Peace keeping in Libya
Kris
20 Mar 2011
Quote
Obama: US launches military action against Libya
By Brad Knickerbocker, Staff Writer / March 20, 2011
As the US-led attack on Libyan targets approached its third day, lawmakers and other observers began to weigh in on the wisdom and timing of the attempt to stop Muammar Qaddafi’s army from attacking civilians and decimating rebel forces.
On Sunday talk shows, the comments ranged from “too little, too late” to concerns about what any endgame might be as the US engages in a third war in Muslim countries.
Senator John McCain ® says President Obama “waited too long” before taking military action against Qaddafi. And he suggested that the delay means the job will be harder.
Related: With Libya, is 'Obama doctrine' on war emerging?
"If we had taken this step a couple of weeks ago, a no-fly zone would probably have been enough," Sen. McCain said on CNN’s State of the Union. "Now, a no-fly zone is not enough. There needs to be other efforts made."
Senator Richard Lugar, senior Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, wonders "who it is in Libya that we're trying to support."
"Obviously, the people who are against Qaddafi, but who?” Sen. Lugar asked on CBS' Face the Nation. “In eastern Libya, for example, a huge number of people went off to help the Iraqis against the United States in a war that still is winding down.”
At this point, US officials aren’t saying when the coalition fighting Qaddafi’s forces in Libya might be able to pull back from the air and sea assaults.
"I think circumstances will drive where this goes in the future," Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen said on ABC's This Week. ''I wouldn't speculate in terms of length at this particular point in time."
Asked if the fighting might end with Qaddafi still in place, Admiral Mullen said, "That's certainly potentially one outcome."
US policy at this point is that the military action in Libya is about protecting people and not regime change.
But that is not enough, according to some critics of the Obama administration’s limited approach there.
"We should isolate this regime," Sen. Lindsey Graham ® told Fox News Sunday. "This is a great opportunity to replace a tyrannical dictator who is not a legitimate leader, who is an international crook. And we should seize the moment and talk about replacing him, not talk about how limited we will be."
"Once the president of the United States says, as President Obama did, that Qaddafi must go, if we don't work with our allies to make sure Qaddafi does go, America's credibility and prestige suffers all over the world," Sen. Joe Lieberman (I) told CNN.
Leaving Qaddafi in power can never solve the problem, says Ali Suleiman Aujali, who was Libya’s UN ambassador before he denounced Qaddafi and became a prominent figure in the opposition.
"Protection of Libyan civilians is only achieved by one goal, that Qaddafi is not there, not only by stopping his airplanes striking the people,” Mr. Aujali told ABC's This Week. “The danger is Qaddafi himself.”
In pushing for UN approval of a no-fly zone, the US and other western nations felt free to do so because the 22-member Arab League had first backed the effort.
But on Sunday, Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa said the missile strikes and aerial bombing had gone too far.
“What is happening in Libya differs from the aim of imposing a no-fly zone,” he said in a statement on the official Middle East News Agency. “And what we want is the protection of civilians and not the shelling of more civilians.”
Mr. Moussa, along with officials from the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Iraq, Qatar, and Morocco took part in the Paris summit Saturday where the US and its western coalition partners met to discuss imposition of the no-fly zone (which began just hours later).
But so far, only tiny Qatar has agreed to commit military forces in the fight against Qaddaf
By Brad Knickerbocker, Staff Writer / March 20, 2011
As the US-led attack on Libyan targets approached its third day, lawmakers and other observers began to weigh in on the wisdom and timing of the attempt to stop Muammar Qaddafi’s army from attacking civilians and decimating rebel forces.
On Sunday talk shows, the comments ranged from “too little, too late” to concerns about what any endgame might be as the US engages in a third war in Muslim countries.
Senator John McCain ® says President Obama “waited too long” before taking military action against Qaddafi. And he suggested that the delay means the job will be harder.
Related: With Libya, is 'Obama doctrine' on war emerging?
