Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Russ0707)
    I think you are one to jump into fights without thinking about the real bigger picture. The fact of the matter is it IS none of our business. End. Different country so yeh leave em be. Now i'm not racist in any way shape or form in fact ive lived in several countries including pakistan and im only 21 so its not some unjust bias.
    I have only ever been in one fight in my life, and that was to help my friend.

    (Original post by Russ0707)
    We cant afford it. You say if someone mugged you in the street and everyone walked on by... well think about that for a minute firstly it doesnt cost anything to fight with your fists.. if the bystanders went to the shop and bought a load of weaponry then it sounds more like whats actually happening.. but anyway how can you not see that thats whats happening to us right now! Our own government is mugging US stealing our hard earned money that should be going on the things we were promised and yeah they are murdering us by getting us involved in an obviously unstable situation! Our economy simply cannot afford it and im pretty certain the vast majority of the public when shown what COULD be given to them instead such as better investment for healthcare, free innoculation for children or lower taxes (yeah unlikely i know but still you get the point) would all be like oh yeah sh!t what are we doing!
    1) It may cost bystanders a lot if they themselves get over-powered and mugged!

    2) We have got a huge military, it costs relativley little to use it compared to the general cost of maintaining it.

    I just think that when innocent people and children are getting killed, its anyones business, and its hard to put a price on peoples lives.

    (Original post by Russ0707)
    .. its not about oil obviously its not bcos it wouldnt be cost efficient with how much is being wasted just flying around/missiles etc.. the only thing remotely likely is nuclear bt again we'll never know.. but in about 10 years when we convert more to fission eyebrows may raise..
    nuclear? Does libia have lots of uranium or something? The world really needs fission or its going to completley implode in the next hundred years in my opinion...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Russ0707)
    I think you are one to jump into fights without thinking about the real bigger picture. The fact of the matter is it IS none of our business. End. Different country so yeh leave em be. Now i'm not racist in any way shape or form in fact ive lived in several countries including pakistan and im only 21 so its not some unjust bias.

    We cant afford it. You say if someone mugged you in the street and everyone walked on by... well think about that for a minute firstly it doesnt cost anything to fight with your fists.. if the bystanders went to the shop and bought a load of weaponry then it sounds more like whats actually happening.. but anyway how can you not see that thats whats happening to us right now! Our own government is mugging US stealing our hard earned money that should be going on the things we were promised and yeah they are murdering us by getting us involved in an obviously unstable situation! Our economy simply cannot afford it and im pretty certain the vast majority of the public when shown what COULD be given to them instead such as better investment for healthcare, free innoculation for children or lower taxes (yeah unlikely i know but still you get the point) would all be like oh yeah sh!t what are we doing!

    .. its not about oil obviously its not bcos it wouldnt be cost efficient with how much is being wasted just flying around/missiles etc.. the only thing remotely likely is nuclear bt again we'll never know.. but in about 10 years when we convert more to fission eyebrows may raise..
    So you're not a racist, good, but your willing to let people die because of where they come from? That's much better then. Remember, according to gaddafi's own rhetoric he was going to slaughter the people of Benghazi house by house.

    The cost of using these weapons isn't actually that great, especially considering we already had them. And frankly, this is what they are for.

    What on earth has libya got to do with anything nuclear? (genuinely interested if there's something to that)

    A mugger is not an appropriate analogy. More like having an argument in the street with a guy who then decides to kill you, and everybody on your street because you won't do what he wants. If the police show up to stop him, I wouldn't much care what country they were from.

    To the OP: This is not about oil. This is not about imperialism. This is not Iraq. This is a humanitarian intervention to stop the slaughter of the rebels, whoever they are, and of innocent people. Yes there probably are strategic elements, but they are tangential, and not even such a bad thing. And maybe, just maybe, it's not best just to blurt them everywhere?

    Yes shock horror international politics is at work and we aren't being told exactly how. Since that is ALWAYS happening, why is it suddenly such a big deal? And 'strategic' is not a dirty word, either.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hanvyj)
    How would I feel if I was being pretty much held captive in my own house, under threat of execution by someone living with me and you came in (with your friends), removed him (either by killing him or otherwise) and finantially supported me and gave me training for a while before simply leaving me on my own, then continued on friendly terms with me for the indefinate future??

    I'd be pretty happy
    That's not how it works and you know it. Fake liberty comes at a price.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by garethDT)
    That's not how it works and you know it. Fake liberty comes at a price.
    Fake liberty? How does it work?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hanvyj)
    Fake liberty? How does it work?
    When you make a country socially liberal but economically enslaved. At the moment the Libyan state has a largely nationalised oil industry from which the Libyan people do see some benefits such as free education and healthcare.

