The Allies go in !

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

Pardon me for posting - but this is exciting news !!!

http://www.voanews.com/english/news/africa/US-Allies-Attack-Libya-118304704.html

The airstrikes have gone in against Libya. For once, the UK, USa and the rest of the world seem to be doing the right thing. I was shocked when i heard that cameron had tried to get the SAS involved in Libya. I want to make it clear that I have never liked Gaddaffi , even if I had never posted on that subject until recently in this forum. Iin fact, i don't like the idea of any dictator oppressing their own people and getting backing from the business community to do so.

So, to herar that the Libyan rebels are getting air support and even air strikes against gaddaffian positions is welcome news.

I just hope it isn't too late. governments never do this sort of thing without wantng some kind of pay back. i still hope that there will be free elections in libya, and that this will mean more demands for freedom there and elsewhere and not a rolling back of freedom to secure ' national interests'.

ii don't want gaddaffi replaced by a puppet of UK or US choosing , I want the Libyans to be able to set their own course as a nation . And if that means that we in the west have to lower our dependence on foriegn oil, so be it.

but we must ask ourselves -
what is the UN for?
if we don't want the USA to be the world's policeman , who else is up for the job ?
how can the democratic voters in democratic nations secure the freedoms of everyone - for untill we are all free, no one really is.

I am overjoyed, not in the death and destruction that now rains down upon Gaddaffis henchmen, but the opportunity that this may open up for democracy and freedom in a land that has been denied it for so long. wee are going in on the terms asked, the only terms the libyan opposition wants. I hope that they will have enough space to build their own nation on their own terms as a result.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42164455/ns/world_news-mideast/n_africa/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12776418

Comments

[nairiporter.livejournal.com]

Excuse me. Why post two times about the same thing? I understand that this is important news but couldn't you just merge these two posts together? I somehow have the feeling that I am reding your personal blog.

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

*sigh* We really don't have the manpower for this.

[box-in-the-box.livejournal.com]

Yes, this is an excellent idea, because our country always benefits when we take military action against Middle Eastern nations. It's kind of like the logic that says that sticking your dick in a nest of hornets is a good thing, because their stings will swell up your weiner and make it even bigger to impress the ladies.

Fun quote from the L.A. Times: (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/sc-dc-0320-us-military-libya-20110319,0,7579064.story)

While President Obama has emphasized that American forces would play a subordinate role in enforcing the no-fly zone over Libya, the Pentagon said the U.S. had to lead the operation in its early days because it has the greatest capability to destroy Kadafi's air defenses, a key prerequisite to taking control of Libya's airspace.

Once that portion of the mission is accomplished, international partners led by France, the United Kingdom and Arab partners will enforce the no-fly zone, U.S. officials said.

In other words, we're only being expected to take charge of all this shit NOW, but once everything gets SETTLED, everyone ELSE will step in to take over the heavy lifting from us.

On the K-Box Index of Unbelievably Bullshit Claims, this hits the scale somewhere between when Steve Jobs was still insisting that he would only be the "Interim" CEO of Apple and college douchebros who tell girls they've just met at parties that they'll only put the HEAD in.

Pretty much this:

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

On the hypocrisy of the so-called "international community", and the blatant double standard in measuring similar situations in different places:

[Error: unknown template video]

Just some food for thought.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Pardon my cynicism, but where were the calls for intervention when Bahrain's autocrat asked in their fellow monarchs, the Saudis, to help them put down their revolt? Where were the calls of outrage, for that matter, back when Putin was bombing Grozny to rubble or when Armenia expelled 1 million Azeris from Azerbaijan or when the Russians were fighting in South Ossetia?

Instead the intervention, like in 1899 and 2003 is supposedly "benevolent" but in reality it's not a humanitarian venture. Never has been, never will be.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

Wow, Libya must be bad-ass if they have flying tanks.

Oh, "no-fly zone" was bullshit from day one, wasn't it? How is this not regular war?

[devil-ad-vocate.livejournal.com]

"I am overjoyed, not in the death and destruction that now rains down upon Gaddaffis henchmen..."

I agree with your post except for this part. I'm overjoyed these f*ckers are getting what they richly deserve.

[ccr1138.livejournal.com]

I DO NOT WANT the USA to be the world's policeman. Nobody thanks us for the interference, and half the time what we do has horrible unforseen consequences.

BUT, the UN is so ineffectual, if we don't step in, who will?

It's a conundrum.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

I'm torn.