"If we had taken this step a couple of weeks ago, a no-fly zone would probably have been enough," Sen. McCain said on CNN’s State of the Union. "Now, a no-fly zone is not enough. There needs to be other efforts made."
Senator Richard Lugar, senior Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, wonders "who it is in Libya that we're trying to support."
"Obviously, the people who are against Qaddafi, but who?” Sen. Lugar asked on CBS' Face the Nation. “In eastern Libya, for example, a huge number of people went off to help the Iraqis against the United States in a war that still is winding down.”
At this point, US officials aren’t saying when the coalition fighting Qaddafi’s forces in Libya might be able to pull back from the air and sea assaults.
"I think circumstances will drive where this goes in the future," Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen said on ABC's This Week. ''I wouldn't speculate in terms of length at this particular point in time."
Asked if the fighting might end with Qaddafi still in place, Admiral Mullen said, "That's certainly potentially one outcome."
US policy at this point is that the military action in Libya is about protecting people and not regime change.
But that is not enough, according to some critics of the Obama administration’s limited approach there.
"We should isolate this regime," Sen. Lindsey Graham ® told Fox News Sunday. "This is a great opportunity to replace a tyrannical dictator who is not a legitimate leader, who is an international crook. And we should seize the moment and talk about replacing him, not talk about how limited we will be."
"Once the president of the United States says, as President Obama did, that Qaddafi must go, if we don't work with our allies to make sure Qaddafi does go, America's credibility and prestige suffers all over the world," Sen. Joe Lieberman (I) told CNN.
Leaving Qaddafi in power can never solve the problem, says Ali Suleiman Aujali, who was Libya’s UN ambassador before he denounced Qaddafi and became a prominent figure in the opposition.
"Protection of Libyan civilians is only achieved by one goal, that Qaddafi is not there, not only by stopping his airplanes striking the people,” Mr. Aujali told ABC's This Week. “The danger is Qaddafi himself.”
In pushing for UN approval of a no-fly zone, the US and other western nations felt free to do so because the 22-member Arab League had first backed the effort.
But on Sunday, Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa said the missile strikes and aerial bombing had gone too far.
“What is happening in Libya differs from the aim of imposing a no-fly zone,” he said in a statement on the official Middle East News Agency. “And what we want is the protection of civilians and not the shelling of more civilians.”
Mr. Moussa, along with officials from the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Iraq, Qatar, and Morocco took part in the Paris summit Saturday where the US and its western coalition partners met to discuss imposition of the no-fly zone (which began just hours later).
But so far, only tiny Qatar has agreed to commit military forces in the fight against Qaddaf
Source: http://news.yahoo.co.../lt_libya_obama
Discuss
Edited by TheDR, 21 March 2011 - 11:04.
BeefJeRKy
20 Mar 2011
The alternative was a crazed nut slaughtering three quarters of his population. I'm not exactly ecstatic, but this should have happened earlier back when the rebels had a foothold near Tripoli and a no-fly zone would have given them more impunity while defending themselves. If the US is to do this right, they will leave as soon as Gaddafi is gone. None of the "Nation Building" they tried elsewhere.
Alias
20 Mar 2011
The main difference between this and the US' recent escapades is this has UN approval, for what it's worth.
As a pacifist I can't condone any violent action, though.
As a pacifist I can't condone any violent action, though.
Chyros
21 Mar 2011
Scope, on 21 Mar 2011, 1:22, said:
If the US is to do this right, they will leave as soon as Gaddafi is gone. None of the "Nation Building" they tried elsewhere.
Alias, on 21 Mar 2011, 1:33, said:
The main difference between this and the US' recent escapades is this has UN approval, for what it's worth.
