• 193 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#1 Posted by JB16 (745 posts) -

The no fly zone has just been passed by the UN. The EU and the US will probably be starting this military operation in days, if not hours.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/17/u-n-imposes-no-fly-zone-over-libya/
#2 Edited by KarlPilkington (2714 posts) -

*Libya.

#3 Posted by FiestaUnicorn (1577 posts) -

Finally, some revenge for Doc Brown.
#4 Posted by melcene (3056 posts) -

/sigh. 
 
/waits for all the US foreign policy hate, even though this was a UN thing.

#5 Posted by Jimbo (9799 posts) -

You spelled Labia wrong.  
 
Amazing that the UN actually passed something.  I love how the UK government has been pushing hard for this for weeks, even though we have about 2 Spitfires and a Sopwith Camel left to actually enforce it with.

#6 Posted by august (3836 posts) -

I've always waned to go to Lybia!

#7 Posted by SSully (4153 posts) -

I would love to say this is a horrible decision, but the shit that has been going on there needs to stop, so i am all for it.

#8 Posted by mnzy (2914 posts) -

Yay, another war. See you in 10 years, when it'll be over.

#9 Posted by buzz_killington (3532 posts) -

That's a bit presumptuous, but definitely possible.

#10 Posted by JB16 (745 posts) -
@Chabbs0 said:
" *Libya. "
Goddamn typos, the internet will never let me hear the end of this.
#11 Edited by Chindie (192 posts) -

Airstrip Malta and Cyprus on standby no doubt.
 
To be fair this is probably a fairly good idea. Intervention isn't always bad. Lets just hope we learnt the lessons of what went wrong in Kosovo the last time we did something like this (thankfully on the whole that worked out to be not a complete disaster but still had problematic issues, hopefully it being a UN measure might aid that...or not).

#12 Edited by PhatSeeJay (3322 posts) -

Highly doubt this will be a dragged out war since it's already an open conflict between a tyrant and his people.  
Foreign involvement is very much necessary now.

#13 Posted by benjaebe (2783 posts) -

I assume you mean "we're" as in the United Nations including several Arab countries, France, Germany the UK and US in a vote that passed 10-0 with five countries abstaining.
And I assume you mean "going to Libya" as in the sense that we'll be assisting in a way that does not involve sending in any ground forces whatsoever.
 
It's the right thing to do, glad they passed it.

#14 Edited by AhmadMetallic (18955 posts) -

and there goes Libya's freedom.. just another arab country with america's dick up its ass 
 enjoy ruling and exploiting it, get all the resources and oil you can 
 
 
Edit: this isnt hate ! i clarified in on the second page

#15 Posted by august (3836 posts) -
@Ahmad_Metallic said:
" and there goes Libya's freedom.. just another arab country with america's dick up its ass  enjoying ruling and exploiting it, get all the resources and oil you can "
Sweet!
#16 Posted by benjaebe (2783 posts) -
@Ahmad_Metallic said:
" and there goes Libya's freedom.. just another arab country with america's dick up its ass  enjoying ruling and exploiting it, get all the resources and oil you can "
You realize it's a United Nations measure to protect civilians from being mindlessly killed by a tyrant in the midst of a power struggle, right? And that America isn't even involved in the first set of operations, since France and Britain will begin any bombing with support from other Arab nations?
 
This is what the UN is for.
#17 Edited by mnzy (2914 posts) -

This will be a full blown war, because Gaddafi is easily beating the protesters at the moment. He does not need the air space. And what will happen if he wins even with an intact no fly zone?

#18 Posted by JB16 (745 posts) -
@benjaebe said:
" I assume you mean "we're" as in the United Nations including several Arab countries, France, Germany the UK and US in a vote that passed 10-0 with five countries abstaining.And I assume you mean "going to Libya" as in the sense that we'll be assisting in a way that does not involve sending in any ground forces whatsoever.  It's the right thing to do, glad they passed it. "
Uhh I did include the EU in my post didn't I? And last I checked most of the Arab countries said they supported it but also said they would not actively participate in it.
#19 Posted by AlexW00d (6235 posts) -
@PhatSeeJay said:
" Highly doubt this will be a dragged out war since it's already an open conflict between a tyrant and his people.   Foreign involvement is very much necessary now. "
I assume this was sarcastic, but I can't be sure.
#20 Posted by PeasantAbuse (5138 posts) -
@Ahmad_Metallic said:
"and there goes Libya's freedom.. just another arab country with america's dick up its ass  enjoying ruling and exploiting it, get all the resources and oil you can "
 