On one hand, Qadaffi (or however we're spelling it now) is a murderous bastard and I can't help but feel a little warm-and-fuzzy seeing him and his minions bombed to kingdom come.

On the other hand, people are going to die, and we don't have the resources (even with allies) to control this situation. This is a tribal war and things are going to get ugly.

Above all this is NOT a game.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

I don't often speak well of President Obama but for once he actually sounds like the CiC (http://www.africom.mil/getArticle.asp?art=6212).

The United States, the United Kingdom, France and Arab states agree that a cease-fire must be implemented immediately. That means all attacks against civilians must stop.

Qadhafi must stop his troops from advancing on Benghazi, pull them back from Adjabiyah, Misurata (ph) and Zawiyah (ph), and establish water, electricity and gas supplies to all area.

Humanitarian assistance must be allowed to reach the people of Libya.

Let me be clear: These terms are not negotiable. These terms are not subject to negotiation. If Qadhafi does not comply with the resolution, the international community will impose consequences, and the resolution will be enforced through military action.

In this effort, the United States is prepared to act as part of an international coalition.

American leadership is essential, but that does mean acting alone. It means shaping the conditions for the international community to act together.

That's why I've directed Secretary Gates and our military to coordinate their planning, and tomorrow Secretary Clinton will travel to Paris for a meeting with our European allies and our partners about the enforcement of Resolution 1973.

[kinvore.livejournal.com]

I'm conflicted. While I applaud any effort to keep Ka-Daffy from slaughtering civilians, I can't help but feel that nothing good will come of this.

[kris-schnee.livejournal.com]

Can I start protesting about this being an illegal war, since the President didn't bother to get the legally required consent of the Senate?

Also, it remains to be seen whether helping the people here will lead to a democratically elected terrorist government. Egypt is facing possible democratic rule by the Muslim Brotherhood, and even our corrupt puppet government in Afghanistan has a policy of killing apostates against Islam.

[terminator44.livejournal.com]

I've said it before: destroying Qadhafi's pitiful air force and air defenses will not change the outcome of the conflict. Since the U.S., U.K., and France have decided who will win the war, that means it is only a matter of time before they escalate.

[ytterbius.livejournal.com]

They loved it when Reagan did it. Obama's just assuring his reelection.

[okmewriting.livejournal.com]

I like how Cameron hasn't had the decency to make a statement to parliament.

[okmewriting.livejournal.com]

David Cameron - "What we are doing, it is necessary, it is legal and it is right." It always disturbs me when politicians start spouting off about the right thing to do. President B. Liar used to bang on about Iraq being the right thing to do...

[jerseycajun.livejournal.com]

"I am overjoyed, not in the death and destruction that now rains down upon Gaddaffis henchmen, but the opportunity that this may open up for democracy and freedom in a land that has been denied it for so long. wee are going in on the terms asked, the only terms the libyan opposition wants. I hope that they will have enough space to build their own nation on their own terms as a result."

Because surely history tells us this is how it happens. Just like its supposed to. Amirite?

[kgbman.livejournal.com]

I'm not old enough to remember a time when going to war was a big deal. Now the US declares war more often than it balances its budget.

[paedraggaidin.livejournal.com]

America: Gleefully Leaping Into Questionable Middle Eastern Misadventures since 1958!

But, seriously, I stand by my previous comments on this: we should not be involved in this. We're hypocrites. There have been far nastier civil wars than this going on in Africa since the end of the colonial era, and we didn't set up no-fly zones or threaten worse. An estimated 5.4 million people died in the "Second Congo War" of 1998-2003, a war that included such horrible atrocities as to make the situation in Libya look like a schoolyard rumble, and most Americans probably knew nothing about it, let alone cried for intervention. At the same time, the mass-murder of 11,000 Kosovan Albanians spawned continuous news coverage and brought down the full aerial wrath of NATO. I don't remember us intervening (except with half-assed sanctions) during the Bush War, either.

I'm not saying that one humanitarian disaster is less important than another. I'm saying that it's clear, dark-skinned people don't really matter unless the soil under them is full of oil. We'll bomb the hell out of Serbia to protect Europeans, and we'll bomb the hell out of Libya to protect our precious black gold supplies, ditto Saddam Hussein's Iraq, but hey, who cares if Saddam gasses a bunch of Kurds or black people rape, torture, and murder other black people on a massive scale?

I find the whole situation disgusting. It's great for the Libyan rebels, though. I'm sure they'll be appreciative in 10-20 years when we invade their country again because we need the oil.