No one Amos-----we would be left in the dust, save perhaps a few dozen "thinking of you" cards from Isreal. The UK would actually do all they could, until the poltiical tide turned on the officials---then we're on our own. Which is why we need to stay out of $hit more, and allow life to happen.
Ain't it funny that so many countries posture that the US is an evil, war-mongering nation who's only interest in the middle east is oil and to convert Arabs to Christianity, but when the **** hits the fan, the US is the first one they run to, begging for help?
I think it's just the burden of being the world's lone superpower - you're the punching bag when times are good, and you're the one being begged for help when the fecal matter hits the rotator.
This may have been mentioned here before and I just missed it, but my biggest problem with us taking any action in Libya is that we really have no idea who we are helping. They are called "the people" and "rebel forces" but we don't know that the people we are helping and fighting for aren't much much worse than the nut job running the country now. No doubt he is a tyrant and an evil person, but do we really know we are building and contributing to the rise of something that will turn out to be much worse? It's not like we can know they won't turn on us after we have helped them... we did arm the Taliban to fight the soviets.
Im not sure about this, but I have heard the same from Hannity last night and just dont get it. The right used to be the people of ---STAY OUT of foreigh affairs. Now, Obama is the coward. All he has done in office is beefed up on the people we had in Afganistan and stayed the course in other areas in basically the same way Bush had been handling the 8 years prior to his innaguration (sp?)
I for one say let the Libyan's handle their own. We get invovled in too much overseas, and now we want to take sides again. Isnt our side taking what put leaders like Mubarek and Hussein in power many years ago? I think our track record with dictators shows that perhaps staying the hell out for once is the most courageous thing a leader for the U.S. can do.
It was the Left that thought the surge was a mistake before Bush ever went forward with it, and it was the Left that said we should pull out of Afghanistan, repercussions be damned. The Right was the one urging Bush to see the surge through to success. I never saw the Right burning effigies of Bush and calling him a war monger.
To be fair, a lot of the people who supported the war suddenly have a change of heart when they realized things weren't going their way and that Baghdad wouldn't be throwing roses at our feet; these same people suddenly found out that Afghanistan wasn't a cake walk, so they changed again and turned against that war as well - so hypocrisy and cowardice is found on both sides of the aisles
But at any rate, the situation in Libya shouldn't be decided among party lines - have you watched the news recently? Ghaddafi is rolling through prior rebel-held towns, and there are reports of his forces entering hospitals and just killing everyone - men, women, and children, because they lived in a rebel-controlled city. His forces are bombing everything they can, he's rolling in tanks to level anything that stands against him, and he's killing everyone his forces meet. How is it courageous to stand by and watch people be slaughtered?
Wasn't it too long ago that people in the US were holding protests about Rwanda and Darfur, holding signs saying "Never again"? What happened to that? It's easy to talk a big game after a genocide is over, but when one is about to begin or going on, suddenly those same people are nowhere to be seen.
But even now, there's bipartisan support for a no-fly-zone, and maybe more - hell, even John Kerry has come out alongside John McCain in support of helping Libya - how is it courageous to just stand by and watch people be slaughtered? Obama says "Ghaddafi must go", but then never lifts a finger to help that happen - how is that leadership?
Actually the surge didn't really work. Sure it did to an extent but we have left that country worse than it was when we got there. We should have never went there to begin with. As with Afgan, I mean why did we not get a coalition? I'm sure one could have been made if the evidence was strong enough. I think this libya coalition is a good thing, too bad other countries get left out. It's a game that's all it is. War usually isn't the answer only an answer to a select group, everyone else ends up being screwed.
Just a note on this, I've heard you make this claim many times that there was "no coalition" for the war in Iraq, but that is a flat out lie. There was a coalition for the Iraq war twice as big as the current coalition for the military action in Libya actually.
Coalition countries for Iraq war in 2003
Afghanistan,
Albania
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Czech Republic
Denmark
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Hungary
Italy
Japan
South Korea
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Philippines
Poland
Romania
Slovakia
Spain
Turkey
United Kingdom
Uzbekistan
Libya coalition countries 2011
France
United Kingdom
Italy
Canada
Belgium
Denmark
Norway
Qatar
Spain
Greece
Germany
Poland
Jordan
Morocco
United Arab Emirate
This claim has been made many times but it's time to set the record straight. This is a flat out lie.
This may have been mentioned here before and I just missed it, but my biggest problem with us taking any action in Libya is that we really have no idea who we are helping. They are called "the people" and "rebel forces" but we don't know that the people we are helping and fighting for aren't much much worse than the nut job running the country now. No doubt he is a tyrant and an evil person, but do we really know we are building and contributing to the rise of something that will turn out to be much worse? It's not like we can know they won't turn on us after we have helped them... we did arm the Taliban to fight the soviets.
excellent point, but, a la Charlie Wilson, let's not repeat the mistake we made with the Taliban, if we help, we're commited to see it through the aftermath, and that...well, can we?