This is the UN not just America, fucking moron.
#21 Posted by melcene (3056 posts) -
@mnzy said:
" This will be a full blown war, because Gaddafi is easily beating the protesters at the moment. He does not need the air space. And what will happen if he wins even with an intact no fly zone? "
Yeah, unfortunately this resolution comes a bit too late for the no fly zone to be of much use.
#22 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18955 posts) -
@benjaebe said:
" @Ahmad_Metallic said:
" and there goes Libya's freedom.. just another arab country with america's dick up its ass  enjoying ruling and exploiting it, get all the resources and oil you can "
You realize it's a United Nations measure to protect civilians from being mindlessly killed by a tyrant in the midst of a power struggle, right? And that America isn't even involved in the first set of operations, since France and Britain will begin any bombing with support from other Arab nations?  This is what the UN is for. "
that all sounds very sweet and just, but i dont mind betting a few hundred dollars that in a year or two, Libya's gonna vicariously become another americanized arab state living in the illusion of freedom while its getting fucked and dominated and exploited by the US 
there's always a fair and just cause that gets you to invade these arab countries, and when the shitstorm quiets down and all is under control, the US just decide to stick around.. this is gonna happen again and we all know it. hey, i hope im wrong !
#23 Posted by benjaebe (2783 posts) -
@Ahmad_Metallic said:
" @benjaebe said:
" @Ahmad_Metallic said:
" and there goes Libya's freedom.. just another arab country with america's dick up its ass  enjoying ruling and exploiting it, get all the resources and oil you can "
You realize it's a United Nations measure to protect civilians from being mindlessly killed by a tyrant in the midst of a power struggle, right? And that America isn't even involved in the first set of operations, since France and Britain will begin any bombing with support from other Arab nations?  This is what the UN is for. "
that all sounds very sweet and just, but i dont mind betting a few hundred dollars that in a year or two, Libya's gonna vicariously become another americanized arab state living in the illusion of freedom while its getting fucked and dominated and exploited by the US there's always a fair and just cause that gets you to invade these arab countries, and when the shitstorm quiets down and all is under control, the US just decide to stick around.. this is gonna happen again and we all know it. hey, i hope im wrong ! "
No one's invading, the UNITED NATIONS is instituting a no-fly zone WITHOUT SENDING IN GROUND TROOPS to help protect civilians from being caught in the crossfire in a measure that was approved by the United Nations 10-0 with countries like China and Russia abstaining instead of using any veto power. But, you know, if you'd rather let all the civilians die in the crossfire from a leader who's been in power since the 70s and has already said he's willing to die rather than turn over power of the country, then by all means continue.
#24 Posted by august (3836 posts) -
@Ahmad_Metallic said:
" @benjaebe said:
" @Ahmad_Metallic said:
" and there goes Libya's freedom.. just another arab country with america's dick up its ass  enjoying ruling and exploiting it, get all the resources and oil you can "
You realize it's a United Nations measure to protect civilians from being mindlessly killed by a tyrant in the midst of a power struggle, right? And that America isn't even involved in the first set of operations, since France and Britain will begin any bombing with support from other Arab nations?  This is what the UN is for. "
that all sounds very sweet and just, but i dont mind betting a few hundred dollars that in a year or two, Libya's gonna vicariously become another americanized arab state living in the illusion of freedom while its getting fucked and dominated and exploited by the US there's always a fair and just cause that gets you to invade these arab countries, and when the shitstorm quiets down and all is under control, the US just decide to stick around.. this is gonna happen again and we all know it. hey, i hope im wrong ! "
What I think you're failing to realize is that America is so damn sick of being stuck in countries impossible to govern by anyone due to sectarian bullshit and corruption that you'd be hard pressed to find ten people in the whole country wiling to put boots on the ground in the middle east again any time this generation.
#25 Posted by Chindie (192 posts) -

Theres very little political will to put boots on ground, so this'll be very similar to the Bosnia campaign (though probably considerably shorter), with hints of NATO's Kosovo intervention . An air campaign against anti-air defences, then dominate the air - which will happen in hours with the combined forces. If necessary I'd imagine they will 'assist' the opposition by taking out some of Gadaffi's armor and so on, but outside of a UN force it won't escalate to a 'proper' boots on ground war.
 
