|
Not goons, but media outlets. edit: that's all, PM me for phonetics debates.
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 12:30 |
|
|
junyatwin posted:If the reports are right, these mercs are from impoverished areas of Africa in a lot of cases. Where, $2000 is more than they've made in years if not a decade. Not to sound cynical, but at a certain point, money is more appealing than sense for the average person. It's like if you were to shop around the southern US offering a few million dollars to people to go to the border with guns and shoot Mexicans with no consequences. Yeah most people would probably refuse on moral grounds but there's bound to be a few takers that would do it just out of racism. Everywhere else in the world works more or less the same way; it's just the amount of money that qualifies as "A lot" that varies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:20
|
|
|
SERPUS posted:I'm not trying to troll or derail, but in the past week or so I swear I've seen a dozen different spellings of "Qadhafi". Most amusing to me was "Khadafi", the /kh/ sound isn't even close. Obviously the best way to avoid this is simply spell it correctly. معمر القذافي
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:20
|
|
|
SERPUS posted:Not goons, but media outlets. EDIT: Image that describes the combinations from Wikipedia (link to the discussion too) 
Ewan fucked around with this message at 20:25 on Feb 25, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:21
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:Huh, if that's the case than I was thinking too highly of mercenaries. I figured they were people who knew how to choose their jobs better. These people are by and large former rebels or ex-soldiers from some random West/Central African country that seem to have signed up on an individual basis, not highly-trained professionals like Blackwater that have established chains of command and all that other military stuff. An ad-hoc mercenary army like the one Gaddafi has raised isn't good for much beyond slaughtering civilians.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:22
|
|
|
The US embassy is officially closed. A couple of Syrian Air flights have taken off from Tripoli bound for Damascus, but I have no idea who's on board. In good news, the Maltese ferry company that operates the Malta-Tripoli ferries is sending their ferries over to evacuate anyone who needs to leave. I have to assume this means that no Libyan naval units remain that are loyal to Qaddafi.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:32
|
|
|
I think your missing out on some context here, so just type Sahel into wikipedia. It's one of the most hosed up , poorest, war torn places in the world, and the mercenaries slaughtering Libyans right now all come from there. Basically, when the Arabs conquered North Africa, they were only stopped by Malaria when they reached the Sahel and people have been fighting over that land non stop for hundreds of years now. We've had a lot of rumors that they were looting houses , I wouldn't be surprised if they're just murdering people for whatever they have on them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:33
|
|
|
Furious Mittens posted:Don't expect the UN to do much of anything, as if that is a surprise, because it seems Russia and China are doing everything they can to prop up Gaddafi in every discussion that they have about Libya and the current situation. Jesus Christ, enough of the UN hate, I know that's the trend in the US but christ! The UN is not mandated to intervene in conflicts unless a genocide is taking place. When the definition of genocide was drawn up, it didn't include 'political groups' due to a certain Russian dude. The UN has nearly 100,000 troops deployed at this very moment in time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:33
|
|
|
breaklaw posted:Let's not forget about Bahrain. Man that picture sums up segregation of the sexes in Bahrain (and Qatar, Saudi and the UAE) so well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:37
|
|
|
Breaking News on AJE. Jay Carney, White House's Press secretary and leader of his high school debate and chess teams. (Seriously, he looks like he's about 17) Talking about sanctions and stuff, I guess?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:39
|
|
|
Talk about great timing and taking advantage of an opportunity. What better time than now to travel the Middle East and sell arms to oppressive regimes! http://english.aljazeera.net//news/europe/2011/02/201122518383717298.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:41
|
|
|
Jut posted:Jesus Christ, enough of the UN hate, I know that's the trend in the US but christ! The UN is not mandated to intervene in conflicts unless a genocide is taking place. When the definition of genocide was drawn up, it didn't include 'political groups' due to a certain Russian dude. I wasn't hating on the U.N., just stating my opinion that they wouldn't act because of the current makeup of the security council.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:45
|
|
|
The BBC is saying the US is to impose unilateral and multilateral sanctions on Libya. The only ones that'll count are ones that effect Gaddafi directly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:46
|
|
|
Speaking of mercs, why are they carrying passports? I saw pictures of dead ones and the passports they were carrying.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:48
|
|
|
DevNull posted:Obviously the best way to avoid this is simply spell it correctly. معمر القذافي That's the safest way. It's a "qaaf" not an Egyptian "jeem"...unless Libyans use the "g" sound for "qaaf".
