32 posts
Discussing Hookbenders views is meaningless - fun maybe - but
This is real world stuff - significant development - signals a western response.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12673956
My views seem to be reality. ;) Is reality meaningless to you? Shouldn't be if your concerned about Libya. :o
Why the fuck is it that America responds to all this shit? Where are other countries? Why do we think we are the worlds police?
Hookbender — Mar 09, 2011Why the fuck is it that America responds to all this shit? Where are other countries? Why do we think we are the worlds police?
Yes, there are 710 reasons. See? :D
In the other thread you just asked when Obama was going to wake up and do something about gas prices.
In this thread you ask why the fuck we have to do something about Libya.
Can you see the contradictions that we all see?
A Hookbender show again.
"Explaining the bleeding obvious to a moron" sketch ;)
charger — Mar 09, 2011In the other thread you just asked when Obama was going to wake up and do something about gas prices.
In this thread you ask why the fuck we have to do something about Libya.
Can you see the contradictions that we all see?
No, not at all.
I said why do we have to respond to ALL this shit, as in Libya, Iran, Korea, etc. Not just things that effect oil. Not just Libya. Your injecting and trying to create contradictions. Nice try.
Because we're the rich top dog and we enjoy the advantages it brings. We took over or partnered on the old trade routes and created some new ones and we look after our investments.
As long as we're the #1 economy, we're going to be in the predicament of making sure we can stay there.
Once China takes over that spot from us, we'll let them worry about it, and we can get really focused on being #2.
Only Korea in that list is unrelated to oil, just related to "war on terror"
So you think that China should respond instead ?
Or Russia ?
Or do you think nobody should respond?
I don't think anyone will respond - Gaddafi looks to be winning now and a lot of slimey back sliding will ensue.
Much like Iraq circa 1991
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_uprisings_in_Iraq
I think it is going to be another shameful episode
I'm not sure if anyone should respond. What good would it do? Thats the way of life over there. I feel bad for the common folk there, but should another country stick their nose in other countries business if it doesn't effect the responding country?
I think the lesson of the last month is that, much to the west's surprise, it's not a way of life, and the people in general do not want to live under autocratic, repressive dictators. Whether we should go to war in Libya is besides the point. I don't think we can, and I think the recent revolutionary fervor has proved that people cherish their freedom more when they win it themselves.
I don't think a war is an option on the table,
but creating a no fly zone would give the rebels a chance against the state forces.
I don't think it would. The Libyan army's ground forces are far superior to the opposition... they've got tanks, RPGs, mobile artillery, and training. The opposition has a lot of rifles and ammunition, and no training. What the opposition needs is for the army to defect.
Ideally that would be the case.
But for Benghazi - an external effort at removing the threat of air attack would be a major development for the rebels.
Also "encouraging" mercenary forces from Chad and other states to leave.
It would balance things out and make the time for cracks to appear and split the regime.
Without any outside help - Gaddafi will win, probably with a bloodbath in Benghazi, air strikes or otherwise.
Can't see any other outcome as the west and east have old history and it won't end nicely.
Politically - the Arab countries are near 100% united in calling for outside intervention.
The one time they actually ask for an intervention the answer is no.
After recent decades of trampling over their advice against interventions and going to war regardless it would just be even more transparent that it is just complete selfish interest that motivates the west.
The big caveat is getting dragged into a mire.
Let Arabs lead it, just back them up with support.
It will likely take months anyway to resolve - work with explicit Arab support only
The Saudis have sent troops into Bahrain to smash protests. Why not send troops into Libya to fight Qaddafi? Why not Egypt? These countries have militaries. They need to get on the ball.
The UN has just passed this.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12781009
Yep - a hypocritical line in the sand compared to the one with Bahrain and Saudi.
But that aside - I think the real fear is what could happen to Benghazi in retalliation.
Holding off the threat of air strikes buys time.
It is one small stretch from destroying any defences against aircraft enforcing the no fly zone (UN Mandate) and eliminating forces that are troubling the rebels.
That is the part we shall not see reported. :)
The mandate is wider than I thought when I posted yesterday, it allows for attacks on ground forces - more a demilitarisation rather than no-fly.
walking a tightrope
Yep, the French have already started flying their fighters in and the U.S. has already launched over 100 Tomahawk cruise missiles at radar installations...
Sarkozy and France are prominent as being the prime movers.
which will be interesting to watch.
Looks like the UK fired tomahawks from a sub - the US launched 100 or more from surface ships - 110 stated to have been fired.
maybe the UK fired one of them to show they are involved
fingers — Mar 20, 2011maybe the UK fired one of them to show they are involved
LOL! Yep, at least one shot from a submarine plus they are scrambling some Tornados for action.
The random, wild AA in Tripoli reminded me of the scene from Baghdad during the last Gulf War.
They fired one alright...right into qualdaffy's compound!
Well it require France to lead a EU show.
Europe is a massive resource of special forces- Every state has their Olympic Games Team of soldiers.
fully technically aware and equiped units with exceptional nutters.
It will far outnumber the US equivalent.
Europe would kick the ass of the US in a battle of special forces.
That is an untapped resource - random example - I bet Belgium has a ferocious bunch of elite bastards ;) - probably 50.
A bunch that the only the top few hundred maybe a 1000 in the US could compare against.
The US military is a more Walmart one.
The Belgian one will be elite focused.
Chase vs Rambo :)
And that's what you need in something like Libya - many small patrol groups who can enter and stay discrete and train rebels, organise supplies and act as training wheels in command in early engagements.
Leave it to the Libyans and the Arab street is happily unaware.
Military just doesn't scale in that particular feature of warfare with tech and money,
Small nations excel at that - major sporting events don't go t o the country with the largest populations in proportion.
France does love the Libyan crude...
nah - Sarkozy is trying to be taller :-/
He is the leader
He should go in personally...heh h eh
I await the cartoon sarkozy missile - fired with full UN authority of course :)
"Europe would kick the ass of the US in a battle of special forces."
;D ;D ;D ;D
Sure they would. ;D ;D
US special forces just ain't very special :)
Rangers, Green Berets - equivalent to Paras or commandos in Europe.
Not special - Elite troops.
The real US special forces would be attached to the CIA etc.
And be much smaller in number