The Libyian Situation

[UNT90]

So funny to see you package people's complex thoughts and opinions into simple little amusing tidbits so you can make cute little comments.

Not really that complex.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Since Bush I the US have fought in Panama, Kuwait, Iraq, Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Serbia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya and "IF" John McCain & Liberman had their way we would be fighting the Russians in Georgia and bombing Iran.

President Washington advised us not to get involved in foreign entanglements. he was absolutely correct in 1796 [French Revolution had just taken place and Napoleon was about to appear]. About all did was buy Louisiana from Napoleon (the French) plus War of 1812 was actually an extension fo the Napoleonic Wars... [we both were fighting the British... remember all the "1812 Overture" was about the Napoleon vs. Europe war] Although we were not considered allies, the "enemy of my enemy" is my friend -- applied

You are not all wrong... we should not be getting involved in every international conflict.

--- As for Geo. Washington... The world was a "bit" different then. Europe was thousands of miles away and travel and communication was so slow that we had no business being involved in their affairs... Today we know what is happening seconds after it happens plus we have world economy now and war here could happens in a few minutes if we are not observant. We learned that lesson in 1941...and it is much more extreme now.. When the Nazis invaded Poland in 1939 we had about 170,000 people in the military TOTAL. We had thought distance was safety. We immediately began to prepare for war... my father was working building an army camp in 1940 (over a year prior to Pearl Harbour)... we knew war was coming... we had no meaningful army and worse no weapons to even equipped give one... People were going through training at Camp Bowie (Brownwwood) with wooden guns.. We were that unprepared. our planes, tanks etc. were very inferior to what Germany and Japan had at that time. We pretty much took a beating in 1942 due to this. Panzers vs. Shermans... we would lose at a 9 to 1 rate. Air power finally caught up and took out their armour. We had the ability to replace losses and they didn't.

Like it or not, we now have to pay attention to what is happening in other places in the world. Just don't get involved with ground forces.... that is a totally different matter and we lose all real advantage that we have. Libya is all about "not allowing a few with an organized army kill and rule the many, the citizens of Libya that want him gone. They started it... not us...nothing like Iraq.

..

[UNT90]

They started it... not us...nothing like Iraq.

..

Technically, the rebels started it, not Momar. The Rebels started it because (if you believe what they say) they want democracy. They wouldn't want democracy if they had not seen it was possible in Iraq.

So, even though you say this is nothing like Iraq, this (and all the other middle east uprisings) would not have happened wothout the democracy in Iraq, which obviously wouldn't have happen without US intervention.

Whether or not this is a good thing or a bad thing, time will tell.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Technically, the rebels started it, not Momar. The Rebels started it because (if you believe what they say) they want democracy. They wouldn't want democracy if they had not seen it was possible in Iraq.

So, even though you say this is nothing like Iraq, this (and all the other middle east uprisings) would not have happened wothout the democracy in Iraq, which obviously wouldn't have happen without US intervention.

Whether or not this is a good thing or a bad thing, time will tell.

"They" meant the citizens of Egypt and Libya... not Momar obviously...as you implied I meant... Libya happened because Egypt (near door) turned out a success for the rebels. Some credit an event in Tunisia as starting it all.

I doubt your conclusion.... Iraq had very little to do with Libya or Egypt situation.... after all the change in Iraq was not by the locals overthrowing the government as is now happening... besides that took place several years ago.... Why not sooner if that was the key?? Iran in the late 70's fits better (people overthrowing government) but that was also too long ago as well. That result wasn't so good for us... Hope this all turns out better... Revolutions can go bad... see Iran and Russia in 1918. The ability to communicate and organize quickly by cell and internet (Includes Facebook) is the "largest" factor now of "why now".. Because that and great international communications, they realize how bad they were being treated compared what exists elsewhere [Western Europe Japan, USA, and even China has changed.

..

Edited March 28, 2011 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[Coffee and TV]

They wouldn't want democracy if they had not seen it was possible in Iraq.

lol!

[UNT90]

"They" meant the citizens of Egypt and Libya... not Momar obviously...as you implied I meant... Libya happened because Egypt (near door) turned out a success for the rebels. Some credit an event in Tunisia as starting it all.