Libains
21 Mar 2011
What I find particularly funny is that everyone seems to think this is another US mission. The US have very very little to do with this 'war'. It's been instigated, and run mostly, by the UK, France and Italy. The US are providing intelligence, and a few cruise missiles. France has hit Libya by far the hardest. It's almost like we've dragged them into a peacekeeping mission, as opposed to it being the other way around, usually. Libya needed intervention, that I can't deny. If this is solely enforcement of a no-fly zone and preventing Gadaffi from nuking the civilians, then I have no qualms with it.
Map showing various nations' input into this.
Edited by AJ, 21 March 2011 - 02:22.
Map showing various nations' input into this.
Edited by AJ, 21 March 2011 - 02:22.
Destiny
21 Mar 2011
Hahaha, I don't think 112 Tomahawks are 'some' only 
But yeah, just get that guy out of Libya and all will be good. The US isn't putting any soldiers on the ground.
Aviano base eh...
But yeah, just get that guy out of Libya and all will be good. The US isn't putting any soldiers on the ground.Aviano base eh...
Destiny
21 Mar 2011
Of course it is, I've stressed it many times 
Let's put it into perspective.
Damn you BBCode!
Edited by Destiny, 21 March 2011 - 07:21.
Let's put it into perspective.
Damn you BBCode!
Edited by Destiny, 21 March 2011 - 07:21.
SquigPie
21 Mar 2011
Denmark's in that war too, with about 3 or 4 jets I think...
Hope we still have time to take this bastard down.
Hope we still have time to take this bastard down.
Destiny
21 Mar 2011
I'm thinking Qad-hisnamehere will escalate the situation into something bad.
Dutchygamer
21 Mar 2011
Perhaps change the topic title so it doesn't look like it's just the US doing the fighting in Libya?
Sgt. Nuker
21 Mar 2011
From what I've heard over the radio, the US will eventually turn this whole thing over to French-British forces, or even *gasp* UN forces.
Violence is sometimes needed, for diplomacy can come from the tip of a sword.
Violence is sometimes needed, for diplomacy can come from the tip of a sword.
BeefJeRKy
21 Mar 2011
Interesting how the Arabs are revolting a little less than a hundred years after the first call for independence from the Ottomans in the early 1900s.
I'm unsure what will happen in Libya if Qaddafi is removed. I'm just hoping he won't be replaced by Salafi/Wahhabi Islamists like in Saudi Arabia.
In other news, Iran welcomed the revolts in Arab states like Bahrain and Libya but conveniently left out Syria and its own people's demands.
I'm unsure what will happen in Libya if Qaddafi is removed. I'm just hoping he won't be replaced by Salafi/Wahhabi Islamists like in Saudi Arabia.
In other news, Iran welcomed the revolts in Arab states like Bahrain and Libya but conveniently left out Syria and its own people's demands.
CJ
21 Mar 2011
Scope, on 21 Mar 2011, 22:39, said:
Interesting how the Arabs are revolting a little less than a hundred years after the first call for independence from the Ottomans in the early 1900s.
I'm unsure what will happen in Libya if Qaddafi is removed. I'm just hoping he won't be replaced by Salafi/Wahhabi Islamists like in Saudi Arabia.
In other news, Iran welcomed the revolts in Arab states like Bahrain and Libya but conveniently left out Syria and its own people's demands.
I'm unsure what will happen in Libya if Qaddafi is removed. I'm just hoping he won't be replaced by Salafi/Wahhabi Islamists like in Saudi Arabia.
In other news, Iran welcomed the revolts in Arab states like Bahrain and Libya but conveniently left out Syria and its own people's demands.
In other news, Saudi Arabia is against Gaddafi but seems to conveniently forget that they sent their soldier to slaughters Bahraini protesters.
Also, the US has practically nothing to do with this operation, if anything it should be France which should get most of the credits for once.
AND what I have to say is : took them fricking long enough, like it took them a week to send money to the refugees when the Tunisian government couldn't just keep up with helping them. Thankfully everyone here helped by buying food and goods for them, cause if we had waited for those ONU retards to take a decision, everyone would have starved by now.
