|
Intel5 posted:I'm just ranting here, but we spend billions on the latest and greatest military toys, and now we have a veritable carte blanche of international opinion to use them to save lives, and our president is standing around holding his dick. We could have air superiority over Libya within hours, it may do fuckall for stuff that's happening on the ground, but they wouldn't be able to drop bombs on their own people anymore. This is such a balancing act though. If we don't have UN approval, we'd effectively be "going rogue" Even if the global community approves of it, politically it could have astronomical impacts.
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 19:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 11:15 |
|
|
With Italy's ties to Libya...if there ever was a time for Berlusconi to step up, be a good human being (or even just be as lovely a human being and play out his Mussolini fantasies), and send in the drat Italian military, this would be the time. It's entirely unrealistic and impossible, but I can dream.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 19:54
|
|
|
Its a shame that Egypt has a rather modern air-force, but may not be in a position to intervene.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 19:57
|
|
|
Intel5 posted:I'm just ranting here, but we spend billions on the latest and greatest military toys, and now we have a veritable carte blanche of international opinion to use them to save lives, and our president is standing around holding his dick. We could have air superiority over Libya within hours, it may do fuckall for stuff that's happening on the ground, but they wouldn't be able to drop bombs on their own people anymore. Actually, air superiority would also mean that their anti-aircraft guns would be more concentrated shooting down aircraft that are violating Libyan airspace and shooting down Libya aircraft than chopping up civilians. Which would also mean that the same AAA would soon be priority targets as soon as they engaged.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 19:57
|
|
|
The line between staying out, letting the protesters deal with the revolution themselves, and outside intervention has just been crossed. I would gladly support/pay/go out there myself to stop this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 19:58
|
|
|
Hob_Gadling posted:How has Israel reacted to the Libyan situation? Israel's better off not getting near any of this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:00
|
|
|
Shagga posted:I was quite young during the First Gulf War but I do not recall any significant backlash against the US for the liberation of Kuwait. Certainly not on the scale of GWB's subsequent adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan for certain. Yea there wasn't during Gulf I, but the bitching came about why we pulled back before toppling the regime. Then Gulf II where that was the objective (and WMD!), there was a shitstorm - true China/Russia/etc didn't stop us - but I question whether the US toppling a regime that kills its own people (ala Hussein) to stay in power would improve our perception in the world as folks here are saying.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:00
|
|
|
Roark posted:With Italy's ties to Libya...if there ever was a time for Berlusconi to step up, be a good human being (or even just be as lovely a human being and play out his Mussolini fantasies), and send in the drat Italian military, this would be the time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:01
|
|
|
Nuclear Spoon posted:#tahrir on irc.synirc.net http://www.synirc.net/servers/ are the servers that are up at this time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:03
|
|
SoroScrew
|
Darth123123 posted:Yea there wasn't during Gulf I, but the bitching came about why we pulled back before toppling the regime. Then Gulf II where that was the objective (and WMD!), there was a shitstorm - true China/Russia/etc didn't stop us - but I question whether the US toppling a regime that kills its own people (ala Hussein) to stay in power would improve our perception in the world as folks here are saying. The Iraqis weren't trying to topple Saddam's government themselves, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:03
|
|
|
Darth123123 posted:Really?! You think the world (including China, Russia, and other ME nations) would view our intervention positively? Irrespective of how quickly we left. Not a chance. I think the US is hesitant because of the RIGHTFUL skepticism over the interventionist poo poo we have done in the recent past. In countries where the peoples will was murky and probably didnt want us involved. This is completely different. gaddaffi at this point is going down no matter what. He is going to take as many innocent lives as he can before he is gone I think its pretty sad America is too scared to intervene here because of how shady/corporate/malignant its recent history with this type of thing is. I understand it could be warped to look like typical imperialist america by certain lenses, but i think the world is so focused and informed on what is happening that it wouldn't hold any water with people. This is a time when quick decisive action is needed and the world will stand their holding their dick to scared to make a move because of how it will be perceived.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:04
|
|
|
Ace Oliveira posted:The Iraqis weren't trying to topple Saddam's government themselves, though. There were a series of uprisings in the south and north of the country actually, but they were brutally crushed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:05
|
|
|
