Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    I liked you. I liked your threads. I liked your polls.

    But you are a dolt.

    Why have we not invaded Zimbabwe or a host of other countries?

    Write this down.

    BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO REBELLION TO SUPPORT. THEY DO NOT WANT US

    Libya has been begging for our support. No other countries are nor do they have the means to oust their governments mostly on their own.

    We have a chance to help the Libyan people liberate themselves.
    I, and these people beg to differ

    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by The_Male_Melons)
    The most important countries.

    So From democratic countries such as Germany, Brazil, India, to important countries such as China and Russia did not intervene.

    Such a burden has to be placed on UK shoulders to liberate many around the world.

    We have the largest deficit and debt in the industrialised world, yet sadly, despite all the savings being made, it is our moral duty to be in Libya than to be in Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe or even the Ivory Coast.

    This moral duty does costs an awful lot of money.

    We can't be the world police, unless we know a country that is weaker than us, can easily turn into foe and has natural resources.

    Judging by every paper- read some of the comments on the telegraph, or the daily mail, or even listen to the BBC radio stations which feature ordinary people's voices- Not one comment (unless worse rated) have supported this intervention. Even on Question Time, many agreed with Kelvin Mackenzie and the Green party's Caroline Lucas as opposed to the rest of the panel.

    Will the Libyan be greeting us with open arms or will it be another Iraq?
    Russia and China never intervene. In anything. Unless its right on their doorstep.

    Oh God this is getting long/ You ****ing moron. I am getting sick of explaining this to idiots like you. THERE IS NO REBELLION IN THOSE COUNTRIES TO SUPPORT.

    There will be no troops in Libya so it cannot be an Iraq moron.

    The rebels (the only Libyans with the freedom to tell us they want out help) have already asked for it.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Bishy786)
    I, and these people beg to differ

    http://www.aolnews.com/2011/03/07/ga...st-for-no-fly/

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news...ectid=10711553

    These people all disagree.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jackthevillain)
    Im talking about English muslims and with you being Australian or living in Australia you cant really say a huge deal about this.
    Ad hominem, and not even done convincingly at that. Even if I were to give you the benefit of the doubt and pretend we were in fact discussing English Muslims and my being Australian renders my argument invalid, then I'd assert that I've visited the UK several times and lived for months at a time in London. My point still stands that the simple act of saying Allah(u)Akbar does not make one an extremist. Just like someone saying 'God bless you' to you, or vice versa, does not make either of you trigger-happy terrorists.

    Now what about my argument doesn't apply to England (or any other country for that matter)?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Russia and China never intervene. In anything. Unless its right on their doorstep.

    Oh God this is getting long/ You ****ing moron. I am getting sick of explaining this to idiots like you. THERE IS NO REBELLION IN THOSE COUNTRIES TO SUPPORT.

    There will be no troops in Libya so it cannot be an Iraq moron.

    The rebels (the only Libyans with the freedom to tell us they want out help) have already asked for it.
    So you say existing armed opposition creates a precedent in which we must act? Does this not leave many countries languishing then because they are unable to get together a proper armed resistance because even the smallest dissent is crushed violently?

    Also, in a theoretical world where by an armed group who wish to bring Britain under a completely different system, would you support American, Russian, European, Iranian, Chinese intervention if they wished to bomb our ground troops trying to keep it all under control?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, they want a "no-fly zone" but not bombings of tanks and artillery because they can take them out themselves.

    They just want a UN no fly zone not a full scale invasion of their country with planes patrolling the their sovereign airspace.

    Read unbiased news stories: http://rt.com/news/military-full-swing-libya/
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jetsetgirl)
    My point still stands that the simple act of saying Allah(u)Akbar does not make one an extremist. Just like someone saying 'God bless you' to you, or vice versa, does not make either of you trigger-happy terrorists.
    ..
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bishy786)
    On the day of UN intervention, Colonel Gadaffi's troops were launching an attack on the rebel stronghold of Benghazi. The rebels are outgunned and outmanned. They could not do it alone.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by small t tory.)
    Oh shut up and go chain yourself to a tree you hippy.