Theres very little desire to do that, and to be frank, the US and UK would provide the vast amount of any potential ground force and the US won't want that for PR and cost reasons, and the UK won't for the same reasons as well as not having the sheer man power to do it. It'll be a UN peace keeping force at most unless things get so seriously out of hand theres a popular desire for all out war. Which is very, very unlikely.

#26 Edited by melcene (3056 posts) -

I think @Ahmad_Metallic: is just trying to live up to my call of the America-hate that was going to be forthcoming in this thread.  Thanks for not letting a gal down.

#27 Edited by Jimbo (9799 posts) -
@mnzy said:

" This will be a full blown war, because Gaddafi is easily beating the protesters at the moment. He does not need the air space. And what will happen if he wins even with an intact no fly zone? "

He isn't 'easily' beating the 'protestors'.  He has air, sea and armour and is fighting a bunch of guys driving around in 4x4s and he's still making it look like hard work.  The no-fly zone may become a 'take out as much as possible from the air' zone, but the rebels ought to be able to take care of it from there.  The US/UK forces would walk through Gaddafi's forces in about a week if it came to putting boots on the ground, but it shouldn't come to that.
 
The US have an epic justice boner for Megrahi though, so perhaps he'll be spirited away in the night if they know where he is.
#28 Posted by Rattle618 (1463 posts) -

Nice to see so many people and organizations worldwide so committed to fight the over-population problem in this planet.

#29 Posted by Skytylz (4031 posts) -

I hope the U.S. doesn't send anybody over there, they hate us and if they wanna kill each other let them.  I'd rather watch it burn than help them.

#30 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18955 posts) -
@benjaebe:  without sending in ground troops? ok that sounds good. i didnt read the whole thing before speaking, which i dont really regret because when you see middle eastern countries drop like flies one after the other by a big invader from the west, its logical to think that its that country's intention to keep that strategy up 
 
 
@melcene said:
" I think @Ahmad_Metallic: is just trying to live up to my call of the America-hate that was going to be forthcoming in this thread.  Thanks for not letting a gal down. "
actually i love America.. you gave me metal music, South Park, all the tv shows and movies i love, and alot of american video games i adore.. if it wasnt for the US i wouldnt have all the things i enjoy practicing and/or experiencing.. 

im really indifferent about most issues, so this isnt hatred, but merely an observation. 
#31 Posted by spudtastic (542 posts) -

Our 'Lockerbie Loonie' will soon get a dose of his own pills, methinx.

#32 Edited by mutha3 (4985 posts) -

woah woah woah woah
 
 
hold the fuckin phone right there
 
 
The UN  actually did something?
 
 
@Skytylz said:

" I hope the U.S. doesn't send anybody over there, they hate us and if they wanna kill each other let them.  I'd rather watch it burn than help them. "

For the sake of my sanity i'm gonna assume your trolling.
#33 Posted by canucks23 (1087 posts) -
@Skytylz said:
" I hope the U.S. doesn't send anybody over there, they hate us and if they wanna kill each other let them.  I'd rather watch it burn than help them. "
Do you even know what's going on there? By the sounds of it you don't.
#34 Posted by mutha3 (4985 posts) -
@Ahmad_Metallic said:
" @benjaebe said:
" @Ahmad_Metallic said:
" and there goes Libya's freedom.. just another arab country with america's dick up its ass  enjoying ruling and exploiting it, get all the resources and oil you can "
You realize it's a United Nations measure to protect civilians from being mindlessly killed by a tyrant in the midst of a power struggle, right? And that America isn't even involved in the first set of operations, since France and Britain will begin any bombing with support from other Arab nations?  This is what the UN is for. "
that all sounds very sweet and just, but i dont mind betting a few hundred dollars that in a year or two, Libya's gonna vicariously become another americanized arab state living in the illusion of freedom while its getting fucked and dominated and exploited by the US
oh yes the current state most arabian countries are in right now is so much preferable to that hypothetical
 
/sarcasm(because some of you idjits will find a way to take the above statement seriously.)
#35 Edited by CptBedlam (4449 posts) -

Yeah well, way too late. There is like one rebel city left, what are the prospects of military action now? Splitting up Lybia?

#36 Posted by Tim_the_Corsair (3065 posts) -

I don't understand why everyone suddenly wants to interfere in a revolution against a legitimate government - isn't that meant to be a sacrosanct, internal matter?

Don't get me wrong, I'd like nothing better than for that tyrant to be wiped off the face of the earth, but the UN and it's member nations have had no problem with his being a murderous dictator until now. Would we be interfering if the rebels were slaughtering Gaddafi supporters instead?