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:49
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:The BBC is saying the US is to impose unilateral and multilateral sanctions on Libya. The only ones that'll count are ones that effect Gaddafi directly. What? No more leopard prints?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:50
|
|
|
Interesting if not particularly surprising article on Venezuela's reaction to the Libyan crisis: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2011/02/20112257594678917.htmlquote:Separately, Nicolas Maduro, the Venezuelan foreign minister, told the National Assembly that Venezuela "repudiates the violence" in Libya, but said the conflict merits "objective" study. This is exactly why no Western country has or will go in guns blazing to stop the bloodshed as so many in this thread wish they would. Such a move would be seen by most of the developing world as a neo-imperialist venture and would solidify anti-Western sentiment globally and quite possibly make Qadaffi a more sympathetic figure in the eyes of Libyans themselves.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:50
|
|
|
Furious Mittens posted:I wasn't hating on the U.N., just stating my opinion that they wouldn't act because of the current makeup of the security council. Also while it is true the UN SC can in theory do pretty much anything it wants the UN Charter does contain specific language which says the the UN should not intervene in affairs in the domestic jurisdiction of a member state. This idea also has high customary law precedence as well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:51
|
|
|
All US Citizens out, 1/2 hour later sanctions announced.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:51
|
|
|
What kind of sanction is going to affect gaddafi directly? Hes gonna be holed up for x amount of time then killed or commit suicide. Heaven forbid they revoke his year pass to disneyland.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:52
|
|
|
Monkeytime posted:Such a move would be seen by most of the developing world as a neo-imperialist venture It would be a "neo imperialist" adventure. I am not sure though why you say "neo" as if imperialism went away for a long time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:52
|
|
|
Why are they even bothering with sanctions? Qaddafi will like not survive the weekend, let alone the week or so that it'll take to get the sanctions implemented.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:53
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Also while it is true the UN SC can in theory do pretty much anything it wants the UN Charter does contain specific language which says the the UN should not intervene in affairs in the domestic jurisdiction of a member state. This idea also has high customary law precedence as well. There's no doubt about that at all and I don't disagree with the intent either. My main point was to illustrate the influence that China and Russia have on the UNSC and their respective ties to Libya, vis-a-vis Oil & Natural Gas interests. This connection would make it hard for anything to be accomplished at the UN Level even if it met the criteria for action to be taken.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:54
|
|
|
Darth123123 posted:All US Citizens out, 1/2 hour later sanctions announced. Sky News says David Cameron and his peeps where worrying that might happen. They are worried CQ might want to take westerners as hostages\human shields, and now the only ones really left are 50-60 Brits in the oils field compounds.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:54
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:Why are they even bothering with sanctions? Qaddafi will like not survive the weekend, let alone the week or so that it'll take to get the sanctions implemented. Not much else they can do. And as the leading world power, the US has a lot of responsibility to respond to poo poo like this. And it's a burden we don't bare well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:55
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:Why are they even bothering with sanctions? Qaddafi will like not survive the weekend, let alone the week or so that it'll take to get the sanctions implemented. To give appearance of action/support. Goons are saying we aren't doing anything, and we certainly aren't invading, what exactly does that leave?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:55
|
|
|
Darth123123 posted:Speaking of mercs, why are they carrying passports? I saw pictures of dead ones and the passports they were carrying.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 20:58
|
|
|
Furious Mittens posted:I wasn't hating on the U.N., just stating my opinion that they wouldn't act because of the current makeup of the security council. They won't act because it's not in the Security councils mandate to act unless a genocide is going on. Furious Mittens posted:There's no doubt about that at all and I don't disagree with the intent either. My main point was to illustrate the influence that China and Russia have on the UNSC and their respective ties to Libya, vis-a-vis Oil & Natural Gas interests. Jut fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Feb 25, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 21:13
|
|
|