Ace Oliveira posted:The Iraqis weren't trying to topple Saddam's government themselves, though. Well, the Kurds and Shi'a tried to do that in Gulf War 1 and look where that got them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:06
|
|
|
sweeptheleg posted:i think the world is so focused and informed on what is happening that it wouldn't hold any water with people. I think you're the one who is mistaken. Go ahead - pull up any news site, whether local, national, international, and check what the headline story is. On the off chance that the main story is actually about what is happening in Libya (or any country in the middle east), try and find where in the article they explain why it is happening, or even why it is important. I think it is simply a pipe dream to imagine that the general public knows, or more importantly, cares about the protests. E: Emphasis on why and how, not what.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:08
|
|
|
GnatKingCoal posted:There was actually some Italian government dude more or less condoning what is happening because MUSLIM EMIRATE OF BENGHAZI. Also the shellshocked Lybian on BBC earlier talked of possibly Italian mercenaries but I don't really believe that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:08
|
|
|
Ace Oliveira posted:The Iraqis weren't trying to topple Saddam's government themselves, though. I believe they were actually. 1991 uprising that was crushed in similar fashion. edit: beaten (hopefully) like a paid mercenary.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:08
|
|
|
Ace Oliveira posted:Gaddafi is commiting genocide, though. This would be more akin to the NATO intervention in Bosnia, than some gently caress up like Iraq or Afghanistan. There's a reason we didn't even intervene in Darfur. No matter how well-intentioned, American foreign intervention that involves anything military is tainted. The only time the US could intervene militarily is if a genocide were breaking out between two different sub-Saharan factions (except Somalia).
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:13
|
|
|
IM_DA_DECIDER posted:Also the shellshocked Lybian on BBC earlier talked of possibly Italian mercenaries but I don't really believe that. In that picture of the mercenaries, some of them were white, but I figured that they were most likely South Africans or maybe even Balkan mercenaries.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:14
|
|
|
THE HORSES rear end posted:There's a reason we didn't even intervene in Darfur. No matter how well-intentioned, American foreign intervention that involves anything military is tainted. Also Rwanda. And Liberia.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:14
|
|
|
What's the deal with the Army there? Egypt was brought out of chaos after they joined in. I think the best/quickest option is for that to happen sooner than later. Not foreign invasion. I heard several smaller factions not obeying, but how about Generals/etc?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:14
|
|
|
Kane posted:What are the chances of anyone actually intervening at this point? None. These revolutions are all up to the people. Geopolitics are completely selfish and inhumane and that isn't changing any time soon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:19
|
|
|
Darth123123 posted:What's the deal with the Army there? Egypt was brought out of chaos after they joined in. I think the best/quickest option is for that to happen sooner than later. Not foreign invasion. I heard several smaller factions not obeying, but how about Generals/etc? The Generals are loyal to Gaddafi. They even call him "Dad" for gently caress's sake. That's why the air force is bombing the poo poo outta the city right now. They complied with Gaddafi's orders, unlike the Egyptian army during the protests.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:23
|
|
|
THE HORSES rear end posted:The only time the US could intervene militarily is if a genocide were breaking out between two different sub-Saharan factions (except Somalia). USA has intervened there militarily, but only on a limited scale - bombing some Islamists, maybe some small scale black op stuff And then of course there was that botched plan to capture Aidid... which is part of the reason for why USA is reluctant to do anything similar again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:25
|
|
|
From the BBC:quote:An interesting development in London. Krishnan Guru-Murthy of Channel 4 news has just tweeted that the Libyan embassy in London has replaced the official national flag with the pre-Gaddafi era version, favoured by many of those involved in the current uprising.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:25
|
|
|
Who here is dana?quote:<&dana> on AJA; israel f-16s bombing libayns
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:28
|
|
|
From: http://alive.in/libya/quote:The Secretary-General today had an intensive conversation with the Libyan leader, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, for the deterioration of the situation in that country. According to BBC, Ban Ki Moon says Gaddafi's still in Libya. I'd guess he's in Sirte. That phone conversation must have been hosed. I can't imagine that Gaddafi's even remotely coherent right now. He has to know he's going down and I think he's going to try to take as many people as possible down too. A couple of air force personnel who refused to shoot protestors have landed in Malta and are requesting asylum and several Libyan ambassadors are resigning.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:28
|
|
|