    The UN resolution has already banned these state owned oil companies from doing business. The plan is to topple Gadaffi and then to completely privatise Libya's oil industry so all the profits go to the likes of BP and Shell.

    The real war is the same old left v right, nationalisation v privatisation.

    The totalitarianism v liberalism war exists only in the PR war, it's an argument that is only ever used as a cover for the real war.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by robin22391)
    Libya another country with oil.

    since when does a no-fly zone involve destroying tanks?

    where is the real evidence of the apparent massacres of unarmed civilians, why did i only find out today than the rebels also have jets,why is the news so biased, why did france recognise basically the libyan version of the ira as a government,where is all the journalistic evidence???.

    And why did the SAS land in a mi6 agents back garden in a helicopter dressed in black with a bag full of explosives and then claim that it was a diplomatic mission when they were captured?


    Also why all the focus on libya, what about all the other countries like bahrain and saudi arabia, the congo and ivory coast.

    This is clearly a plan to take out libya no matter the cost in lives, while they still can.

    put down the guns get some un peacekeepers in, or let libyans fight their own civil war just like you let all the other people in other countries kill each other and do not take sides as you do not know who the bad guys are.
    1. How has Iraq resulted in America being better off oil-wise? It's often quoted as a reason, but these wars are making the price shoot up (making America worse off) and costs billions (trillions?) of dollars (making America worse off). I really don't understand how these are all helping oil supply? It would be far easier to just make a deal with the dictator.

    2. In the hospitals? Eyewitness accounts? Pleas for help? It's pretty hard to verify when Gadaffi refuses to let journalists in, and those who can are effectively under house arrest in their hotel rooms until Gadaffi has something he wants them to see.

    3. No idea.

    4. The Libyan action has broad international - and crucially regional support, plus a weak army. If we invaded Bahrain or Saudi Arabia it would be a major war - possibly WW3.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by garethDT)
    When you make a country socially liberal but economically enslaved. At the moment the Libyan state has a largely nationalised oil industry from which the Libyan people do see some benefits such as free education and healthcare.

    The UN resolution has already banned these state owned oil companies from doing business. The plan is to topple Gadaffi and then to completely privatise Libya's oil industry so all the profits go to the likes of BP and Shell.

    The real war is the same old left v right, nationalisation v privatisation.

    The totalitarianism v liberalism war exists only in the PR war, it's an argument that is only ever used as a cover for the real war.
    You really think this is to do with oil? Surley siding with Gadaffi would have been a better solution?

    You say other wars were about oil, show me how the west has gained anything to do with oil?

    The oil companies wern't producing much oil under the shelling of Gadaffi, regardless of the UN.

    BP and Shell had real trouble getting people out of the country when it went t*ts up, it was in cotrol by Gadaffi - so they were allready present. Prolonging the confluct (ie stopping Gadaffi killig everyone) is going to delay these companies getting back in the country.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hanvyj)
    You really think this is to do with oil? Surley siding with Gadaffi would have been a better solution?

    You say other wars were about oil, show me how the west has gained anything to do with oil?

    The oil companies wern't producing much oil under the shelling of Gadaffi, regardless of the UN.

    BP and Shell had real trouble getting people out of the country when it went t*ts up, it was in cotrol by Gadaffi - so they were allready present. Prolonging the confluct (ie stopping Gadaffi killig everyone) is going to delay these companies getting back in the country.
    It's not just about oil no. The West will gain massively when Libya's oil is entirely in corporate hands. A free market is much more favourable than letting Gadaffi dictate to us what he does with his oil.

    You mention BP but the only reason they got their oil contract in the first place is because the UK agreed to release el-Magrahi.

    The BP oil rigs are off shore, completely safe as far as I'm aware.

    It's not all about oil anyway, the government is also in the pocket of the arms industry who need a war every few years to keep profits up.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by robin22391)
    at least the russians try to keep a non biased view
    :lol:!!!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by garethDT)
    When you make a country socially liberal but economically enslaved. At the moment the Libyan state has a largely nationalised oil industry from which the Libyan people do see some benefits such as free education and healthcare.

    The UN resolution has already banned these state owned oil companies from doing business. The plan is to topple Gadaffi and then to completely privatise Libya's oil industry so all the profits go to the likes of BP and Shell.

    The real war is the same old left v right, nationalisation v privatisation.

    The totalitarianism v liberalism war exists only in the PR war, it's an argument that is only ever used as a cover for the real war.
    Interested to see what you say next to justify a totalitarian regime bombarding its own people.