Have sanctions ever worked anywhere at any time? All sanctions will accomplish is making the little people suffer more. I suppose that at least it gives the semblance of support, but it seems to me it's as effective as lecturing your dog on how immoral it is for him to piddle on the carpet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 21:15
|
|
|
Jut posted:They won't act because it's not in the Security councils mandate to act unless a genocide is going on. And, due to a certain Soviet Russian crazy guy, absolute annihilation of political groups isn't considered genocide. Why don't they change that, though? It's not like they have any reason not to.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 21:16
|
|
|
Apology posted:Have sanctions ever worked anywhere at any time? All sanctions will accomplish is making the little people suffer more. I suppose that at least it gives the semblance of support, but it seems to me it's as effective as lecturing your dog on how immoral it is for him to piddle on the carpet. From what I understand, the real idea of Sanctions is: "Hey, government of [oppressed country] - We're going to stop giving you poo poo, your people will suffer, and hate you for it unless you do what we want." Sanctions have historically had a much greater impact on the poor and the masses of said sanctioned country. However, countries that are self sustainable don't really give a poo poo. This is sort of what happened in Cuba. The country is nearly self sustainable so they don't care how much America doesn't like them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 21:19
|
|
|
Apology posted:Have sanctions ever worked anywhere at any time? All sanctions will accomplish is making the little people suffer more. I suppose that at least it gives the semblance of support, but it seems to me it's as effective as lecturing your dog on how immoral it is for him to piddle on the carpet. Define "worked." It is an effective bargaining tool.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 21:19
|
|
|
Apology posted:Have sanctions ever worked anywhere at any time? All sanctions will accomplish is making the little people suffer more. I suppose that at least it gives the semblance of support, but it seems to me it's as effective as lecturing your dog on how immoral it is for him to piddle on the carpet. Sanctions work very well it just depends on what is being sanctioned and to what degree. Generally anything that hurts a tinpot dictators personal assets is highly effective.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 21:20
|
|
|
Finlander posted:And, due to a certain Soviet Russian crazy guy, absolute annihilation of political groups isn't considered genocide. If the member states agree, then they should change it. But criticising the UN for not being world policeman when their hands are tied is pretty lame.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 21:22
|
|
|
Jut posted:They won't act because it's not in the Security councils mandate to act unless a genocide is going on. UNSCR 1674 commits the UN to act to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. I have used "crimes against humanity" thrown around a lot in reference to these current events in Libya, including I am sure by David Cameron and I seem to recall the Ban Ki-Moon However, I am sure that imposing Sanctions counts as "acting". Ewan fucked around with this message at 21:25 on Feb 25, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 21:22
|
|
|
They should spread the phones out and use a secret twitter channel twitter to coordinate attacks on Tripoli. That would be awesome.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 21:27
|
|
|
Does anyone else get a Mr. Miyagi vibe from Ban Ki-Moon? Seems like such a nice guy. Like the Asian grandfather i'll never have. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 21:27
|
|
|
Finlander posted:And, due to a certain Soviet Russian crazy guy, absolute annihilation of political groups isn't considered genocide. I would support the UN changing its mandate to include being able to act against the wholesale murder of a group of people identified as a political organization rather than an ethnic group. However, that is not "genocide". It's something else (and something that is also horrible) but the word genocide does have an actual meaning. It refers to the attempt to eradicate a People, defined by an ethnicity or nationality. e. Yeah I'd say murdering hundreds of unarmed protesters is a crime against humanity. I'd buy that. I also think it's unrealistic to expect the UN to mobilize troops and organize an invasion in the space of week. That's the kind of thing few nations on earth are capable of, requiring enormous expense and resources, and which has a huge potential for spectacular and disastrous unforseen consequences. Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 21:33 on Feb 25, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 21:28
|
|
|
Security council meeting again. Almost certainly they will do gently caress all, but I would love to be surprised.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 21:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 12:30 |
|
|
Ewan posted:UNSCR 1674 commits the UN to act to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. Troop deployment is limited to peacekeeping, not peace enforcement.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2011 21:31
|
|