Pickled Kittens posted:Go ahead - pull up any news site, whether local, national, international, and check what the headline story is. On the off chance that the main story is actually about what is happening in Libya (or any country in the middle east), try and find where in the article they explain why it is happening, or even why it is important. http://www.nytimes.com/ It doesn't go into specifics about why it's important, but I'd imagine that could be a pretty lengthy article. I'm just happy it made the lead article. In case it changes sooner than later. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/22/world/africa/22libya.html?hp I'm not saying that 'OH Hay, Everybody knows and cares about this" I'm saying, that it's there if people are interested. I do wish it was getting more attention though. It deserves more. I'm in favor of controlling air space with just these. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MQ-9_Reaper
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:29
|
|
|
Paradox Personified posted:Israel Oh god please don't let this be true. It's going to be an absolute international poo poo storm if this is the case. Holy gently caress please no. I've only seen one source saying it was F-16s not MIGs bombing Tripoli and it was from twitter so. Oh man.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:32
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:USA has intervened there militarily, but only on a limited scale - bombing some Islamists, maybe some small scale black op stuff France used to give no gently caress about destroying itty bitty airforces and bombing runs in Africa. A few Lybian airplanes lost due to "accidents" would not cause an international uproar.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:33
|
|
|
ShortStack posted:Oh god please don't let this be true. It's going to be an absolute international poo poo storm if this is the case. Holy gently caress please no. If true it's probably the Libyan regime trying to put the blame on the Israelis, even though two of their senior pilots have defected and confirmed it's Libyan planes bombing everyone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:34
|
|
|
Paradox Personified posted:Who here is dana? I assume this means they are bombing pro-Gaddafi Libyans and mercenaries, right? If true for the opposite meaning, I can't see what Israel would gain out of this. Foreign countries only need to maintain a no-fly zone and provide a way to destroy targets on the ground. There's already a huge mass of people on the ground, so there's no need to put a foreign military on the ground yet. If the mercenaries won't give up they may have to, although I don't see why the mercenaries still think they'll get all the money they are supposed to get. Yaos fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Feb 21, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:35
|
|
|
ShortStack posted:Oh god please don't let this be true. It's going to be an absolute international poo poo storm if this is the case. Holy gently caress please no. Basically people who can't identify aircraft or are seeing what they want to believe.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:35
|
|
|
L-Boned posted:Basically people who can't identify aircraft or are seeing what they want to believe. Or they're just trolls.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:36
|
|
|
Yeah sorry goons, my knee jerk reaction. I could just see this becoming  VV If you can't see that happening what's wrong with you? ShortStack fucked around with this message at 20:40 on Feb 21, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:37
|
|
|
ShortStack posted:Oh god please don't let this be true. It's going to be an absolute international poo poo storm if this is the case. Holy gently caress please no. Are you honestly considering the possibility of that happening? What's wrong with you?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:38
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:USA has intervened there militarily, but only on a limited scale - bombing some Islamists, maybe some small scale black op stuff Yeah, we are in some anti-piracy/counter-insurgency operations in and around Somalia, even though there isn't much press about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:39
|
|
|
SauceNinja posted:http://www.nytimes.com/ Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying its unimportant. I just agree with the sentiment that "it's there if people are interested." A number of us are interested enough to find information, to find what is happening. Despite the enormity of the situation, there isn't a whole lot of attention on it. Not on any local level in my little Midwest hole in the ground. That is kind of scary.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:39
|
|
|
So, can anyone think of a precedent for a country's UN delegation coming out for that regime's ouster? I find that absolutely mind-boggling.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:40
|
|
|
Sivias posted:This is such a balancing act though. If we don't have UN approval, we'd effectively be "going rogue" Even if the global community approves of it, politically it could have astronomical impacts. The most hosed up thing is that this is even an issue. You have a government carpet bombing its own city and shoot anyone they see but that still doesnt matter in the international community. Makes you wonder just how bad it would have to be for them just act with out deliberation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 11:15 |
|
|
It feels like its given about equal importance as a suicide bombing. I guess they are tryig to seem objective or something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2011 20:43
|
|