Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Libyan uprising

Options
1…1213151718…27

Comments

  • Options
    #422
    CiaranC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,300 ✭✭✭CiaranC


    Seriously, take it to the conspiracy theory forum lads, the adults are having a conversation


  • Options
    #423
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    murphaph wrote: »
    Obama is a feckin socialist himself ffs, or at least as close as you'll get to one in the US...

    Obama is NOT a warmonger like Bush, with his dodgy connections to Haliburton etc. If this was Bush ordering US troops in, I might be a nit more sceptical but I (maybe naively) trust Barack Obama (I believe he's basically a decent person who wants to do right by people).

    What was the alternative here? To do nothing as Gadaffi approached Benghazi and butchered the people there? That would have been a disgrace and another failure of the UN, but it wasn't, the UN DID SOMETHING for once. This is a UN sanctioned operation, NOT even driven by the United States.

    The fact that the UAE support the Bahrain and Saudi dictatorships does not change the fact that dictatorships are wrong. Democracy is often flawed (look at our own septic isle for proof of that) but it's the best system available.

    Rather than shying away from helping ordinary (non Gadaffi circle) Libyans, the UN (not, "the west") should help any people where their government terrorises them. Perhapy this action will raise further questions as to why the UN hasn't helped the people of Zimbabwe or Saudi Arabia etc. etc. I imagine the Saudi royal family are felling hot under the collar as people in countries all around them say "we've had enough of this".

    The UN has failed people around the world soooo often (the Balkans, for example, was NATO operation initially, as the UN again failed the people of Sarajevo for many years) and this time it has acted in the nick of time. I personally support this, but I understand the cynicism, being a bit of a cynic myself.

    Actually the US is the diplomatic and military muscle behind this. They pushed for it in the UN [for the sake of public legitimacy] and they got France to lead in the military action [lol lets hope it turns out differently from the last time we followed France into a war] -strike first but the US is the prime mover.


  • Options
    #424
    A Dub in Glasgo
    Registered Users Posts: 17,180 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    [lol lets hope it turns out differently from the last time we followed France into a war]

    :confused::confused:


  • Options
    #425
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »
    :confused::confused:

    Vietnam.

    Is it to early in the morning for dark humour?


  • Options
    #426
    mike65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    metrovelvet please state in some way you are American otherwise :confused: will follow you around. :)

    Listening to Robert Fisk right now, even he backs this intervention.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #427
    A Dub in Glasgo
    Registered Users Posts: 17,180 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    Vietnam.

    Is it to early in the morning for dark humour?

    Didn't realise the 'we' referred to the USA. I thought it was Ireland.


  • Options
    #428
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,019 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    Actually the US is the diplomatic and military muscle behind this. They pushed for it in the UN [for the sake of public legitimacy] and they got France to lead in the military action [lol lets hope it turns out differently from the last time we followed France into a war] -strike first but the US is the prime mover.
    This is incorrect as far as I can see. The pushing was done by the UK and France if anything. I would class the US here as a reluctant ally in all this.

    This thing is so different from the almost unilateral actions in Iraq (and to a lesser extent, Afghanistan).


  • Options
    #429
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »
    Didn't realise the 'we' referred to the USA. I thought it was Ireland.

    Sorry....I keep forgetting...


  • Options
    #430
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    murphaph wrote: »
    This is incorrect as far as I can see. The pushing was done by the UK and France if anything. I would class the US here as a reluctant ally in all this.

    This thing is so different from the almost unilateral actions in Iraq (and to a lesser extent, Afghanistan).

    Hillary Clinton pushed for it in the UN.

    I don't think Obama wanted to go in and I don't think a lot of the American public did either, if you look at Democratic Underground.

    The military muscle is definitely American even thought the French went in first. They had to do it this way because of the sceptre of Iraq. If you look at the missiles the US is firing, you can hardly call that a reluctant ally. It has to appear that way, and they are so far doing a good job of making it look like that.

    I still dont know what they are hoping to accomplish by getting involved in a north African brawl they dont understand and siding with people they know nothing about.