The whole thing leaves a sour taste.

#37 Posted by JB16 (745 posts) -
@Skytylz said:
" I hope the U.S. doesn't send anybody over there, they hate us and if they wanna kill each other let them.  I'd rather watch it burn than help them. "
Do you have any background information about the situation at all? Because that was by far without a doubt the most ignorant comment I have seen on this entire thread.
#38 Posted by Skytylz (4031 posts) -
@mutha3: Nope, we could easily overthrow the government but then it would be just like Iraq.  Sorry, but we'll waste a bunch of money, just like Iraq, to free a people that will likely hate us when Gahdafi is gone.  I guess it's alright if it happens while the party one supports is making the call.
#39 Edited by mutha3 (4985 posts) -
@Tim_the_Corsair said:

" I don't understand why everyone suddenly wants to interfere in a revolution against a legitimate government - isn't that meant to be a sacrosanct, internal matter? Don't get me wrong, I'd like nothing better than for that tyrant to be wiped off the face of the earth, but the UN and it's member nations have had no problem with his being a murderous dictator until now. Would we be interfering if the rebels were slaughtering Gaddafi supporters instead? The whole thing leaves a sour taste. "

Does not compute.
 
I don't see anything wrong with the UN enforcing the human rights its set up since its conception. I don't get your point:
 
Because the UN has been a worthless piece of shit organization in past examples of human right-related atrocities, it means they should never try to actual live up to their purpose?
 
Yes, there is obviously a 100% selfish reason for the west interfering with Lybia, but if it stops a crazy bastard from committing atrocities, who cares?
 
@Skytylz said:

" @mutha3: Nope, we could easily overthrow the government but then it would be just like Iraq.  Sorry, but we'll waste a bunch of money, just like Iraq, to free a people that will likely hate us when Gahdafi is gone.  I guess it's alright if it happens while the party one supports is making the call. "

You're dumb.
#40 Posted by Wrighteous86 (3782 posts) -
@Skytylz: You should stop before you make yourself look worse.
#41 Posted by OtakuGamer (1227 posts) -

About time. Shame it might be too late.

#42 Posted by ShaneDev (1696 posts) -

Well the UN actually does something for once and its probably too late anyway.

#43 Posted by CmdrSheppard (202 posts) -
@melcene: This.
#44 Posted by SSValis (1136 posts) -

I'll bring some sunscreen and condoms... oh wait its Libya so just sunscreen. 

#45 Posted by eagles_band (159 posts) -
@ShaneDev said:
" Well the UN actually does something for once and its probably too late anyway. "
Exactly what I was thinking. 
#46 Posted by Skytylz (4031 posts) -
@Wrighteous86 said:
" @Skytylz: You should stop before you make yourself look worse. "
Thanks for the motivation to keep going.
 
I just love however how everyone has already forgot about Iraq.  I don't see it as any different than Iraq, but I guess in a few years we will all be pissed about this.  The revolt is pretty much quelled, so by the time we get there it will be all under the control of Gaddafi and it will be a similar war to the last one we fought and are still fighting. 
#47 Posted by Wrighteous86 (3782 posts) -
@Skytylz: The UN is instituting a no-fly order. The US is doing nothing. 
 
The US invaded Iraq. The UN did nothing.
#48 Posted by FrankCanada97 (4039 posts) -
@Skytylz said:
" @Wrighteous86 said:
" @Skytylz: You should stop before you make yourself look worse. "
Thanks for the motivation to keep going. I just love however how everyone has already forgot about Iraq.  I don't see it as any different than Iraq, but I guess in a few years we will all be pissed about this.  The revolt is pretty much quelled, so by the time we get there it will be all under the control of Gaddafi and it will be a similar war to the last one we fought and are still fighting.  "
You are bringing Afghanistan into this now?
#49 Posted by Skytylz (4031 posts) -
@Wrighteous86: You really think all they are going to do is issue a no-fly order?  There will be UN forces on the ground soon, but it's ok for them to do it, but if the U.S. does anything it's terrible.  Some people in this thread are already blaming the U.S. for this and what we are going to do.
#50 Posted by beej (1674 posts) -
@Wrighteous86: I'm not declaring a slippery slope as inevitable but a no fly zone and other purely protective actions have ended with boots on the ground before haven't they? Also doesn't the U.S. make up most of the UN peacekeeping forces?