I doubt your conclusion.... Iraq had very little to do with Libya or Egypt situation.... after all the change in Iraq was not by the locals overthrowing the government as is now happening... besides that took place several years ago.... Why not sooner if that was the key?? Iran in the late 70's fits better (people overthrowing government) but that was also too long ago as well. That result wasn't so good for us... Hope this all turns out better... Revolutions can go bad... see Iran and Russia in 1918. The ability to communicate and organize quickly by cell and internet (Includes Facebook) is the "largest" factor now of "why now".. Because that and great international communications, they realize how bad they were being treated compared what exists elsewhere [Western Europe Japan, USA, and even China has changed.

..

The thing is, the one thing all of these uprisings have in common is (again, if you believe the organizers of the uprisings) democracy. It is not a coincidence that once Iraq proved that a democracy could flourish (albeit at a fledging stage), other citizens of the region would want the same form of government, especially considering the history of oppession in that area of the world. You say 6 years is a long time? I say 6 years is a blip on the history screen considering the long history of that region of the world. Once the people 1) saw the benefits of democracy, and 2) believed it was possible for a democracy to succeed in their country, then and only then did they decide they were willing to make the sacrafice to fight for what they wanted. Frankly, I'm surprised it happened this soon.

Again, this is assuming they aren't just saying they want democracy to get the help of the West, only to decide that a different form of government (religious theocracy, their own form of dictatorship, etc..) is what they want once the current leadership is deposed.

Only time will tell, but if new democracies spring up in this region, you would be naive to dismiss the Iraqi effect.

Edited March 28, 2011 by UNT90

[UNT90]

lol!

Shoot. You got me....

Can't compete with such a compelling argument.

[UNTflyer]

lol!

I like pie.

Edited March 28, 2011 by UNTflyer

[Coffee and TV]

Shoot. You got me....

Can't compete with such a compelling argument.

You're right, they were so impressed by the daily car bombings and sectarian violence that they thought, "hey! we gotta get summa dat!".

[UNTflyer]

You're right, they were so impressed by the daily car bombings and sectarian violence that they thought, "hey! we gotta get summa dat!".

You have a point... I love everything about democracy except the daily car bombings in my neighborhood.

[Coffee and TV]

You have a point... I love everything about democracy except the daily car bombings in my neighborhood.

You live in Iraq? Because that was his point.

[UNT90]

You're right, they were so impressed by the daily car bombings and sectarian violence that they thought, "hey! we gotta get summa dat!".

Again, never letting facts stand in the way of the statements that you throw out. A car bomb does not go off in every neighborhood in Iraq every day. As a matter of fact, bombings are in steep decline in Iraq as the country becomes a more stabile democracy (yes, still a long way to go). I bet you a poll would show that the Iraqi citizens are much happier now than under Sadam's rule.

To credit Egypt and Tanzania with the uprising in Lybia, but not credit Iraq for having the same effect on Eygpt and Tanzania is just disingenuous. Yes, the US helped establish the democracy in Iraq, but don't you think the rebels in Lybia and Syria want the same thing from us now? Is it your position that the Iraqi people were happy living under Sadam's rule? Did they not want their freedom?

Like I said, who knows what form of government will come to be in these nations. But if there is a true desire for democracy, you can thank the US forces that worked so hard to help Iraq establish the 1st such Muslim based democracy in the region.

[Coffee and TV]

Iraq establish the 1st such Muslim based democracy in the region.

lol!

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Again, never letting facts stand in the way of the statements that you throw out. A car bomb does not go off in every neighborhood in Iraq every day. As a matter of fact, bombings are in steep decline in Iraq as the country becomes a more stabile democracy (yes, still a long way to go). I bet you a poll would show that the Iraqi citizens are much happier now than under Sadam's rule.

To credit Egypt and Tanzania with the uprising in Lybia, but not credit Iraq for having the same effect on Eygpt and Tanzania is just disingenuous. Yes, the US helped establish the democracy in Iraq, but don't you think the rebels in Lybia and Syria want the same thing from us now? Is it your position that the Iraqi people were happy living under Sadam's rule? Did they not want their freedom?

