taxman Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 I wonder if they'll be so quick to defend the subjugated people of Bahrain against their oil rich pro Western Royal Family? Of course they wont. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Bourne Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 If we give the Libyan rebels a helping hand, with the support of the Arab world to do it, there is every chance that Gaddafi can be removed without an ugly invasion. Agreed. I hoped Gadaffi would have left quietly by now, but as the situation continues to deteriorate, I feel military action is justified in this case. x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncocker Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 I support western intervention. Libyans have spouted a load of contradiction, no western interference, but a no fly zone is OK. More recently there have been cries of "why is the west watching us suffer?" As long as the west breaks Gaddafi then withdraws to allow their state to take its own course then it's perfectly ethical. Hand wringing pathetically while one of the worlds top tyrants crushes a grass roots rebellion is terrible. At least our government is not doing that and no I've never voted Tory and never will so am not some Cameron lover. nobody seems to mention the fact that daffi was the first to bring in african merceneries . If one side brings in nationallly, ethnically, and religiously different combatants, how is that not already an intervention? How are Gaddafi's forces any less of an international coalition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncocker Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 I support western intervention. Libyans have spouted a load of contradiction, no western interference, but a no fly zone is OK. More recently there have been cries of "why is the west watching us suffer?" As long as the west breaks Gaddafi then withdraws to allow their state to take its own course then it's perfectly ethical. Hand wringing pathetically while one of the worlds top tyrants crushes a grass roots rebellion is terrible. At least our government is not doing that and no I've never voted Tory and never will so am not some Cameron lover. nobody seems to mention the fact that daffi was the first to bring in african merceneries . If one side brings in nationallly, ethnically, and religiously different combatants, how is that not already an intervention? How are Gaddafi's forces any less of an international coalition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redrobbo Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 I support the decision by Hague & Cameron to intervene in Libya. Alongside other nations, our country has the fighter power to protect the civilian population of Benghazi from the massacre that Gaddafi explicity threatened them with. There is a UN Security Council resolution authorising intervention and the UK has responded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vague_Boy Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 ILibyans have spouted a load of contradiction You speak of "Libyans" as if they were some sort of homogeneous mass. All this to save a bunch of Arabs who hate us anyway Yes but they do have lots of lovely oil. That just might be a factor in all of this. I think your right, maybe we should just sit back and watch the inevetible retribution Just as we did during the Rwandan genocide? But of course, Rwanda has no oil. If one side brings in nationallly, ethnically, and religiously different combatants, how is that not already an intervention? Because they're being brought in by Libya's leaders, not a foreign power? The mercenaries are not acting with the authority of their respective nations, unlike say the RAF. They are individuals, not instruments of international policy. First of all, intervention in one's own country is a mite different to intervening in another country. Secondly, mercenaries are stateless, they are employees, and are not legally representative of any nation. If we got involved in every war where British mercenaries were used, there would be no money for anything except military expenditure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vague_Boy Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Alongside other nations, our country has the fighter power to protect the civilian population of Benghazi from the massacre that Gaddafi explicity threatened them with. Please explain our non-intervention in Rwanda. 800,000 people dead, surely more than are currently being threatened in Libya? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 speaking of oil...I wonder why all the bric countrys abstained:suspect: B .brazil R.russia I. india C.china and as usual the bankrupt west does the dirty work and paves the way for the "brics" the new world order? Because they aren't the most free & open democracies themselves. They're worried that it's just the start of us helping popular uprisings to overthrow oppressive regimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Please explain our non-intervention in Rwanda. 800,000 people dead, surely more than are currently being threatened in Libya? Rwanda was quite a while ago. Making mistakes in the past is not a reason to make the same mistakes again. Libya is not much smaller than Rwanda. Benghazi is around 700k population & Gadaffi is as mad as any brutal leader in history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassman62 Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Yes but they do have lots of lovely oil. That just might be a factor in all of this. Rubbish, the Libyan world oil contribution is quite small. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.