This is a parody thread, right?
If you were in charge, exactly what would you do and how could we pay for it? How could we align our allies to support us? How could we maintain the good will (if we have any) of other Arabic states? You talk a good fight; how about telling us how to implement that fight?
Neocons want Obama to intervene in Libya:
Excerpt from open letter signed by the likes of Kristol, Bremer and Liz Cheney:
If the world does not act quickly enough the US cannot help but take action on its own Why wouldn’t the freedom fighters love the opportunity of an end to airstrikes.
I support them to help the Libyan people and to restore America’s standing as a bonus. You do realize this action will save Libyan lives?
And people’s opinions are not a great indicator of truth. Including the Third World and thus all the world’s people, most people would be rabidly homophobic, sexist, racist, and ignorant. Thus they are easily swayed by relatively simplistic things into loving and hating America.
But to your exact points-Afghanistan was pretty much inevitable no matter who was President and Iraq, I agree, may have been a mistake and I do not advocate McCarthyite rhetoric. My point was world opinion turned so viciously anti-American after the IRaq War, people were easily swayed against America/
Yes, hence the quotation marks.
We will pay for it with our tax money, for a far more noble purpose than supporting an artist who smears elephant feces on a picture of the Virgin mary. Remember, I do not advocate invasion, only a no-fly zone. Plus considering the world is crying out for it, we will have world opinion solidly behind us.
We spend damn little money on artists who smear elephant feces on pictures of the virgin Mary.
I do like your answer to my question concerning you intellectualism. You’re getting better as time goes on. Keep it up.
I’ve seen the kind of help right-wing interventionism results in, thanks. And America’s standing means nothing to me, so that’s no argument at all.
I have no reason whatsoever to think that other than your say-so.
Why? We can surgically strike the anti aircraft positions and disable the guns without killing people. Then we can bomb radar installations when nobody is at work. Then we can gently shoot down their planes allowing the pilots to parachute safely.
Then ,the rebels will peacefully take over the government, quietly retiring the soldiers and Kadaffy backers.
Of course, none of our planes would be shot down or pilots would be killed either.
But we’re broke, according to some politicians. We ain’t go no tax money to spare; we’re cutting everything in sight in from our budget and our deficit is beyond belief and getting bigger every day. If the whole world is crying out for a no fly zone, let the whole world put their money where their mouth is. You’re improving Qin but I think you’re just a little bit idealistic. (I intended to add this to my post #45 but forgot it. I do like your answer to my jab at you regarding the intellectual thing; I had it coming.)
France and Britain want to do it. It requires NATO agreement, which means the US has to agree, too, along with other countries.
If the US doesn’t have the money then we have to decline to get involved. I’m sick of my money going off-shore while hearing that we need to cut Social Security. I’m a lot more invested in preserving SS than in intervening in another foreign venture.
The U.S. is not going to act on its own.
Well, you’ve proved your own point: you said people disliked America because of leftist agitation, and you were wrong.
Then don’t use it.
The war was one reason their opinions were swayed. In 2002 and 2003, the U.S. accused Iraq of having dangerous weapons and links to terrorists (without much evidence) and demanded Iraq allow weapons inspections. Iraq did that and destroyed some of its own weapons. The U.S. then invaded anyway and found none of the weapons it said were there. Leftist agitators were not the reason this looked bad.
This is a ridiculous statement. You obviously only know about this painting from a controversy you’ve heard about, as the picture you are thinking of was not funded by taxpayers. In any case a war in Libya would not be paid for with money from the budget of the NEA. My taxes go to a lot of ridiculous crap I don’t support. It’s not a compelling reason to say some of them are worse than a no-fly zone or a war in Libya.
Wolfowitz, too, according to Maureen Dowd.
Kristol, Bremer, Wolfowitz, and (Liz) Cheney – when have those folks ever been wrong?
Jeez, it’s like an Axis of Screw Up.
I fully expect to hear any day now how they know where GaKaChaGhaWhatever-Daffhi has weapons of mass destruction, and that they’re in the areas east, west, north and south of Tripoli.
Yeah… no. I assume you’re talking about The Holy Virgin Mary by Chris Ofili. Some things to take into consideration for your comparison:[ol]
[li]The painting was not commisioned or sold to the US. No tax money payed for it’s creation. In fact, it’s not even in the country anymore, which isn’t a suprise since it was part of a touring exhibition and never permanent. (I think it’s currently in Tasmania)[/li][li]Chris Ofili is British and is not now nor has he ever been employed by the US Government, whether to create artwork for them or in any other capacity.[/li][li]The debate was using this as an excuse to defund the Brooklyn Museum of Art, one of the top art institution in the world.[/li][li]The Brooklyn Museum of Art receives very little federal funding, most of the money comes from private donors and New York City.[/li][li]Even if you took all the tax money the museum receives (ignoring for a moment that most of it isn’t the federal government’s money to take back or spend) you’d probably get less than $10 million a year. Good luck paying for a No-Fly Zone with that.[/li][/ol]
Cite that the world is crying out for it? We aren’t the only people with planes, so why hasn’t any other country set one up? Please provide a list of Heads of State who have publically asked the US to create one or the UN resolution requesting its creation.
And do you no longer count Canada or Russia as part of the world? Both countries have stated that they don’t approve of any outside military intervention at this time.
You misunderstand me. There’s a big difference between not voting against it and having to do it. France and Britain are trying to persuade NATO. The US and China are currently voting against it, so nothing can legally happen. NATO can do it without the US but it legally needs the US’s vote.
I don’t know about the Russians, but we Canadians are a simple folk, and easily swayed.
Actually, that claim is even more baseless. No one “smear[ed] elephant feces on a picture of the Virgin mary.” What the artist actually created was an image using multiple media, one of which happened to be elephant dung. Many of his works employ techniques and materials from his Ethiopian heritage and elephant dung is one of the materials used in that culture’s art. Dung provides a three-dimensional image, (much as paper-mâché which was probably not well-known in Ethiopia in earlier times), while not being too heavy to adhere to canvas as clay would. Rather than “smearing” that substance, he used it to create images of cherubs and other figures common to many European Christian works.
(You really do need to pay enough attention to actual facts to avoid embarrassment.)
Isn’t it just amazing?
back to the OP
. Yes if you think starting another war, spending billions more dollars of tax money, creating more hatred of American Imperialism and killing more innocent Middle Easterners is a better job, then Bush would have done a better job.
The Bushes are war mongers and signatories to the military-industrial complex and have a history with Gaddafi. As such, this kind of situation would have suited them to a tee and they likely would have done a better job of it; or at least, have done something.
The repercussions of a ‘Bush approach’ to Lybia are far less lucid however.