Like I said, who knows what form of government will come to be in these nations. But if there is a true desire for democracy, you can thank the US forces that worked so hard to help Iraq establish the 1st such Muslim based democracy in the region.

It is Tunisia (next "door" and the West of LIBYA) not Tanzania (not even an Arabic country).... This all started there first...and many credit an odd incident there with getting the locals all upset and wanting to change things. No one but you and those few who still want to credit Bush for everything good, thinks Iraq had much to do with the current mid-east revolutions. That is about as crazy as crediting all of this to Obama who has a middle eastern name which gave them hope they could be a democratic nation. Iraq was not a revolution by the locals against SADDAM but was an invasion by a foreign country.. unfortunately it was us and not really justified... no WMD and no terrorism against us by Iraq and the local citizens were not being killed at the time (slaughtered) like is happening in Libya.. Pretty much all of Western Europe and NATO is involved in this "no-fly" situation (wasn't true in Iraq) plus ground troops are not being sent in.... it is up to the locals to control their destiny... not a foreign country that just invaded it. The no fly zone just helps the many from being killed by the few that want to control them.

[KRAM1]

Isn't the power of rationalization great when it comes to supporting one's personal opinion? Those that did not like Bush will always find some way to throw Bush out as the root of all that is wrong and find a way to bless Obama for all he is doing right...and vice versa.

It was enjoyable to me to listen to Obama use some of the same "logic" in speaking to the country last evening that Bush had used in his speeches...of course, even Obama couldn't resist taking a shot at Bush last night. you know, it's just different when your guy says it! Too funny.

Folks, call it what you want, rationalize it any way you want too, the US went to war under Bush's watch and did so under Obama's watch. Remember, there was a coalition of nations involved in both the Iraq wars and in Afghanistan...there is a coalition involved in the Libyan campaign. Call it what you want...blame whoever you want, bullets and missiles are flying and people are being killed. The U.S. has very little "vital interests" to be tied to Libya, and even if we had the proof, no one will ever know if the people of Benghazi (spelling?) would have been slaughtered as Obama said they would be to justify the US initiated attack.

What I do know is that US troops are now involved in a conflict on three fronts. Very tough situation, and in my opinion, this Libyan thing may see "boots on the ground" before it is all said and done. Nice that we can justify this one as a humanitarian effort in which we now want to take a back seat. Right! You go Arab League! You go NATO!

[oldguystudent]

People, please! 5 pages of bickering without addressing the important issues! What I would like to know, nay, need to know, is how tasty is Libyan pie, and do they make a sour cream blueberry?

[UNTLifer]

Isn't the power of rationalization great when it comes to supporting one's personal opinion? Those that did not like Bush will always find some way to throw Bush out as the root of all that is wrong and find a way to bless Obama for all he is doing right...and vice versa.

It was enjoyable to me to listen to Obama use some of the same "logic" in speaking to the country last evening that Bush had used in his speeches...of course, even Obama couldn't resist taking a shot at Bush last night. you know, it's just different when your guy says it! Too funny.

Folks, call it what you want, rationalize it any way you want too, the US went to war under Bush's watch and did so under Obama's watch. Remember, there was a coalition of nations involved in both the Iraq wars and in Afghanistan...there is a coalition involved in the Libyan campaign. Call it what you want...blame whoever you want, bullets and missiles are flying and people are being killed. The U.S. has very little "vital interests" to be tied to Libya, and even if we had the proof, no one will ever know if the people of Benghazi (spelling?) would have been slaughtered as Obama said they would be to justify the US initiated attack.

What I do know is that US troops are now involved in a conflict on three fronts. Very tough situation, and in my opinion, this Libyan thing may see "boots on the ground" before it is all said and done. Nice that we can justify this one as a humanitarian effort in which we now want to take a back seat. Right! You go Arab League! You go NATO!

Kram, this is so on target that I can't want for the Obama supporters to explain this. The mainstream media won't ask him the hard questions, which is the polar opposite of how they treated Bush. Oh, and where is Cindy Sheehan? Shouldn't she be camped out in front of Obama's get-away in Hawaii picketing this war?

[Rudy]

What I would like to know, nay, need to know, is how tasty is Libyan pie

It probably tastes like ass and is hair filled.