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
I think I tried to hit on that Puro before, maybe in a different way, but as I said we were once friends with Saddam and Mubarek as well----because we get involved in too much we shouldnt, but we have to protect our economic interests everywhere. We dont get involved everywhere granted (Darfur), but we do protect our economic interests wherever they may be. Dictators are also OK for this, as long as they are friendly dictators to the U.S.....Lets not even get started on say, Saudi Arabia.
Also, I just want to make sure you are making the statement that a true coalition of forces includes: Azerbiajan, Denmark, Eiteria, Estonia, Macedonia, and the like........That seems kind of like having a chopped steak and piece of catfish yet still referring to it as surf & turf.
I think I tried to hit on that Puro before, maybe in a different way, but as I said we were once friends with Saddam and Mubarek as well----because we get involved in too much we shouldnt, but we have to protect our economic interests everywhere. We dont get involved everywhere granted (Darfur), but we do protect our economic interests wherever they may be. Dictators are also OK for this, as long as they are friendly dictators to the U.S.....Lets not even get started on say, Saudi Arabia.
if i am not mistaken it was George Washington that warned us, and was worried about, this "entanglement"
I think I tried to hit on that Puro before, maybe in a different way, but as I said we were once friends with Saddam and Mubarek as well----because we get involved in too much we shouldnt, but we have to protect our economic interests everywhere. We dont get involved everywhere granted (Darfur), but we do protect our economic interests wherever they may be. Dictators are also OK for this, as long as they are friendly dictators to the U.S.....Lets not even get started on say, Saudi Arabia.
Also, I just want to make sure you are making the statement that a true coalition of forces includes: Azerbiajan, Denmark, Eiteria, Estonia, Macedonia, and the like........That seems kind of like having a chopped steak and piece of catfish yet still referring to it as surf & turf.
Yea, it is a similar thing to our support of former dictators. Just something I think we need to be more cautious of. And yes, I do include those countries in the coalition for the Iraq war because they did pledge their support. Just because they are small doesn't mean they don't count. That's like saying, can we really count Rhode Island as one of the 50 states because the whole state is smaller than most backwoods towns in Kentucky! LoL
I know, I was just as shocked to learn this! LoL But in all seriousness, the opinions over the Iraq war differ and that is fine. We don't have to all agree if it was justified or not. The thing that we need to make sure of is that the debate is honest and truthful. I know you and Pheebs agree more often than you and I, but a lie is lie is a lie and it does a disservice to everyone for a lie to keep being repeated. Not a disagreement of opinion, but a correction of the facts is what I was trying to accomplish.
I agree Puro, and Im not saying this to beat the dead horse-----but my the same sentiment its why FOR YEARS I have begged for a real look into intelligence, planning, and the other stuff (see your conspiracy theories here) behind the Iraq War and the WMD question. The rights response is that it is done with and the left agreed to it, and the left cant stand up enough to complain....Meanwhile people die for reasons we have never been explained or understood in the first place!!!
I agree Puro, and Im not saying this to beat the dead horse-----but my the same sentiment its why FOR YEARS I have begged for a real look into intelligence, planning, and the other stuff (see your conspiracy theories here) behind the Iraq War and the WMD question. The rights response is that it is done with and the left agreed to it, and the left cant stand up enough to complain....Meanwhile people die for reasons we have never been explained or understood in the first place!!!
I agree, and I personally think the war was justified, but not for the reasons of WMD's. The problem I have is when you hear people scream about President Bush making up the whole thing just to go to war. That is a lie for political gain and does nothing to make the situation better. The intelligence was wrong and we need to find out why. But we also have to remember it isn't a matter of democrats vs republicans because it was the same Intel passed on from President Clinton. I agree we need to take a long look at our role as the global police, but it needs to be truly non-partisan... yea like that will ever happen. LoL
Comments
I think it's just the burden of being the world's lone superpower - you're the punching bag when times are good, and you're the one being begged for help when the fecal matter hits the rotator.
Coalition countries for Iraq war in 2003
Afghanistan,
Albania
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Czech Republic
Denmark
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Hungary
Italy
Japan
South Korea
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Philippines
Poland
Romania
Slovakia
Spain
Turkey
United Kingdom
Uzbekistan
Libya coalition countries 2011
France
United Kingdom
Italy
Canada
Belgium
Denmark
Norway
Qatar
Spain
Greece
Germany
Poland
Jordan
Morocco
United Arab Emirate
This claim has been made many times but it's time to set the record straight. This is a flat out lie.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
Also, I just want to make sure you are making the statement that a true coalition of forces includes: Azerbiajan, Denmark, Eiteria, Estonia, Macedonia, and the like........That seems kind of like having a chopped steak and piece of catfish yet still referring to it as surf & turf.