The Libyan Conflict.

Discussion in 'Opinions, Beliefs, & Points of View' started by Issaccs, Mar 20, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Issaccs

    Issaccs Well-Known Member

    With the instigation of the no fly zone and last nights air raids targeting pro government armour and defence installations I figure its time we had a thread on this.
    How do you feel about the current state of affairs and Western involvement.
  2. Crue-K

    Crue-K Well-Known Member

    Why do we (US, UK, France etc) always seem to interfere in affairs of other sovereign nations? It is terrible what is happening to the citizens of these middle eastern/african nations, but is it really up to us to take sides and interfere with their revolutions? I suspect that western nations are politically motivated rather than concerned for any humanitarian attrocities and of course there is always the question about disruption to the uninterrupted oil supplies that our countries so rely on. We have no idea how long these uprising/revolutions will continue yet our governments are pouring in cash to send planes, submarines and aircraft carriers to these embattled regions when we are facing severe cuts back home. Shouldn't we be prioritise our budgets to the benefit of our own citizens first? Some of the longest wars in history started with small-scale intervention, for a purpose that looked good and achievable, and ended up ruining millions of lives. The Soviet takeover of Afghanistan in 1979 ended with countless innocents driven into refugee camps, and the collapse of the Soviet state itself. It also left Afghanistan as a worse snake pit than before. We should stay out of these conflicts, if the Arab League members want to intervene, they’ve got plenty of weapons and resources available to intervene. Western Governments are historically ignorant, politically blinkered, unable to stick to their own affairs and drowning in political vanity.
  3. Issaccs

    Issaccs Well-Known Member

    We're making cut backs at home yes, benefit cuts.
    The Libyans however are involved in a civil war.
    Given the choice between David Cameron launching artillery barrages and air raids in the city I reside or budget cuts I know what my preference is. Thats also a very sad state of affairs when the for the richest nations in the world, its a cost issue. What is a Libyan's life worth? A dollar? A million?
    This isn't two armies squabbling in the desert, this is mechanised urban warfare, the bombing of civilian population centres.
    The ICC has put the death toll in Libya as high as 10,000 and I'm certain that a government assault on Benghazi would have exceeded this.

    This isn't unwanted intervention, this is something the Rebels have been asking for, something Libyas neighbours have been asking for and your right, often small scale intervention escalates and our governments seem to have trouble learning that however right now the no fly zone will save lives and its been pushed by the Rebels, the Arabs and most of the international community.
  4. Zurkhardo

    Zurkhardo Well-Known Member

    I can only hope this establishes a legitimate precedent for humanitarian intervention. Of course that is asking for a lot, and it's clear some geo-strategic and economic motivations were involved. But it's certainly a welcomed move.
  5. aoeu

    aoeu Well-Known Member

    The Libyan people rose in peaceful, popular unrest. They were attacked brutally by the military that should be protecting them. I support the Western intervention precisely because it's a popular movement - I don't think this is imposition of our will on a sovereign nation, I think this is a friendly action taken on the behalf and request of the rightful rulers of the country.
  6. Prinnctopher's Belt

    Prinnctopher's Belt Antiquities Friend SF Supporter

    So...the logic behind this is that the Western Mafia can just begin military conflict with every country on the planet with a leader who rejects opposition from his/her people? If the reason behind this conflict is to protect Libyan "rebels" from being harmed and/or killed by government forces there, then why aren't these forces invading Yemen or Senegal or Ivory Coast or Sudan or the dozen other nations involved in corruption and oppression of people who protest against their leadership? Because that's not the actual reason behind it and it's a bogus operation.