I wish that we would have stayed out of the Libyan conflict. Yes, Queefy, Quaddaffi, or whatever the hell his name is needs to go. But will the alternative be any better? However, once Obama made a declaritive statement that Qaddafi needed to go, he should have been prepared to be more assertive in that statement. Filling out brackets and taking trips to Brazil should have been the last thing on his mind. Then we let the French step up and take the initiative. But, you know what, fine, let them do the dirty work on this one. Now he wants to send the rebels weapons and inevitably, put our people on the ground. Didn't we already learn this lessen 30 years ago?

[All About UNT]

Again, never letting facts stand in the way of the statements that you throw out. A car bomb does not go off in every neighborhood in Iraq every day. As a matter of fact, bombings are in steep decline in Iraq as the country becomes a more stabile democracy (yes, still a long way to go). I bet you a poll would show that the Iraqi citizens are much happier now than under Sadam's rule.

To credit Egypt and Tanzania with the uprising in Lybia, but not credit Iraq for having the same effect on Eygpt and Tanzania is just disingenuous. Yes, the US helped establish the democracy in Iraq, but don't you think the rebels in Lybia and Syria want the same thing from us now? Is it your position that the Iraqi people were happy living under Sadam's rule? Did they not want their freedom?

Like I said, who knows what form of government will come to be in these nations. But if there is a true desire for democracy, you can thank the US forces that worked so hard to help Iraq establish the 1st such Muslim based democracy in the region.

I agree with most of what you have posted within this board though I am thoroughly convinced that true democracy comes from within the indigenous populations desire to embrace this mode of government. Pseudo-Democracy (Iraq, Eygpt etc.) typically takes a strongman to keep things in check. To check the tribal affiliations at the door and to place into the true positions of power (the man behind the scenes) people who can get things done. The bickering between Arab tribes, Sunni-Shiite disagreements and so on is only comparable in the West with the Italian Parliament structure (bickering and worthless...check em out).

With that said..... Iraq and Afghanistan are the equivalent of juvenile boys. They are children in their mindset but "want to wear their big boy pants". We are the "belt" of those "pants" and if you take that belt off.....well you know the rest. Wait...that sounded bad. Either way..I am merely suggesting that I honestly believe that neither of these two nations would exist longer than a yr or two if we were to pull out. That may or may not be such a bad thing. While yes many people would die....eventually you will have stabilized nations that spring from the previous nation (Yugoslavia is the perfect example). Sad but proven to be true.

[All About UNT]

Kram, this is so on target that I can't want for the Obama supporters to explain this. The mainstream media won't ask him the hard questions, which is the polar opposite of how they treated Bush. Oh, and where is Cindy Sheehan? Shouldn't she be camped out in front of Obama's get-away in Hawaii picketing this war?

Nope...since her son Casey died in Iraq. While she would have you believe she is against war in general....she is merely saddened because the one person in her life that cared about her is dead. She channels her anger and loneliness at the source of that death and those that "sent him there". Never mind he signed the dotted line and the US had established a history of going into conflicts that the populace could not deduce why we were involved in them. He didn't sign a contract that guaranteed 4 yrs of enlistment with no threat of injury. I feel that he has died for his country (I too have served and seen kids die for their nation) but she shames his service by how loud she gets and seemingly selfish as to wanting to know only "why is Casey dead?".

[CMJ]

I don't bring this thread back up to renew the whole debate on Libya. I just read a small gem of a story in the LA Times over the weekend and wanted to share it. Finally got around to finding it on the net (yeah, I'm old school and still get the paper).

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/16/world/la-fg-libya-military-cemetery-20110716

[Army of Dad]

I don't bring this thread back up to renew the whole debate on Libya. I just read a small gem of a story in the LA Times over the weekend and wanted to share it. Finally got around to finding it on the net (yeah, I'm old school and still get the paper).

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/16/world/la-fg-libya-military-cemetery-20110716

Beautiful, thank you for sharing.

[KRAM1]

Excellent story. I am glad that some have not forgotten. The British graves of war dead are so different than the US war dead graves in that there are personal messages engraved on many of the British tombstones. It is extremely moving to visit one of these sites and to read the inscriptions. Once you have, you, too, will never forget.

May God bless and keep them all.