Libya rebels face last stand as Gaddafi forces zero in on Benghazi Watch

2ndClass
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#41
Report 7 years ago
#41
If the Arab League called for a No Fly Zone, why can't they carry it out? why are they waiting for the West to do it? Egypt alone has one of the most advanced Air Forces by Middle Eastern standards and can easily cripple the Libyan Air Force.

Inept indeed.
0
quote
reply
Suetonius
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#42
Report 7 years ago
#42
(Original post by 2ndClass)
If the Arab League called for a No Fly Zone, why can't they carry it out? why are they waiting for the West to do it? Egypt alone has one of the most advanced Air Forces by Middle Eastern standards and can easily cripple the Libyan Air Force.

Inept indeed.
This isn't anything new. Whenever another country or regional body wants something done (i.e. prevent ethnic cleansing in Bosnia, genocide in Rwanda etc.) it is always the United States who they expect to execute it. They're burdened with such demands on a regular basis, and are criticised when they carry out their own legitimate foreign policy (i.e. Afghanistan and Iraq). They're criticised when they do intervene, and they're criticised when they don't. It is a perverse anti-Americanism that defines a majority of people who comment on its foreign policy: not "anti-interventionism" (whatever that means; it should be obvious to anyone that passivity simply favours the side with the largest amount of force).
0
quote
reply
Square
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#43
Report 7 years ago
#43
I am proud of the governments stance on libya. For weeks now we and the French have been calling for some kind of military support be that a no fly zone or arming the rebels. We do not have sufficient resources to do this ourselves, and the Germans, Russians and Chinese have blocked any kind of multinational response.

Barack Obama has said absolutely nothing of substance on libya. I dont exactly blame him. The UK has been 'intervening' in cases like this for a long long time, by this we mean putting our best boys into the firing lines of some crazy extremists, we brought down the slave trade, encouraged democracy and brought law and order to two thirds of the globe and all it got us was a load of hate from a bunch of ungrateful *******s at home and abroad.
0
quote
reply
darknessbehold
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#44
Report 7 years ago
#44
Don't worry, this is just the Empire Strikes Back. Theres still Return of the Jedi you know. Rebels will defo win.
2
quote
reply
Salazar
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#45
Report 7 years ago
#45
Can China be world policeman for this crisis, please?
0
quote
reply
Aphotic Cosmos
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#46
Report 7 years ago
#46
(Original post by Salazar)
Can China be world policeman for this crisis, please?
No, they won't step in. China wants Gaddafi to succeed. If the rebels win then it's another blow against authoritarianism that China can't afford to have.
0
quote
reply
Enoch.
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#47
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#47
(Original post by darknessbehold)
Don't worry, this is just the Empire Strikes Back. Theres still Return of the Jedi you know. Rebels will defo win.
Shouldn't laugh at this but...lol
0
quote
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#48
Report 7 years ago
#48
(Original post by Suetonius)
This isn't anything new. Whenever another country or regional body wants something done (i.e. prevent ethnic cleansing in Bosnia, genocide in Rwanda etc.) it is always the United States who they expect to execute it. They're burdened with such demands on a regular basis, and are criticised when they carry out their own legitimate foreign policy (i.e. Afghanistan and Iraq). They're criticised when they do intervene, and they're criticised when they don't. It is a perverse anti-Americanism that defines a majority of people who comment on its foreign policy: not "anti-interventionism" (whatever that means; it should be obvious to anyone that passivity simply favours the side with the largest amount of force).
The USA are criticised because they are hypocritical. Throughout their history they have said they want to promote freedom and they will openly support dictatorships at the same time.

Or they will exaggerate/make things up to attack other countries which they did in Iraq and Kosovo.

Let's not pretend that they are overburdened either at the moment and that they cannot even bomb Libya.

China and Russia are also criticised quite often. However, no one expects them to invade Libya because they don't claim to promote freedom and etc around the world. They quite openly don't care.

The same way that the British were criticised when they ran their empire. On one hand they claimed to be a bastion of civility and etc, whilst their troops were massacring unarmed Indian civilians.
0
quote
reply
hamijack
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#49
Report 7 years ago
#49
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
A full scale invasion isn't needed. I don't think anyone is suggesting that they should have one either. Most of Gadaffis recent success comes from the huge bombardments using heavy artillery and aircraft. Using strategic bombing it should be fairly easy to take them out, especially the aircraft considering he does have a huge number.

I am not sure why the AU should be responsible. They are incompetent. Neither am I sure why South Africa or Nigera should have a greater say in the matter when the countries of Southern Europe would be more affected by such an action.
Bombing is still an act of war on Gaddafi and his supporters and would still stand the risk of killing civvies. In addition we probably don't have the resources to enforce a No-fly zone with the current cuts (however I don't know this for sure).