When I think that Alias was saying we're less civilized than developed countries... The sweet irony...
Wizard
21 Mar 2011
Scope, on 21 Mar 2011, 21:39, said:
In other news, Iran welcomed the revolts in Arab states like Bahrain and Libya but conveniently left out Syria and its own people's demands.
And managed to arrest and disappear the public faces of dissent within it's own borders, lest we forget.....
BeefJeRKy
21 Mar 2011
Change all around us but my own country remains stagnant as ever...
And yes, no side is cleaner than the other CJ.
Edited by Scope, 21 March 2011 - 23:29.
And yes, no side is cleaner than the other CJ.
Edited by Scope, 21 March 2011 - 23:29.
SquigPie
22 Mar 2011
Scope, on 22 Mar 2011, 0:29, said:
Change all around us but my own country remains stagnant as ever...
And yes, no side is cleaner than the other CJ.
And yes, no side is cleaner than the other CJ.
Except for Denmark, we are so clean and superior and white and have so much freedom of speech and equality except for non-whites.
Or well, that's not my opinion, but it appears to be the opinion of the government. And thus the majority of my countrymen.
Edited by SquigPie, 22 March 2011 - 07:16.
Alias
22 Mar 2011
CJ, on 22 Mar 2011, 9:54, said:
Also, the US has practically nothing to do with this operation, if anything it should be France which should get most of the credits for once.
"In Cairo, the Arab League reaffirmed its support for Operation Odyssey Dawn after the previous day saying the air strikes, led by the United States, France and Britain, went beyond the scope of a UN resolution to implement a no-fly zone."
http://www.abc.net.a.../22/3170155.htm
CJ, on 22 Mar 2011, 9:54, said:
AND what I have to say is : took them fricking long enough, like it took them a week to send money to the refugees when the Tunisian government couldn't just keep up with helping them. Thankfully everyone here helped by buying food and goods for them, cause if we had waited for those ONU retards to take a decision, everyone would have starved by now.
CJ, on 22 Mar 2011, 9:54, said:
When I think that Alias was saying we're less civilized than developed countries... The sweet irony...
http://fts.unocha.org/reports/daily/ocha_R..._1103220204.pdf
I've backed my claims up with sources. How about you do the same.
CJ
22 Mar 2011
Alias, on 22 Mar 2011, 8:25, said:
CJ, on 22 Mar 2011, 9:54, said:
Also, the US has practically nothing to do with this operation, if anything it should be France which should get most of the credits for once.
Oh come one, you know that Sarkozy was the one who was pushing all countries in the EU and urging them to do something... He might have done that in the sole hope of regaining some
Alias, on 22 Mar 2011, 8:25, said:
CJ, on 22 Mar 2011, 9:54, said:
When I think that Alias was saying we're less civilized than developed countries... The sweet irony...
http://fts.unocha.org/reports/daily/ocha_R..._1103220204.pdf
I've backed my claims up with sources. How about you do the same.
Why would I need sources to back my claims, I haven't denied that these countries have helped, but it took them a week before doing so, which is my point. Your sources do not infirm anything I said
And here's on the other hand a proof that civilized countries didn't move their arses quick enough : http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/02/world/eu.../02refugee.html
The important part of this article is this one :
Quote
On Monday, the United Nations said it flew out 216 Guineans, 15 Moroccans and 35 Bangladeshis. On Tuesday, Ghana sent buses for hundreds of its citizens, and on Wednesday, 174 people will be put on a charter plane to Dhaka. So far, the United Nations and the Egyptian Army are the only organizations that seem to be helping.
Since the article was posted 8 days after the refugees began to flee Libya, it pretty much speaks for itself. And if you google the articles about your donations you'll see that they all have been posted on March, at least 6 days after the situation became disastrous in the Lybian-Tunisian checkpoints.
Raven
22 Mar 2011
US F-15 crash lands inside Libya. One crewman saves, other is in the process of being rescued. Cause of crash unknown. I don't think it was brought down by AA fire.