    It's not a full scale invasion, it's a no fly zone. We are stopping Gadaffi's planes from attacking his own people and we are stopping Gadaffi's ground forces from attacking his own people. All our planes are doing is bombing a few military places, like oil reserves and weaponries in order to halt Gadaffi's men. It's not like we're sending ground troops into combat. Now shut the hell up with all your claptrap about our evil government. Cameron has been brilliant in this crisis, decisive from the very beginning whilst Obama has been dancing around the issue for weeks. if we had it your way we would have murderous dictators all over the world getting away with genocide whilst people like you fret over the conservation of blackbirds.
    Excellent post, couldn't have put it better myself!
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    I liked you. I liked your threads. I liked your polls.

    But you are a dolt.

    Why have we not invaded Zimbabwe or a host of other countries?

    Write this down.

    BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO REBELLION TO SUPPORT. THEY DO NOT WANT US

    Libya has been begging for our support. No other countries are nor do they have the means to oust their governments mostly on their own.

    We have a chance to help the Libyan people liberate themselves.
    Nah, this is the first time he's actually making sense.

    (Original post by Sovr'gnChancellor£)
    Do you not still like me?

    Many Chinese people have also called for our help - why do we not help them?

    There is a degree of corruption and self-interest here and you know it!
    :yy: There is, with everything that any government does
    Besides, America, France, the UK & other western countries have little hope of getting new oil contracts in the future :lol:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ForensicShoe)
    On the day of UN intervention, Colonel Gadaffi's troops were launching an attack on the rebel stronghold of Benghazi. The rebels are outgunned and outmanned. They could not do it alone.
    The only wanted a no fly zone. Not a bloody invasion with cruise missiles targeting military vehicles and tanks because the rebels said they could do it themselves. Also, why did the aircraft target Tripoli?

    So what your basically saying is that the UK, America, France and other countries are supporting a coup by supplying rebels with heavy artillery and trying to level the playing field between the two sides?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by The_Male_Melons)
    USA, UK and France only intervene if they have interests. They didn't go "oh no, Gadaffi is killing his people" but rather "****, we need the oil and this ain't looking good".

    Why isn't India, Brazil or even Germany supporting it? Why aren't the people of France and Britain supporting this? All the newspapers supporting it yet the comments below highlight a different picture.

    I am a moron- for decades those countries citizens have cried out for help. Where is the humanitarian care? Does it stop all of a sudden? Explain to me why we can't help them? Even in instances where there were rebellions? Or is the middle east oil priority?

    We might not be on the ground now- but what is to say that won't happen. Most people are expecting that to happen.

    You seem to ignore the fact that many Arab people in the particular the Libyans view this intervention with great suspicion.

    Will we be greeted with open arms or will it be another ungrateful Iraq?

    Of course Gadaffi needs to be stopped but let the Libyan deal with the situation by themselves. This moral duty is costing a lot of money and lives. Sometimes it is better to do nothing than to do something. We have a deficit and debt that needs reducing and not increasing because of another unpopular war.
    Then why not attack Iran. Far better pay off.

    Far as I can tell the people are supporting it as well as most Mp's. Germany is generally neutral with these kinds of things. As is Brazil.

    As I keep saying again and again. THERE WAS NO REBELLION TO SUPPORT. Thats why we are doing this now. Different governments have different problems.

    People complain when we do nothing yet they complain when we try to do something.

    Lots of things say it won't happen. The public won't accept it its illegal and we don't want to be on the ground.

    The Libyans are trying to deal with the situation and now they are begging for our help.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Bishy786)
    Yes, they want a "no-fly zone" but not bombings of tanks and artillery because they can take them out themselves.

    They just want a UN no fly zone not a full scale invasion of their country with planes patrolling the their sovereign airspace.

    Read unbiased news stories: http://rt.com/news/military-full-swing-libya/
    A no fly zone is planes patrolling the sky you fool. How else would it be enforced? We are trying to stop tanks from shelling civilian areas. As well as try to force a proper ceasefire.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bishy786)
    The only wanted a no fly zone. Not a bloody invasion with cruise missiles targeting military vehicles and tanks because the rebels said they could do it themselves. Also, why did the aircraft target Tripoli?

    So what your basically saying is that the UK, America, France and other countries are supporting a coup by supplying rebels with heavy artillery and trying to level the playing field between the two sides?
    It isn't an invasion. The Tomahawks were launched to take out Libyan anti-air defences to clear the way for UN aircraft so that Libya's air force can be grounded and, therefore, allow the no fly zone to be enforced.

    As for your other two points regarding Tripoli and 'supplying rebels with heavy artillery' > Sources please.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by adam_zed)
    So you say existing armed opposition creates a precedent in which we must act? Does this not leave many countries languishing then because they are unable to get together a proper armed resistance because even the smallest dissent is crushed violently?