    Will it be the old 'Arabs don't do democracy' chestnut, or are you sticking to the 'this is all an neo-imperialist and I don't care how shady the regime is as long as it sticks two fingers up at the West' approach for the time being?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Gaddafi's still going strong... he has tanks, supposedly tank columns and he's shelling cities still incl hospitals :/

    Yeah, just having a no fly zone doesn't mean Gaddafi just abdicates power, something more may need to be done - arm the rebels if further military intervention won't take place
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    France 'shoots down Libyan plane'

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12850975

    UK officials said on Wednesday that Libya's air force no longer existed as a fighting force.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by garethDT)
    It's not just about oil no. The West will gain massively when Libya's oil is entirely in corporate hands. A free market is much more favourable than letting Gadaffi dictate to us what he does with his oil.

    You mention BP but the only reason they got their oil contract in the first place is because the UK agreed to release el-Magrahi.

    The BP oil rigs are off shore, completely safe as far as I'm aware.

    It's not all about oil anyway, the government is also in the pocket of the arms industry who need a war every few years to keep profits up.
    How would the government be in the pocket of the arms industry? In what way? The arms industry is funded by the government (and export to other governments) so why would it be in the governments intrest to give them more profit (ie pay them more money)? What are you talking about oil rigs for?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I knew it.

    We intervene in another countries affairs and Gadaffi threatens us with terroism.

    This country is thick in the head.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by garethDT)
    When you make a country socially liberal but economically enslaved. At the moment the Libyan state has a largely nationalised oil industry from which the Libyan people do see some benefits such as free education and healthcare.

    The UN resolution has already banned these state owned oil companies from doing business. The plan is to topple Gadaffi and then to completely privatise Libya's oil industry so all the profits go to the likes of BP and Shell.

    The real war is the same old left v right, nationalisation v privatisation.

    The totalitarianism v liberalism war exists only in the PR war, it's an argument that is only ever used as a cover for the real war.
    Yes, the same way we left Iraq's oil nationalised.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by omnomnom.)
    we've been told that we are in a recession close to bankruptcy, people have been refused healthcare, university fees have gone up and there have been so many other spending cuts yet somehow we have got loads of money to waste. David Cameron, said that he would never go into war without the support of the public but he didn't stick to his promise, which isn't fair on the public since it's their money which is being spent.
    We shouldn't spend money on saving lives because there not british? And how do you know its not the public's opinion that we should'nt protect libya and not just your own opinion your projecting on 60 million other people in the country?
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by robin22391)
    Utter crap...
    Do you know what is really annoying pretty much everyone in this thread, is the fact that you refuse to look at both sides read evidence given and form an intelligent opinion on it to create a constructive agruement. I don't mind that you think it's all a lie and were doing it for the wrong reasons but you are quite frankly ignorant to the facts, If you were willing to look at both sides people here could have a coherent conversation with you but you sir are just pig ignorant!!

    I love the way people think the west wanted to get involved in this if they wanted the oil, which they could do with much less hassle than "invading" (which they haven't). You can blatantly see the US's reluctance to be there as they are desperately trying to hand over command of the operation.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by craglyboy)
    Do you know what is really annoying pretty much everyone in this thread, is the fact that you refuse to look at both sides read evidence given and form an intelligent opinion on it to create a constructive agruement. I don't mind that you think it's all a lie and were doing it for the wrong reasons but you are quite frankly ignorant to the facts, If you were willing to look at both sides people here could have a coherent conversation with you but you sir are just pig ignorant!!

    I love the way people think the west wanted to get involved in this if they wanted the oil, which they could do with much less hassle than "invading" (which they haven't). You can blatantly see the US's reluctance to be there as they are desperately trying to hand over command of the operation.
    The intervention of the world in libya is definitely without a doubt heavily influenced by oil. There was a post that said the world cares about its brothers; I laughed so hard in pity for that poor person's naiveity. True it must be done, and I support the attack on libya. There's a video where in February the mercenaries burst into hundreds of homes in benghazi and killed everybody in each house. Another of a baby being killed by the people from other African countries killing a baby, a toddler and a 10 year old boy, all because they get 500 pounds per libyan killed. But people are still being killed for no reason in Yemen and Bahrain, but nothing is being done, not even a mention by Obama or Cameron, trying to avoid the issue. I sense another Rwanda on our hands in these two countries. And on top of it, the royal f'ing family invite the 'King' of Bahrain to their wedding, a murderer, and not even Obama. I also read that part of the libyan army who didn't want to kill a libyan was executed. Who is this person who kills his people? His army? Look at what happened to Saddam Hussein who did even less than this. Hanged. So what is going to happen to Gaddafi?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by craglyboy)
    We shouldn't spend money on saving lives because there not british? And how do you know its not the public's opinion that we should'nt protect libya and not just your own opinion your projecting on 60 million other people in the country?
    Dont take a thread so seriously. By saying their opinion, they're not gonna change anything. Just let them have their say. It's a forum. Come on.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fusilero)
    Yes, the same way we left Iraq's oil nationalised.
    You can hardly call it nationalised when they auction contracts to private international firms.
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
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.