  • Options
    #431
    Jonny7
    Registered Users Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    metrovelvet wrote: »

    I still dont know what they are hoping to accomplish by getting involved in a north African brawl they dont understand and siding with people they know nothing about.

    What is your solution to this? Let it happen?

    This isn't the French revolution - if King Louis had the perfected art of a modern dictator, those people would've been very easily suppressed.

    This isn't deepest darkest Africa, imagine what effect a no fly zone would have on the soon to be dictatorship in Ivory Coast... zero

    Each situation is different. In this situation, its undeniable that Gaddafi is prepared to slaughter as many as it takes, create a huge humanitarian crisis, anything to stay in power

    All we have to do in the West is create a no fly zone, even the odds, give the rebels a chance, they are fighting the good fight, but the modern dictator always has the upper hand - the man is using mercenaries to kill his own people - how black and white does this have to get

    The no fly zone is easy to maintain - no boots on the ground, the rebels can reorganise, swing around and can take this guy out. France and other countries have recognised the rebel council, who are very clear about what they want -

    Suddenly all the cynics are questioning who they are.. such rubbish, did they question who they are in Egypt? or Tunisia? its the people, and its not Al Qaeda, unless you believe Gaddafi, maybe some feel freedom and democracy is only deserved by Western countries, and anywhere else to be viewed with cynicsm?

    If the worst happens, and Gaddafi somehow keeps managing to pay his mercs, and his troops don't desert and he somehow manages to hold off the rebels who will be vicious now with air cover, sat maps, etc, etc.. if he manages to hold off and protract the whole thing - its still not as bad as him being left there right now to slaughter all and be there anyway

    And no this isn't some secret cia imperialism based on a lie gas stealing crap - its very genuine, was never a fan of Sarkowzy or Cameron, very glad people like that have the balls and the heart to do something instead of letting another Rwanda happen


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #432
    Dr. Greenthumb
    Registered Users Posts: 318 ✭✭Dr. Greenthumb


    Jonny7 wrote: »

    Each situation is different. In this situation, its undeniable that Gaddafi is prepared to slaughter as many as it takes, create a huge humanitarian crisis, anything to stay in power

    Suddenly all the cynics are questioning who they are.. such rubbish, did they question who they are in Egypt? or Tunisia? its the people, and its not Al Qaeda, unless you believe Gaddafi, maybe some feel freedom and democracy is only deserved by Western countries, and anywhere else to be viewed with cynicsm?

    If the worst happens, and Gaddafi somehow keeps managing to pay his mercs, and his troops don't desert and he somehow manages to hold off the rebels who will be vicious now with air cover, sat maps, etc, etc.. if he manages to hold off and protract the whole thing - its still not as bad as him being left there right now to slaughter all and be there anyway

    And no this isn't some secret cia imperialism based on a lie gas stealing crap - its very genuine, was never a fan of Sarkowzy or Cameron, very glad people like that have the balls and the heart to do something instead of letting another Rwanda happen

    I'm not defending Gaddafi but...

    There has been no credible proof that Gaddafi has slaughtered anyone and if attacked is entitled to fight back.

    The protester in Egypt, Tunisa were not armed. Libya's rebels have been reported to have fighter jets etc. They have engaged the government troops in battles. Who is arming these guys? Also what is their plan once they oust Gaddafi?

    Gaddafi could have, if he wanted, blown the crap out of these people weeks ago but didn't. He has shown some restraint considering the arms at his disposal.

    The whole thing is a mess and the facts aren't forthcoming. Gaddafi's side and the rebels are both releasing spurious information to back up their own claims. IMO the whole country will descend into anarchy once Gaddafi is gone as the fight for power between the different tribes kicks off.


  • Options
    #433
    mike65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    Tripolli says a million Libyians are being armed by the state, isn't that just a little bit crazy? Who do they trust in a poulation of only 7 million .I'm assuming women, children and OAPs will not be issued with a weapon so thats basically every healthy adult male with a gun. Hmmm.