    I think Western, particularly US because it's my native country, involvement in Libya is unnecessary and a huge waste of resources, major waste. We can't be the world police "protecting" everybody everywhere else. This is simply an opportunity the West is taking advantage of in order to overthrow Gaddhaffi(sp?) and install a new dictator as they've (particularly the US) had a violent history of doing all over the world.
  7. Mortal Moon

    Mortal Moon Well-Known Member

    It's all I can do to resist linking the "America - Fuck Yeah" song again, lest it become a running gag.
  8. Crue-K

    Crue-K Well-Known Member

    I would rather see military action against the illegal settlements, state sponsored assasination and genocide committed by Israel than interfering in a nation that is evolving through a revolution. Israel has committed far worse attrocities than pro-governement Libyans.
  9. Issaccs

    Issaccs Well-Known Member

    Are you sure about that? Supposedly their have been around 15,000 casulties from the Israeli–Palestinian conflict since 1948.
    Compared to the 10,000 alleged by the ICC in ONE month of fighting.
  10. am I alive

    am I alive Well-Known Member

    As far as I know those protestants are not civilians, they are very well armed. Those stories about killing civilians are made up to justify western intervention.

    I am sure if they take down Gaddafi the people of Libya will find themselves in much far worse position then they are now. Many people from my country has been worked there for years and they have been very well paid for their work, also people of Libya have free education and many other benefits. If he would be replaced by some wester puppet politician it will be much worse for ppl of Libya.
    Thats what the world is going to, some people want to rule the world. Sadly that has happened to my country too. Yeah we have free economy sistem and all that capitalistic shit but ppl are unemployed and underpayed while politicians and tycoons have millions and sold all state possessions to western corporations who now exploit people in our own country.
  11. Zurkhardo

    Zurkhardo Well-Known Member

    It began as a peaceful protest, only to be brutally suppressed by Qaddafi's security forces. That is when it became violent, as soldiers defected and took their weapons with them (rebels also raided armories in order to defend themselves).

    There is documented evidence that civilians have been killed, though how many is disputed and ranges wildly from 1,000 to 10,000.
  12. Issaccs

    Issaccs Well-Known Member

    To put a little perspective on this then an explanation of the events that started this revolt.
    A protest was organised, I forget the date to commemorate the execution of 1600 Islamist Libyans.
    In response to this protest the order was given, reputably by one of Gadaffi's sons to open fire on the protesters killing over 200 more.

    This caused part of the army to rebel and for the civilians to rise up in arms. According to Al-Jazeera the civilian militias are around 5000 strong with close to 10,000 defected troops. The civilian count is going to be difficult though as they're going to pick up and discard weapons as and when they're needed or able.

    Your right though, the Libyans generally enjoy a comfortable quality of life however when protesting one act of governmental genocide is responded to by a second act of governmental genocide people are going to ask what the price of their comfort is.

    That said I have confidence the new government could do a fine job of governing after Gadaffi (all things willing) as much of the leadership is composed of ex-government ministers and administrators.

    On the deaths in Libya their are close to 2000 confirmed kills between the opposing forces, and a minimum of 1000 reported civilian casualties, I suspect it is higher but perhaps not yet at 10,000 mark.

    That being said, how high would it be today if the no fly zone had not been enforced and Gaddafis military had continued to shell the half million civilians who reside in Benghazi.
  13. aoeu

    aoeu Well-Known Member

    They were civilians, now they're armed rebels. Gaddafi turned them from his people into his enemy.

    And all the news sources, including an Arabic one that's traditionally not very favourable to the West are lying as a big group? Conspiracy theories don't tend to pan out very well, so I'd suggest you drop this one.
  14. am I alive

    am I alive Well-Known Member

    Ok, I am not interested much in politics, i don't give a shit about it, but I would like to know who suddenly started all those protests around the world? I don't believe it happened spontaneous. Its not just Libya, its happening all around the world. Even in my country there are muslim minorities who openly speak about rebellion even they have all the human rights as everyone else. Not conspiracy? Than what it is?
  15. aoeu

    aoeu Well-Known Member

    It's traceable to a single event where a Tunisian fruit seller self-immolated after being harassed by cops. The protests in Tunisia which followed this (this wasn't the cause, it was the trigger) were successful, which led to further protests in nearby states with similar problems. This is a grassroots, unplanned movement, and I can't think of anything similar happening, well, ever... This wasn't instantaneous, either. The self-immolation was December 17, but the actions in Libya only started a month ago. It was a gradual thing, which is why it doesn't appear to be planned.
  16. Seems_Perfect

    Seems_Perfect Well-Known Member

    I really respect the view points in this thread. Its nice to come across smart people who are educated in world affairs and have valid statements to make.

