war in the MidEast for a decade, while our men and women in uniform are killed.

4) blame Obama for getting us into that stupid shit.



That sound about right?

I can't see blaming Obama here.

If you must blame someone outside Libya, it seems to me that the Arab League and the EU would be more viable targets for blame. It's their backyard.

Matt

Originally Posted by GeorgeLaw

I dont even read your crap.

Me think the lady doth protest too much.

Originally Posted by GeorgeLaw

No one is talking war or would support a war.

We are talking a strictly limited action that will save Libyan lives and force Quack-daffy to retire.

But no. Lefties feel that's not possible.Even with Obama's vast military knowledge?:rolleyes:

And the Iraqis will greet us with open arms, their oil will pay for the war, and it'll be over in 3 months. Sound familiar? That was 8 years ago and what the neo-cons said.