How is this all supposed to end? The Libyans are not a united people. There’s going to be a civil war, so what do we do then?
So, that makes it OK?
Who we bombing tomorrow?
We could always drop a few on Nigeria. Civil war going on there as well, plus vast oil reserves!
Yeah, I’m yet again reminded of this scene from The Jerk. 
CMC fnord!
Dear Osama:
We hope you are doing well.
We know you’ve gotten tired of hunkering down in Pakistan, and we never really let you take hold in Iraq. So, can we interest you in an Arab country, with oil, that will make a nice little failed state and a good base for your North African operations?
Sincerely,
The West
Are you done with this yet? It’s getting a little silly.
Nothing compared to yours, John, on any subject, I am sure, but I did not intend to make extravagant claims. Nonetheless, with all due awe…
More risk than Grenada, less than Iraq. Definitely worth it so far, since all we have actually deployed are stern words and threats. Now, its not likely such words and threats will do the trick, but stranger things have happened.
What I would like to know more about is his army. I have scraps of information that suggest his army is largely mercenary, and not reflective of the population, as compared to Egypt, made up of conscripts that identified with the population. Assuming that is so, the downside is they are likely to be unsympathetic and professional, far better equipped and trained than the rebels. Being better equipped and trained, they could slaughter their opposition. Being unsympathetic, they very well might.
But rebels are more dedicated, by and large, and that matters. But the other guys have armor, and that really matters. However, if that armor starts falling prey to missiles and gun ships, if the Army starts taking some serious casualties…
History shows that under such stress, armies often re-examine their priorities. Their loyalties. The rebels have no such option, and are not so tempted.
Besides, I remember a baby super-power, struggling to be born, and it was France, in a fit of snotty condescension, saved our bacon. We thanked them then, and still do, naming our national dish, freedom fries, in their honor! That’s a true fact, you could look it up.
Well, that narrows it down!
I really don’t know what to say about that other than perhaps you haven’t seen the news that we starting bombing today. That’s a little more than “stern words and threats”.
But it’s more than just that. Libya has it’s own internal divisions (ethnic, tribal, and geographic) that make it ripe for civil war. What do we do then? Whose side do we pick when this turns into Yugoslavia?
Well, the French were hardly altruistic. They were siding against the British, not with us. But it doesn’t really matter, unless you’re appealing to some sort of War Karma-- that we need to support revolutions because some country once supported ours.
I’m sick and tired of getting involved in the Arab and Muslim world. I’m sick of US soldiers dying in those countries, and I’m sick of US soldiers killing civilians there. Let the Europeans take care if this, if it needs taking care of. We have no problem sidling up with dictators all over the world as long as we can do business with them. There’s nothing special about Libya, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with our national security interests. At least it doesn’t now. Who knows what will emerge from a civil war there, and I want no part of it.
Come on, American Presidents aren’t real Presidents until they’ve launched a few Cruise missiles at somebody. It’s now a rite of office, like the swearing-in.
Seriously though, what’s the expected outcome here? Regime change is apparently off the table, so what happens? After a few bombs Gaddafi says, OK, I’ll call the dogs off my people, can I have my country back now? The West retires, feeling virtuous and triumphant. Gaddafi bides his time and eventually his secret police perform by stealth what the West prevented his army from doing. The rebels must know full well that Gaddafi’s word is worthless. The only outcome that will satisfy them is his ousting or the division of the country. The West clearly won’t deliver that.
The whole thing is a charade to salve the Western conscience and if I were a rebel in Benghazi I’d be packing my bags for Egypt now.
Which, as I recall, didn’t go off according to plan.
Watching the news right now, that’s exactly what is happening.
Yes, because the way to prevent future incursions into other countries is to vote Republican :rolleyes:
As a vehemently anti-war, leftist liberal, I was initially inclined to angrily denouncing this as none of our business, too.
How is what’s happening in Libya any interest of the U.S.? Why should we get involved there, if not in Yemen, Tunisia, Egypt, Iran, Bahrain?
But I’ve come around on this. First, what’s happening in Libya isn’t a simple civil war. It’s a dictator threatening annihilation of his citizens, and beginning the follow-through on that threat, forcing formerly peaceful protesters to take up whatever arms they could find to protect themselves. Had the Jews in Germany been able to do the same, would we not have bothered to protect them from their government’s mass extermination efforts?