  • Options
    #434
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    mike65 wrote: »
    Tripolli says a million Libyians are being armed by the state, isn't that just a little bit crazy? Who do they trust in a poulation of only 7 million .I'm assuming women, children and OAPs will not be issued with a weapon so thats basically every healthy adult male with a gun. Hmmm.

    Why would you assume women, children and OAPs will not be armed?

    The MILLION Libyians being armed by the state, are these the civilians who support G?


  • Options
    #435
    AlekSmart
    Registered Users Posts: 14,005 ✭✭✭✭AlekSmart


    Jonny7 wrote: »
    What is your solution to this? Let it happen?

    This isn't the French revolution - if King Louis had the perfected art of a modern dictator, those people would've been very easily suppressed.

    This isn't deepest darkest Africa, imagine what effect a no fly zone would have on the soon to be dictatorship in Ivory Coast... zero

    Each situation is different. In this situation, its undeniable that Gaddafi is prepared to slaughter as many as it takes, create a huge humanitarian crisis, anything to stay in power

    All we have to do in the West is create a no fly zone, even the odds, give the rebels a chance, they are fighting the good fight, but the modern dictator always has the upper hand - the man is using mercenaries to kill his own people - how black and white does this have to get


    I`m not sure many of us here have the least notion of what Gadaffai`s relationship with his people actually is based upon.

    We`re certainly getting a dose of spin but I`m not willing to swallow it whole I`m afraid.


    Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.

    Charles Mackay (1812-1889)



  • Options
    #436
    Clank1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10 ✭Clank1


    Let's not be too hasty my friend, there is always tomorrow... haw haw :pac:


  • Options
    #437
    mike65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    The MILLION Libyians being armed by the state, are these the civilians who support G?

    How does he know they support him, do they ask a trick question before handing the gun over?


  • Options
    #438
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Dr. Greenthumb wrote: »
    I'm not defending Gaddafi but...

    There has been no credible proof that Gaddafi has slaughtered anyone and if attacked is entitled to fight back.

    The protester in Egypt, Tunisa were not armed. Libya's rebels have been reported to have fighter jets etc. They have engaged the government troops in battles. Who is arming these guys? Also what is their plan once they oust Gaddafi?

    Gaddafi could have, if he wanted, blown the crap out of these people weeks ago but didn't. He has shown some restraint considering the arms at his disposal.

    The whole thing is a mess and the facts aren't forthcoming. Gaddafi's side and the rebels are both releasing spurious information to back up their own claims. IMO the whole country will descend into anarchy once Gaddafi is gone as the fight for power between the different tribes kicks off.
    He blew the crap out of quite a few towns in the past couple of weeks actually.
    The nile is in Egypt you know not Libya.
    Everytime I turn on the BBC,I'm hearing reports of what Gadaffii is doing.
    Currently they are burning misrata in the west to the ground.
    It's their own citizens they are killing and have been for weeks,not foreigners.

    The game plan in resolution 1973 is evening the playing field.
    Neutralising the Gadaffi ordinance.
    Though I hear interpretations that say it doesn't rule out crack teams on the ground as long as they are not occupiers.
    They could arm and train the rebels for instance.
    Theres no doubt it's going to be messy but neutralising the Gaddifites will be an improvement on what we have now in my opinion.


  • Options
    #439
    Clank1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10 ✭Clank1


    mike65 wrote: »
    How does he know they support him, do they ask a trick question before handing the gun over?

    Surely they wouldn't mind? haw haw :pac:


  • Options
    #440
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    mike65 wrote: »
    How does he know they support him, do they ask a trick question before handing the gun over?

    Well exactly.

    I dont get this at all...

    Ok he is slaughtering some citizens and arming others. And arming others against whom? Is it a self defense measure? What am I not getting?


  • Options
    #441
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,019 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Gadaffi say he's arming the citizenry. In reality of course he will not, lest they turn the guns on him.