    Also, in a theoretical world where by an armed group who wish to bring Britain under a completely different system, would you support American, Russian, European, Iranian, Chinese intervention if they wished to bomb our ground troops trying to keep it all under control?
    Pretty much. We can't help every or even some countries. Its just the world we live. At least we are doing something for once rather than sitting back and watching. This may put other dictators on edge to. Show that they cannot bomb their own people without consequence.

    Depends. If the British government had been using tanks and planes to put down unrest and if it had a 40 year history of brutally against its own people. Then yes I would.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by amsie/)
    Nah, this is the first time he's actually making sense.


    :yy: There is, with everything that any government does
    Besides, America, France, the UK & other western countries have little hope of getting new oil contracts in the future :lol:
    Been waiting for you to show up.:cool:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Then why not attack Iran. Far better pay off.

    Far as I can tell the people are supporting it as well as most Mp's. Germany is generally neutral with these kinds of things. As is Brazil.

    As I keep saying again and again. THERE WAS NO REBELLION TO SUPPORT. Thats why we are doing this now. Different governments have different problems.

    People complain when we do nothing yet they complain when we try to do something.

    Lots of things say it won't happen. The public won't accept it its illegal and we don't want to be on the ground.

    The Libyans are trying to deal with the situation and now they are begging for our help.

    Maybe Libya is weaker than Iran...

    Libya was allies and then in a few weeks turned foe. How bizarre?

    There are rebellions in the Ivory Coast, in Saudi Arabia, in Zimbabwe against their governments. Even now. No moral duty has occurred.

    What people want is to leave other countries alone. To stop interfering. To stop being the world police.

    What is to say- ground troops won't be there. Iraq was illegal yet nothing happened.

    Let the Libyans people deal with it themselves. If they need help, then get their neighbours involved. They already view this intervention as it is from the west hence a great suspicion.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by The_Male_Melons)
    Maybe Libya is weaker than Iran...

    Libya was allies and then in a few weeks turned foe. How bizarre?

    There are rebellions in the Ivory Coast, in Saudi Arabia, in Zimbabwe against their governments. Even now. No moral duty has occurred.

    What people want is to leave other countries alone. To stop interfering. To stop being the world police.

    What is to say- ground troops won't be there. Iraq was illegal yet nothing happened.

    Let the Libyans people deal with it themselves. If they need help, then get their neighbours involved. They already view this intervention as it is from the west hence a great suspicion.
    It would still be crushed easily. We already had oil contracts in Libya why **** that up with a no fly zone?

    Hardly. Libya was never an ally. He hates the West and we hate him. It just happens that we at one point had more to gain and so did he.

    None of them are of this scale. They are mostly unarmed protesters. Libya is practically a war with an armed rebellion that was doing pretty well against the government until he started using planes on them and any other civilians that he did't like.

    So we should watch massacres?.

    There won't be ground troops. If that happens support will evaporate. Labour will have a field day, and the government may even fall.

    They have asked for help. If people are begging for help we should give it to them.
    if it is practical and likely to succeed.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Been waiting for you to show up.:cool:
    Missed everything, I like my sleep :yawn:

    (Original post by The_Male_Melons)
    Maybe Libya is weaker than Iran...

    Libya was allies and then in a few weeks turned foe. How bizarre?

    There are rebellions in the Ivory Coast, in Saudi Arabia, in Zimbabwe against their governments. Even now. No moral duty has occurred.

    What people want is to leave other countries alone. To stop interfering. To stop being the world police.

    What is to say- ground troops won't be there. Iraq was illegal yet nothing happened.

    Let the Libyans people deal with it themselves. If they need help, then get their neighbours involved. They already view this intervention as it is from the west hence a great suspicion.
    Yup, Iran's crazy :lol:
    Well, yeah, we do whatever suits us. We need to get rid of gaddafi for definite now
    I seriously doubt it's for moral reasons.The government/ the UN have no morals . If the Libyans wanted help, then we should try, I just don't see why we're not helping countries that are worse off. I guess this isn't as bad because the whole thing was backed by the un, with a few countries abstaining, but it's still nothing like iraq. Agreed. France is fronting the whole thing anyway so fingers crossed it won't be too bad.
 
 
 
Poll
Are you going to a festival?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.