Second, we aren’t “invading”, nor will we “invade”, which is one way this can be differentiated from the Iraq debacle.
Third, the Yememis, Tunisians, Egyptians, Iranians and Bahrainians haven’t asked for our help; the Libyans have. When victims ask for your help, do you turn your back because it’s none of your business? Do you walk past a rape in progress while the victim is begging you to help because it’s none of your business?
Fourth, we aren’t the instigators here, the French and British are. They have a vested interest in stability in that region. When we asked for their support in our battle against Saddam in Iraq, they backed us up. They’re now asking us to back them up. Do we turn down our allies when they didn’t turn us down? Should we not have their back when they had ours?
And finally, we have the full support of the Arab League here. We have an opportunity to forge some stronger alliances in places where they’re badly needed. We have an opportunity to not look like Cowboys killing Arabs, but friends helping save Arabs. And let’s be honest, even if it doesn’t look much different to us, it does look entirely different to them. And especially in international relations, perception is reality.
I hope it’s short and sweet. I hope there is minimal involvement on our part and that we don’t lose any American lives. I hope we can use this opportunity to help our allies to the ultimate benefit of everyone, especially the people of Libya.
I voted for Barack Obama because I found him to be a thoughtful person. I found him to be pragmatic. I trusted him to be our country’s Commander in Chief because of those qualities. He hasn’t given me any reason to have lost trust in his thoughtfulness or pragmatism, so I have to trust that he did not make this decision lightly, having weighed all the pros and cons. Ultimately, I don’t like it, but I think we’ve done the right thing here.
Not unique to Libya.
Ditto.
The Libyans aren’t the only ones who asked us to help.
No, the French didn’t.
We don’t have any actual support from the Arab League. Just their invitation for us to their dirty work. A few countries may throw a bone into the effort, but it’s Western bombs dropping on Libya.
I’m no Obama fan, to say the least. But that means I need to do what I would have wanted those who were not Bush fans to do, a few years back. And that is to ask the questions that should have been asked before Iraq, and Grenada, and Panama, and Afghanistan, and Viet Nam, and so on.
[ul][li]What is our goal here? Specifically.[/li][li]How are we going to achieve that goal?[/li][li]How much of our resources are we going to commit?[/li][li]How will we know when we have reached the goal?[/li][li]How will we know if we aren’t going to reach it? [/li][li]What is our exit strategy whether we reach the goal or not? [/ul][/li]I am not asking this to embarrass Obama. I have not made up my mind as to whether this is a good thing to intervene, or not. But I sure as hell would like to hear the answers to those questions to help me decide.
Regards,
Shodan
So your answer is to do nothing. President Obama’s answer was to support our allies in the region. I think I’ll trust his judgment over yours.
Our allies have asked us to back them up. I contend we cannot and should not say no. You apparently believe otherwise. I’ll stick with the President on this one, too.
Yes we do have their support. You don’t get your own definition of what support means. They voted nearly unanimously to enforce the no-fly zone over Libya, which is the exact opposite of what they did when we illegally invaded Iraq.
Shayna’s post made me think of why I think Obama agreed to this. A lot of our partners in Afghanistan are getting cold feet, and he had to scratch a few backs so his would get scratched in return. Look for more support for our little adventure in that country in the future.
Shayna: You didn’t say “support”, you said “full support”. What does “full support” mean to you? Permission? If that’s what you meant then fine. We have their permission for us to do their dirty work. Does that make you feel better?
No, John, nothing about this makes me feel better. But I find legitimate reasons for our involvement that go beyond the “imminent threat” argument" that Bush lied to use to get us mired in Iraq. We have allies who have asked for our help. In a complete 180 from their opinion on Iraq, the Arab League is nearly unanimous in wanting us in there this time. We won’t be seen as unwanted invaders, but invited supporters.
Your mileage is free to vary.
Shayna, do you believe my questions should be answered before we get involved? Do you think they have been?
Regards,
Shodan
Has it occurred to you that answering your questions in public would be pretty stupid and give Kah-Daffy the upper hand in determining his strategy?
Cripes, you’re an idiot.
Regards,
Shodan