    He maintains control, like so many dictators, by looking after a small proportion of the population well well indeed and making sure of their loyalty to him and him alone. He may arm these people, but I would think it unlikely myself, just in case.

    I'd say he's now hoping for a ground "invasion". The man is a master of media manipulation. He's already giving it loads about this being another crusade. All done to whip up the sentiments of Muslims, and indeed non-Muslims in the West (mainly) in the hope they pressure their own governments to withdraw.

    You don't cling on to power for 40 years by being a nice guy. The best we can hope for is a load of defections from his inner circle/army and desertion of his mercenary soldiers back to wherever they came from.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #442
    Jonny7
    Registered Users Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    AlekSmart wrote: »
    I`m not sure many of us here have the least notion of what Gadaffai`s relationship with his people actually is based upon.

    We`re certainly getting a dose of spin but I`m not willing to swallow it whole I`m afraid.

    I've been following this since day one. I am a major cynic, and from Fox to Al Jazeera, I haven't seen one discrepancy. The reports, like those from Rwanda, Yugoslavia, etc are not spun. Its all in sync.

    The way the tribe system works in Libya, means that Gaddafi and his sons, and their paramilitary units, are more like a 'gang' than anything, they have no problem fighting what they see as the 'other gang' (based in the East). In order to stop the rebellion they will have to kill basically anyone willing to bear arms against them, they will have to 'disappear' a lot of people, they will also have to 'punish' the population in the East, literally slaughter a lot of them. This is how it works and this is exactly what is happening, you don't need much history to know how much this has happened in the past.

    If there was no intervention in Yugoslavia, then you'd be reading about that genocide in your history books - farmers armed with pitchforks and shotguns fighting against a heavily armed military, intent of 'eradicating' them. It would've been a very high figure. Perhaps close to Rwanda, which was 800,000, mainly with machetes, fuelled by what and who? thats right small cabal, a 'gang' and what was most chilling about it, Gaddafi now using the same words

    'cleanse the rats' 'house by house' - these same words were used over the airwaves in the Rwanda genocide 'cleanse the cockroaches'

    Think we should leave it and see what happens?

    Sure let them sort it out by themselves? no problem in Tunisia, Egypt, they had tough leaders, yes with State TV, control, internal security, illegal secret prisons, etc....... but nothing like Gaddafi

    Mubarak didn't have the absolute fear andcontrol to start using the army to massacre the civilians, the guy tried though, the tank crews were ripping off their headsets when they got the order, calling home on their mobiles, asking what the **** to do.

    Every situation is different, but its very clear to me and to many people what Gaddafi and his thugs and mercenaries have done, are doing and will do. "leaving it up to the people' will mean a massacre, but the people cannot stop T72's and millions of dollars being poured into heavily armed African mercenaries (read killing machines)

    Again, I have to repeat, there are black and white situations, and this is one of them.


  • Options
    #443
    Dr. Greenthumb
    Registered Users Posts: 318 ✭✭Dr. Greenthumb


    Deleted User wrote: »
    He blew the crap out of quite a few towns in the past couple of weeks actually.
    The nile is in Egypt and Sudan (and arguably Uganda & Ethiopia) you know not Libya.
    Everytime I turn on the BBC,I'm hearing reports of what Gadaffii is doing.
    Currently they are burning misrata in the west to the ground.
    It's their own citizens they are killing and have been for weeks,not foreigners.

    The game plan in resolution 1973 is evening the playing field.
    Neutralising the Gadaffi ordinance.
    Though I hear interpretations that say it doesn't rule out crack teams on the ground as long as they are not occupiers.
    They could arm and train the rebels for instance.
    Theres no doubt it's going to be messy but neutralising the Gaddifites will be an improvement on what we have now in my opinion.

    Where is the proof that the government are killing civilians? I'm hearing reports about Misrata also but it's second hand information with again no proof. The only damage that is seen to be caused at the moment is from the UN air strikes. If you can provide back up to your claims about Gaddafi killing his own citizens then ok but it has all been assumptions to date.

    The arab league are criticizing the bombings as are russia.