The AU should be responsible because it is Africa and as such is their problem. If they decide to call for our aid in enforcing the no-fly then that would be different. However its not NATO jurisdiction so unless they ask us we should keep out.
0
quote
reply
hollywoodbudgie
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#50
Report 7 years ago
#50
(Original post by Craig_D)
I didn't say we should feel guilty, just that that there will be those who try to make us. The hypocritical media will have a field day when the numbers of Libyan dead are revealed, and we're constantly asked if we could have stopped it.
Have the mental strength to resist media brainwashing.

(Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
The difference between Iraq (which I did not agree with at the time or now, but do accept that it removed a ruthless dictator from power) and what should happen in Libya is that Saddam wasn't really doing anything more objectionable than any other dictator in 2003, whereas Gaddafi is in the process of slaughtering his own people. Like I said - if he gets to Benghazi, it will be a massacre.

Frankly I don't give a damn whether this has ramifications in the "war on terror" or wider relations with the Arabic or Islamic world, there are thousands of people dying at the hands of their leader and as mature, powerful democracies we would do well to help them. We should not cast aside what is right for the sake of what is expedient.
The worst of the violence is carried out by land forces such as tanks and artillery. A no-fly zone would not stop these. In fact, it would not necessarily stop the helicopters. I feel for the rebels too, but I disagree that a no-fly zone would be the best solution.

(Original post by Stalin)
The same reason you feel the need to help the Palestinians, despite not being Palestinian yourself.
I do not feel guilt or responsibility for Palestinian suffering.

(Original post by Stalin)
Why can't our government deem the lives of a few million Libyans its top priority?
Since when has the goverment cared so much about the lives of people in other countries if there is no benefit to their own country?

For instance, let us think back to the genocide in Rwanda. The USA banned its officials from using the term 'genocide' and did not even use its skills to get the génocidaire radio off the air because 'the traditional US commitment to free speech cannot be reconciled with such a measure'. France backed the genocidal government and there is even much speculation that one of their generals advised the Hutus to keep corpses out of the sight of cameras.

Western goverments should certainly not be perceived as a justice league that sets out to amend the atrocities in other countries as their top priority.
0
quote
reply
Suetonius
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#51
Report 7 years ago
#51
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
The USA are criticised because they are hypocritical. Throughout their history they have said they want to promote freedom and they will openly support dictatorships at the same time.
Perhaps so, but it's similarly just as hypocritical to go from opposing dictators to opposing their overthrow just because the United States shifts their position. It's a simple truth that the Left treated Kurdistan and others living under Ba'athist repression as one of their main causes during the 1980s. And then 1991 came: the United States turned course on Iraq, and the so-called Left suddenly comes to treat the Ba'athist oligarchy/criminal mafia as some sort of victim. You will also find these pseudo-intellectual types fervently defending Iran's nuclear programme against legitimate international criticism, while blaming the U.S. for its support of Mubarak and the House of Saud (both of these countries being overwhelmingly supplied by other countries, by the way). I have absolutely no time for such a hypocritical sentiment either. I have no time for people who simply base the credibility of a foreign policy decision on the basis of what the United States chooses to do. I don't care if, when I believe there is a case for war, the warmaking power has a "hypocritical" record. I care about each specific case, judging them by their own merits. I would not, for example, have opposed the overthrow of the Khmer Rouge in 1979/80 because the Vietnamese who invaded may have had close relations with the equally repugnant thugs in Moscow.

Or they will exaggerate/make things up to attack other countries which they did in Iraq and Kosovo.
As I said, I don't care about any official U.S. governmental claim when I believe that a certain foreign policy decision is worthwhile (although I'd still be willing to argue that the case for WMD/terrorism is still one of the strongest arguments for the war).

China and Russia are also criticised quite often. However, no one expects them to invade Libya because they don't claim to promote freedom and etc around the world. They quite openly don't care.
Oh, brilliant. Of course, support for regimes significantly worse than any U.S.-backed regime (i.e. North Korea, Zimbabwe, Sudan, Myanmar etc.), and expansionist ventures in Georgia, can never be worse than "hypocrisy". :rolleyes:

The same way that the British were criticised when they ran their empire. On one hand they claimed to be a bastion of civility and etc, whilst their troops were massacring unarmed Indian civilians.
You give away your whole argument with this cheap point. What Iraqi civilians have the U.S. forces taken into slavery (with official government mandate)? What Iraqi civilians have been subjected to routine slaughter? What Iraqi homes have been pillaged by U.S. forces, without punishment? What Iraqi women have been systematically raped and tortured recreationally? Don't cite isolated cases, which we all know about and all condemn. Iraq is governed by Iraqis, for Iraqis, with a Kurdish President (something almost unthinkable 10 years ago).
0
quote
reply
ChaoticSkills
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#52
Report 7 years ago
#52
(Original post by hamijack)
Bombing is still an act of war on Gaddafi and his supporters and would still stand the risk of killing civvies. In addition we probably don't have the resources to enforce a No-fly zone with the current cuts (however I don't know this for sure).