BBC Link
BBC Link
CJ
22 Mar 2011
The crazy guy is using civilians as cover now btw, the barracks and military bases are full of civilians which makes the US-UE forces task even harder...
And concerning the crash I don't think it was due to the AA either, Libya's got a very rusty equipment, they couldn't take out an F-15 unless they're using suppressing fire...
And concerning the crash I don't think it was due to the AA either, Libya's got a very rusty equipment, they couldn't take out an F-15 unless they're using suppressing fire...
Alias
22 Mar 2011
CJ, on 22 Mar 2011, 21:53, said:
Alias, on 22 Mar 2011, 8:25, said:
CJ, on 22 Mar 2011, 9:54, said:
Also, the US has practically nothing to do with this operation, if anything it should be France which should get most of the credits for once.
Oh come one, you know that Sarkozy was the one who was pushing all countries in the EU and urging them to do something... He might have done that in the sole hope of regaining some
Sarkozy wasn't doing anything more than Cameron was. They were both very vocal proponents of it, as was our foreign minister (and ex-prime minister) Kevin Rudd.
CJ, on 22 Mar 2011, 21:53, said:
Alias, on 22 Mar 2011, 8:25, said:
CJ, on 22 Mar 2011, 9:54, said:
When I think that Alias was saying we're less civilized than developed countries... The sweet irony...
http://fts.unocha.org/reports/daily/ocha_R..._1103220204.pdf
I've backed my claims up with sources. How about you do the same.
Why would I need sources to back my claims, I haven't denied that these countries have helped, but it took them a week before doing so, which is my point. Your sources do not infirm anything I said
CJ, on 22 Mar 2011, 21:53, said:
And here's on the other hand a proof that civilized countries didn't move their arses quick enough : http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/02/world/eu.../02refugee.html
The important part of this article is this one :
Since the article was posted 8 days after the refugees began to flee Libya, it pretty much speaks for itself. And if you google the articles about your donations you'll see that they all have been posted on March, at least 6 days after the situation became disastrous in the Lybian-Tunisian checkpoints.
The important part of this article is this one :
Quote
On Monday, the United Nations said it flew out 216 Guineans, 15 Moroccans and 35 Bangladeshis. On Tuesday, Ghana sent buses for hundreds of its citizens, and on Wednesday, 174 people will be put on a charter plane to Dhaka. So far, the United Nations and the Egyptian Army are the only organizations that seem to be helping.
Since the article was posted 8 days after the refugees began to flee Libya, it pretty much speaks for itself. And if you google the articles about your donations you'll see that they all have been posted on March, at least 6 days after the situation became disastrous in the Lybian-Tunisian checkpoints.
Heathrow airport averages 67 million people a year, or 180000 a day.
Only if you diverted half of ALL passenger flights that fly into or out of Heathrow every day would you have enough planes to fly them home. If they can't fly, the only quick option is by land. About the only places to go to via land are Egypt and Tunisia. I think it's understandable why it takes a while to happen.
For the aid, read the report I posted above. The heading is "Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Unrest and Neighbouring Countries (Egypt, Niger and Tunisia) - February 2011". Last time I checked February wasn't March. The figures are the March count for the February donations (it takes a while to process that much money).
Edited by Alias, 22 March 2011 - 11:32.
Sgt. Nuker
22 Mar 2011
According to the news this morning, the Obama administration plans to phase out US involvement in a matter of days, rather than weeks.
As far as the F-15 going down, it could be anything from pilot error to electrical or mechanical failure, to surface to air missiles (just throwing that last part out there).
Edited by Sgt. Nuker, 22 March 2011 - 13:20.
As far as the F-15 going down, it could be anything from pilot error to electrical or mechanical failure, to surface to air missiles (just throwing that last part out there).
Edited by Sgt. Nuker, 22 March 2011 - 13:20.