    There was british secret forces reportedly caught in Libya by rebels last week although I doubt they were carrying fighter jets etc with them.


  • Options
    #444
    LeixlipRed
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,081 ✭✭✭LeixlipRed


    And meanwhile in Bahrain the government there have surrounded and attacked hospitals with unarmed protestors inside. Bahrain who were backed up by the Saudis this week. The Saudis support the action against Libya. The hypocrisy of all of this makes my head hurt. This is only about one thing, oil.....


  • Options
    #445
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    LeixlipRed wrote: »
    And meanwhile in Bahrain the government there have surrounded and attacked hospitals with unarmed protestors inside. Bahrain who were backed up by the Saudis this week. The Saudis support the action against Libya. The hypocrisy of all of this makes my head hurt. This is only about one thing, oil.....

    No, its not only about one thing. Its incredibly complicated and muddled. But no, you return to your purity of perrenial opposition and obstruction and see where that gets humanity in the long run.


  • Options
    #446
    opinion guy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,001 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    Dr. Greenthumb wrote: »
    The arab league are criticizing the bombings as are russia.

    This is ****ing farce. The head of Arab league was yesterday in Paris and agreeing with the action. Today he criticises it. This is him playing politics. Apparently he is planning to run for president in Egypt. If this is true I imagine such flip-flopping will seriously backfire on him since the Egyptians are in a take no **** kinda mood when it comes to their leaders.
    LeixlipRed wrote: »
    And meanwhile in Bahrain the government there have surrounded and attacked hospitals with unarmed protestors inside. Bahrain who were backed up by the Saudis this week. The Saudis support the action against Libya. The hypocrisy of all of this makes my head hurt. This is only about one thing, oil.....
    I was going to thank this post until the last line. Its not about oil.


  • Options
    #447
    Macha
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,376 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    LeixlipRed wrote: »
    And meanwhile in Bahrain the government there have surrounded and attacked hospitals with unarmed protestors inside. Bahrain who were backed up by the Saudis this week. The Saudis support the action against Libya. The hypocrisy of all of this makes my head hurt. This is only about one thing, oil.....
    Actually, the easiest thing for the West to do would be to support Khadaffi if it was all about oil. He proved very good at keeping the Libyan people down and keeping oil production up.

    The reality is that in states with a lot of oil, there tends to be a resource curse. And this often results in dictatorships. The phenomenon is well documented.


  • Options
    #448
    mike65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    Macha wrote: »
    The reality is that in states with a lot of oil, there tends to be a resource curse. And this often results in dictatorships. The phenomenon is well documented.

    Looking at the world you'd certainly think that, still Norway is pretty democratic!. The oil arguement is embarrassingly lame, as you say Libya has been happy to sell it to whoever wants it. Also and I could be wrong here but I'm pretty sure the UN resolution was passed not to secure oil but to protect (by implication aid?) those rebels based in Benghazi. That city would almost certainly have been raised to the ground by Gaddafi.


  • Options
    #449
    Macha
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,376 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    mike65 wrote: »
    Looking at the world you'd certainly think that, still Norway is pretty democratic!. The oil arguement is embarrassingly lame, as you say Libya has been happy to sell it to whoever wants it. Also and I could be wrong here but I'm pretty sure the UN resolution was passed not to secure oil but to protect (by implication aid?) those rebels based in Benghazi. That city would almost certainly have been raised to the ground by Gaddafi.

    Well, Norway had a stable, mature democracy by the time they found oil - same with UK.


  • Options
    #450
    mike65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    Amazing how most precious carbon and mineral resources are in the worst countries.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #451
    Killer Pigeon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,132 ✭✭✭Killer Pigeon


    LeixlipRed wrote: »
    And meanwhile in Bahrain the government there have surrounded and attacked hospitals with unarmed protestors inside. Bahrain who were backed up by the Saudis this week. The Saudis support the action against Libya. The hypocrisy of all of this makes my head hurt. This is only about one thing, oil.....

    There isn't much oil in Bahrain.


Advertisement