IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> It's Time To Eliminate Gaddafi, Why is nobody taking any real action??
Richard Garvie
post Mar 29 2011, 09:24 AM
Post #61


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



My concern about Libya is that we are effectively encouraging regime change through civil war. We have acted as the air force wing of the uprising, clearing the way for the rebels to progress through the country.

What should have happened was a no fly zone from when Gaddafi started to attack his own people. We should not be flying over towns boming the Libyan Army to facilitate the progress of the rebels, as that isn't in the resolution from what I understand.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Mar 29 2011, 09:37 AM
Post #62


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



RG - totally agree.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Mar 29 2011, 11:45 AM
Post #63


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



The resolution is up for interpretation. I believe an effective no fly zone would mean disabling any military force that poses a threat to our (air) forces. Government troops are 'attacking' our planes so so we are 'disabling' them.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Mar 29 2011, 11:54 AM
Post #64


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Mar 29 2011, 12:45 PM) *
The resolution is up for interpretation. I believe an effective no fly zone would mean disabling any military force that poses a threat to our (air) forces. Government troops are 'attacking' our plains so so we are 'disabling' them.



Just like the Belgrano!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Mar 29 2011, 11:55 AM
Post #65


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (dannyboy @ Mar 29 2011, 12:54 PM) *
Just like the Belgrano!

Yes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NWNREADER
post Mar 29 2011, 12:21 PM
Post #66


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Mar 29 2011, 10:24 AM) *
My concern about Libya is that we are effectively encouraging regime change through civil war. We have acted as the air force wing of the uprising, clearing the way for the rebels to progress through the country.

What should have happened was a no fly zone from when Gaddafi started to attack his own people. We should not be flying over towns boming the Libyan Army to facilitate the progress of the rebels, as that isn't in the resolution from what I understand.


I fear you have misunderstood:
Resolution 1973

The UN line is that the other G Man may not use his military power to batter the uprising - a 'fair fight'. It allows for much more than a 'no fly' zone.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Mar 29 2011, 07:49 PM
Post #67


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



I see things totally different than what is happening. In the past, I could see a justification in going in and getting Gaddafi, but I don't see the justification in the current conflict. What we are demonstrating time and again is the urgency rogue states need to obtain the nuclear option. We wouldn't dare attack North Korea or China despite their record on human rights.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Blake
post Mar 30 2011, 03:09 PM
Post #68


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 507
Joined: 19-May 09
Member No.: 75



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Mar 29 2011, 08:49 PM) *
I see things totally different than what is happening. In the past, I could see a justification in going in and getting Gaddafi, but I don't see the justification in the current conflict. What we are demonstrating time and again is the urgency rogue states need to obtain the nuclear option. We wouldn't dare attack North Korea or China despite their record on human rights.


No.

Just because a rogue state has a "nuclear capability" does not mean it can drop one on us.

We must not fail to learn the dreadful lessons of appeasement. Never again!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Mar 30 2011, 03:26 PM
Post #69


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (Blake @ Mar 30 2011, 04:09 PM) *
No.

Just because a rogue state has a "nuclear capability" does not mean it can drop one on us.

We must not fail to learn the dreadful lessons of appeasement. Never again!


Who decides a rogue state though? wink.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Mar 30 2011, 06:12 PM
Post #70


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (Blake @ Mar 30 2011, 04:09 PM) *
No. Just because a rogue state has a "nuclear capability" does not mean it can drop one on us.

The rogue states realise that we are not going to be in a hurry to go marching in to their place either.

QUOTE (Blake @ Mar 30 2011, 04:09 PM) *
We must not fail to learn the dreadful lessons of appeasement. Never again!

That is probably why some muslims will never get over The Crusades then.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Turin Machine
post Mar 30 2011, 09:23 PM
Post #71


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,682
Joined: 23-September 10
From: In the lower 40
Member No.: 1,104



A rogue state;

1, Someone who does not agree with us,

2, Someone we know we can beat.


--------------------
Gammon. And proud!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Apr 1 2011, 01:55 AM
Post #72


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



Worth a look even if it is only half true. Libya is featured in the last 5 or 10 minutes.

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatc...es-86/episode-1
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Apr 1 2011, 10:23 AM
Post #73


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Mar 30 2011, 07:12 PM) *
That is probably why some muslims will never get over The Crusades then.

Maybe they'll get over them when they have finished.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Apr 1 2011, 05:25 PM
Post #74


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (blackdog @ Apr 1 2011, 11:23 AM) *
Maybe they'll get over them when they have finished.


The majority of wars all through history have been based on religion differences.


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 19th April 2024 - 10:29 PM