The AU should be responsible because it is Africa and as such is their problem. If they decide to call for our aid in enforcing the no-fly then that would be different. However its not NATO jurisdiction so unless they ask us we should keep out.
AU responsible for Libya? are you serious, nobody in Africa likes them They've been involved in battles with Egypt, Chad and Tanzania. Not even the Arab league respect Gaddafi or his regime, they regard him as the lowest of the low. Only the PLO respect him and thats because he supplies arms to them. Not to mention they probably dont have the mindset or guts to start such an operation.

If the west really wants to help Libya then they should do what the U.S did with Al Qaeda and thats arm them and provide financial aid to help fight off Gaddafis troops since they are such humanitarians :rolleyes: Plus a proxy war would suit them a lot more...

Or alternatively send a joint coalition of Nato troops to diffuse the situation. It worked in the Bosnian and Kosovan wars whos to say it wouldnt this time around?

What makes me laugh is once all of these stories began appearing on the media, everyone suddenly decides that Libyas the bad nation. Two months ago you didn't hear a peep out of them, now Gaddafis threatening Civilians suddenly the west feel that its their duty to help the poor oppressed people of Libya.
0
quote
reply
Craig_D
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#53
Report 7 years ago
#53
(Original post by hollywoodbudgie)
Have the mental strength to resist media brainwashing.
Who says I don't? I say 'we' meaning the public at large, it is not specifically self including; otherwise I wouldn't have been able to point out that the media intentionally manipulate?
0
quote
reply
Craig_D
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#54
Report 7 years ago
#54
(Original post by Stalin)
Iraq and Libya are two very different scenarios.



The same reason you feel the need to help the Palestinians, despite not being Palestinian yourself.



Why can't our government deem the lives of a few million Libyans its top priority?
Stalin, Stalin, Stalin, Stalin.

You have returned, as have I :awesome:
0
quote
reply
PendulumBoB
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#55
Report 7 years ago
#55
The West truly is "the old man" of the world, always talking about nothing when they should be acting. If the balance of power between east and west tips in the other direction it shall be due to western incompetance at least as much as eastern dynamism.
0
quote
reply
Aj12
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#56
Report 7 years ago
#56
(Original post by 2ndClass)
If the Arab League called for a No Fly Zone, why can't they carry it out? why are they waiting for the West to do it? Egypt alone has one of the most advanced Air Forces by Middle Eastern standards and can easily cripple the Libyan Air Force.

Inept indeed.
Egypt is in to much of a state to do it.
0
quote
reply
yituool
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#57
Report 7 years ago
#57
Gaddafi doesn't have enough forces to capture and hold a city of around a million people. He's gonna have to shell most of them first.

Siege of Sarajevo ROUND 2. Hopefully we get Operation Deliberate Force ROUND 2.
0
quote
reply
ChaoticSkills
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#58
Report 7 years ago
#58
(Original post by Craig_D)
Who says I don't? I say 'we' meaning the public at large, it is not specifically self including; otherwise I wouldn't have been able to point out that the media intentionally manipulate?
If you want "The Truth" without bias use this website, their articles are written by people who have no commericial interest. Quite leftist and anti-neoliberal if I do say so myself. You might have to search for articles though, everybodies written a bunch of stuff on the middle east within the last few weeks.

www.indymedia.org.uk

Also, they've got other branches around the world so if you googled them you'd probably find their other websites. Sorry, I dont mean to sound like I'm trying to recruit you there or something. You just seem like someone who's likely to read their articles.
0
quote
reply
yituool
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#59
Report 7 years ago
#59
(Original post by Swell)
Typical West, nothing in it for them so they just turn around and say they're "thinking about it"... They don't give two ****s about human rights aslong as they can still go and cuddle up to Gaddafi for some of his oil. The rebels stand no chance against the Army, its going to be a massacre and many innocent people will die, Gaddafi will reagin power and it'll all be over. Sickening!

Haha i'm so angry. No doubt they'll do nothing about Bahrain aswell, just claim the "Rebels" (Freedom Fighters) are supporters of The Muslim Brotherhood, of which the absolute majority are not.
Ffs lrn2history. Don't remember Bosnia, Somalia or Kosovo do you?

If the West wanted to "cuddle up to Gaddafi" they wouldn't be arming the rebels.

How old are you, 14?
1
quote
reply
yituool
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#60
Report 7 years ago
#60
(Original post by eLECTROLOSIS)
Well it was the Russians and the Chinese fault for vetoing the resolution at the UN...
I'll assume you're talking about a No-fly zone. Firstly the resolution hasn't been voted on yet. Secondly, a no-fly zone won't stop Gadz from shelling the city with ground ordnance.
0
quote
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Were you ever put in isolation at school?

Yes (76)
27.54%
No (200)
72.46%

Watched Threads

View All