Suck a fat one Gadaffi!

[corndog36]

If the UN expects us, (America) to provide an leadership, they will be sadly disappointed, out president is a wimp. Hillary has got a pair, but Obama will insist on being able to blame Europe for forcing us into it, before he will turn her loose.

Hillary is an evil bitch.

Unquestionably. What scares me is that she will probably take another run at the White House in 2016, maybe sooner if the party decides to throw Obama under the bus.

[ib.me.ub]

---

Kindly explain to me why it matters to the US which bunch of towel-heads rules fucking Libya?

So that they can have a connection which is more favorable to them, and afterall, the main reason why America wants to get involved in these revolutions is to gain an advantage through which they can further maintain their policies in the Middle East (for the purpose of oil business, for example).

The Libyans are quite weary of outside intervention because of what effect it may have on their legitimacy and future dealings. They know well enough about the notoriety of the US in the region and fear that if the US were to back them they would lose legitimacy in the eyes of the wider region.

However, with Qaddafi's superior air power in the region, it's understandable why they would want outside intervention and I don't think there is anything wrong with that.

---

If you want the oil in Libya (or whatever else is there): kill all/most of the people there, and annex the country. Seriously. This world peace shit has to stop or I start vomiting.

Yes Hitler, 'cough' bush, hmmm, sorry I mean Sae.

[Violet]

If you want the oil in Libya (or whatever else is there): kill all/most of the people there, and annex the country. Seriously. This world peace shit has to stop or I start vomiting.

Obviously, that would be even worse. Better to be subtle at least.

It is worse by being more cost effective and easier to defend? I'd rather not pay any attention whatsoever to 'country borders' and to only have the military defend the resources we want from the area. Subtly has the effect of the masses not knowing why we are there, and most of them complaining about it.

I have no problem with America acquiring oil to fuel itself. The whole world runs on oil. Everyone needs it. But, the way they have been going about achieving this is unfair because they have caused a lot of instability in the Middle East countries. Even the news gives us this very indication; as the gas prices soar because of what is happening in the Middle East, there are talks about finally using American oil reserves.

Oil companies *want* prices high, because they make more money that way. I'd rather America drilled the oil and sold/used it itself. Taxing others to do stuff and then buying it from them is just stupid. Most powerful military on the planet and we can't even seize the assets of the rich and make use of it.

If you know Muslims you'd know that the first thing they would say is that its ironic that (1) America tried to push for democracy using force, (2) that they did it for the oil and having a stronger presence in the region, and (3) the governments that they propped are illegitimate and corrupt, just like other western propped governments from generations ago. America waged war and conducted an aerial invasion and occupation for lies that cover their true motives.

I agree that it is ironic... and it isn't fooling any of the power-players. I can only hope that its paying off, and somehow I doubt it.

To say it was done for democracy is silly, and whether you agree with that or not, this is how the rest of the Arab/Muslim world perceives it.

And why aren't we being run by them yet?

This has something to do with the Arabs not having the world's largest/strongest military, i think

My source of venom today is almost fully from my Silicoid people being repeatedly butchered as I struggled to defend them from psychotic alien powers that pretend to be at peace while they send ten death fleets into my space. I'll be happier by tomorrow

---

Yes Hitler, 'cough' bush, hmmm, sorry I mean Sae.

Hitler occupied territories, he didn't exterminate those within. And he suffered endlessly from the intelligence and resistance provided by various underground members of the populace. Exterminate the people and there is only the resistance of corpses. You could always extradite them or put them to work in a forced labor camp (holocaust nothing). Just get them out of there.

Germany would have done better without Hitler in any case. And are we seriously not 'over' world war 2 yet?

[ib.me.ub]

Oh, and the US dosen't suffer from the intelligence and resistance provided by the underground in the countries they occupy?

[Violet]

Oh, and the US dosen't suffer from the intelligence and resistance provided by the underground in the countries they occupy?

It does. My position is to eliminate the people from inside area 'x' that contains what one wants out of the country. Perhaps the areas around that area as well.

The united states does not do this under the guise of democracy, but really it's just scared of what those precious Europeans and American hippies would think.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

If only the UN had an air force to carry out those strikes.

I suppose they will expect us to do it for them?

The UN is doing its usual thing of hypocritical moral posturing. The issue is about protecting oil supplies. Foreign policy is never based on moral principle. There is ALWAYS quid pro quo at some. level .

Other countries will intervene in Libya if and only if it is seem to be in their best interests. They don't give rat's rectum about Libyan civilians.

[Rayaan]

Here's another insight. I'll keep it short since I don't want to go into the details and all ...

What I believe happened now, is that there is a new agreed upon strategy between the oil companies and the government which involves removing Qaddafi but securing their investments. By imposing a no fly zone, and taking direct intervention, the west hopes to secure for itself a place among the movement and the people so that in the near future when it comes time for Libya to do business, they will do it with the West. It's basically a way to confront an insecure situation by trying to control its outcome as best as possible. The reason why its an insecure situation is because the US knows that the attitudes that the Libyans have towards the US are predominantly negative, and therefore, by getting involved and "coming to the rescue" they hope to not only change these attitudes, but also, to use their "rescue" as a form of business leverage in the future.

China and Russia did not support the no-fly zone because they have always been against military intervention in the Middle East. Because of that, they have been able to avoid getting sucked into costly operations, battles, and even wars. Getting involved militarily is always bad for business. It would definitely hurt them economically, especially China who has been making progress in the Middle East through good business partnerships. They know that wars, embargoes, and sanctions in the region would hurt them. That's the reason they didn't support the no-fly zone.

[Ubermensch]

Hitler occupied territories, he didn't exterminate those within. And he suffered endlessly from the intelligence and resistance provided by various underground members of the populace.

He certainly tried his hardest. Do you know just how difficult it is to exterminate huge numbers of people? If you were in a military organisation and you were ordered to massacre millions of civilllians, would you do it? Typically people don't like to indiscriminantly slaughter civillians, even if they did, it would take more effort than it is worth.

[Anomalocaris]

Hitler occupied territories, he didn't exterminate those within. And he suffered endlessly from the intelligence and resistance provided by various underground members of the populace.

He certainly tried his hardest. Do you know just how difficult it is to exterminate huge numbers of people? If you were in a military organisation and you were ordered to massacre millions of civilllians, would you do it? Typically people don't like to indiscriminantly slaughter civillians, even if they did, it would take more effort than it is worth.

If I was in a military organization ordered to massacre millions of innocents out of policy, I do what I can to overthrow the leadership that tasked the military with such orders.

[Violet]

Hitler occupied territories, he didn't exterminate those within. And he suffered endlessly from the intelligence and resistance provided by various underground members of the populace.

He certainly tried his hardest. Do you know just how difficult it is to exterminate huge numbers of people? If you were in a military organisation and you were ordered to massacre millions of civilllians, would you do it? Typically people don't like to indiscriminantly slaughter civillians, even if they did, it would take more effort than it is worth.

If I was in a military and I was given an order, would I complete it? Absolutely yes.

Because it is so hard to carpet bomb/haze an area? It's really not. It's discriminate killing that is hard to manage. The more effective the weapons: the easier it is to exterminate the pests. Get rid of as many as you can before they evolve a tolerance to your favorite brand of pesticide

If I was in a military organization ordered to massacre millions of innocents out of policy, I do what I can to overthrow the leadership that tasked the military with such orders.

And that is why you don't recruit such idealists into the military. Drafts/conscription are bad if a loyal/effective military is what one desires. Discipline is vital in a military... if one does not posses this: they do not belong in a military.