    In my humble opinion world affairs are cyclical and this is just another example of such. The fact the general public is (or feigns to be) surprised really does amaze me. For instance, Yemen has been on the verge of all out civil war for years which is what allowed al-Qaeda to gain such a strong foothold in the nation particularly as it relates to their establishment of terrorist training camps.

    Further, it doesn't take much to draw parallels between Egypt today and Cuba under Batista, or Libya today and Panama under Noriega. N. Africa (and the Middle East) is unfolding in a manner similar to Latin America 30-50 years ago. Of course, an even more apt and recent comparison would be Eastern Europe and its various states' fight for democracy over the past 20 years (more apt b/c Latin America's regime changes were part-populous but mostly politically/fiscally motivated and executed).

    As for military involvement, many citizens of various nations (to include my own) really frustrate me b/c if a coalition force doesn't get involved and people are slaughtered citizens say the military option should have been deployed (e.g., Somalia). Yet, if the military option is deployed many of those same citizens are ready to cry for an extraction of forces the moment an unfortunate situation arises that makes the news rounds (e.g., Somalia!). Its the predominant reason I thank God for covert and special operations - the things that go bump in the night that will go unreported but often lead to change for the better. (Insert Here: Jack Nicholson's character quote on the stand in "A Few Good Men" b/c it most certainly applies.)

    The real question as it relates to Libya and others in N. Africa is how well do we know those that are taking charge (after all, many nations - not just the US - supported the Taliban in their fight against Soviet occupation in Afghanistan). Meanwhile, the real question as it relates to the Middle East is just how deeply Iran is involved in pushing instability.

    I have an idea of how this will play out over the next 10 years, though I believe this is just a re-run of diplomatic and military events past.
  17. mrluvaluva

    mrluvaluva New Member

    I could not agree more... This has been swept through the U.N without public consent or backing.. At risk of sounding insensitive to the libyan people.. It's none of our buisness and they can no longer justify the dramatic cuts that have been enforced in the UK.. 2.3million per day this no fly zone will cost! It's funny how after making 220 million this year alone in arms sales to Libya the UK government now wants Gaddaffi dead? Its totally politically motivated and because the rebels were losing they have intervened.. There is always 2 sides to every story.. and what if these rebels were genuine terrorists? We don't know they aren't? We have to believe what the government says.. Gaddaffi is a tyrant we all know that.. But why deal with him after lockerbie in the first place? The whole thing stinks to high heaven and we are better out of it and leaving it to the arabs to sort out.. We have more need to be sorting out our own affairs!
  18. jota1

    jota1 Well-Known Member

    I have been following this for ages and the revolt was bound to happen but I hate the hypocrisy of the Arab states.

    They sell us Oil make trillions out of us and yet cant agree on saving their own people. The UN has requested their participation yet they dont send planes or troops and expect the West to do the dirty work so they come out of this smelling like roses.

    Says a lot about these people.
  19. Zurkhardo

    Zurkhardo Well-Known Member

    To those that are cynical about this intervention, I must sincerely ask: what sort of action would you have preferred? All too often I find the public's reaction to these events to be inconsistent.

    If we fail to act, the people view it as a pessimistic example of indifference begetting evil - another Rwanda or Somalia that represents a lost opportunity to accomplish good and justice. Yet if we act, people apply a similarly misanthropic logic, which holds that the intervention is self-interested, or even that it is a worse action than doing nothing at all.

    Between letting Qaddafi slaughter his own people in a bloodbath that would see him return to power, and our imperfect and not entirely altruistic involvement, I'd prefer the latter hands down.
  20. draculim

    draculim Member

    Lybia does seem like another Vietnam to me, more so than Iraq ever was. Now Qaddafi can justify his war as "the war against invasion" instead of "the war against democracy" in the same way North Vietnam justified their war against the South. Therefore, I absolutely agree with mrluvaluva and Crue-K: STAY OUT OF IT. For the better or worse, let them sort it out.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.