Libyans applaud Obama and European leaders

Rob we where not the main driver of Lybia...thats your american ego speaking...the main drivers where the UK and France...we gave support...and of course the biggest driver was the Libyan people..

Great...what is the English and French plan on how to turn Libya into a peaceful democracy?

But I know you hate it when we help get rid of evil dictators who support terrorism, kill there own people, and have large amounts of yellow cake.....you know ..like Libya.

I hate it when we intervene anywhere with no clear national interest at stake..something our own administration has openly stated we did not have in Libya.

By the way, how are things going after the gov fell there...vs say...Iraq after Sadam fell...pretty Fing good I would say next to Iraq. Also what was the cost of one vs the other....

Is "better than Iraq" our barometer for success now? "Don't worry that we are making little progress and have no plan, at least it is not Iraq." That is simple stupidity, and even more idiotic coming from someone who studied IR in school. Or are we one day finally going to realize that we need some semblance of a plan if we want Libya to ever turn into anything like what we envision?
 
Werbung:
Great...what is the English and French plan on how to turn Libya into a peaceful democracy?



I hate it when we intervene anywhere with no clear national interest at stake..something our own administration has openly stated we did not have in Libya.



Is "better than Iraq" our barometer for success now? "Don't worry that we are making little progress and have no plan, at least it is not Iraq." That is simple stupidity, and even more idiotic coming from someone who studied IR in school. Or are we one day finally going to realize that we need some semblance of a plan if we want Libya to ever turn into anything like what we envision?



There is your big mistake and the "American arrogance" again!

Libya needs to turn into something THEY envision, NOT what WE envision!
It is not up to us to "make plans" for Libya. It is up to them, WITH the advise and support of the countries that THEY will choose to listen to.

That is what democracy is all about, NOT what America thinks everyone else should adopt to be a democracy that we approve of, but what their people want to see happen, whether or not WE approve!
 
There is your big mistake and the "American arrogance" again!

Libya needs to turn into something THEY envision, NOT what WE envision!
It is not up to us to "make plans" for Libya. It is up to them, WITH the advise and support of the countries that THEY will choose to listen to.

That is what democracy is all about, NOT what America thinks everyone else should adopt to be a democracy that we approve of, but what their people want to see happen, whether or not WE approve!

So, if they want an Islamic republic where women are less than dogs and homosexuals, Christians, Jews, and others are persecuted....and Islamic law is imposed in draconian fashion on all their citizens, so be it. Is that okay with you?

It continually amazes me how libs apply moral equivalence to all OTHER nations, but fail to recognize the horrible tyrannies present in those other countries.

I am not suggesting the USA get militarily involved (you libs naturally jumped to that conclusion...right?), but there are things we can do to try an get the Libyans to install a government with true human rights and real democracy for all their citizens. Failing to support a true democracy movement in Libya would be a big mistake. That said, I do think true democracy is possible in a Muslim nation. Islam prevents it.

The great Winston Churchill put it this way and libs everywhere could learn from him, if they knew of him:
How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.
Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.
 
There is your big mistake and the "American arrogance" again!

Libya needs to turn into something THEY envision, NOT what WE envision!
It is not up to us to "make plans" for Libya. It is up to them, WITH the advise and support of the countries that THEY will choose to listen to.

That is what democracy is all about, NOT what America thinks everyone else should adopt to be a democracy that we approve of, but what their people want to see happen, whether or not WE approve!

NATO basically put them in power....should NATO not plan to ensure they at least hold fair elections, and don't simply replace a dictator with a dictator?
 
NATO basically put them in power....should NATO not plan to ensure they at least hold fair elections, and don't simply replace a dictator with a dictator?


This is a little premature, isn't it?

NATO is NOT the US. . .US is PART of NATO.

And, NATO is not made to tell ANY country how to run their government, but are there to intervene.
 
This is a little premature, isn't it?

NATO is NOT the US. . .US is PART of NATO.

It is not in fact premature at all...unless you truly believe that NATO ought to be toppling governments with no plan (and seemingly no interest in a plan) on what happens next.

And, NATO is not made to tell ANY country how to run their government, but are there to intervene.

"not made to tell ANY country how to run their government"...and yet we are having this discussion because NATO removed the Libyan government from power. :rolleyes:
 
It is not in fact premature at all...unless you truly believe that NATO ought to be toppling governments with no plan (and seemingly no interest in a plan) on what happens next.



"not made to tell ANY country how to run their government"...and yet we are having this discussion because NATO removed the Libyan government from power. :rolleyes:

NATO didn't initiate the revolutions. they intervene to prevent massacres.
I wish they had intervened whe WE played God and single handedly toppled thgovernment of Iraq. . . WITHOUT a plan . . . And pushed Iraq in thé direction of Iran!
 
Werbung:
NATO didn't initiate the revolutions. they intervene to prevent massacres.

So, should we intervene in every nation where there is some ragtag rebellion? There was one in Iraq before we intervened..would you be so supportive had that been given as the main reason?

I wish they had intervened whe WE played God and single handedly toppled thgovernment of Iraq. . . WITHOUT a plan . . . And pushed Iraq in thé direction of Iran!

This is rich...on one hand you want to criticize our lack of real plan in Iraq, and on the other somehow pretend we don't need one in Libya to have a successful transition.

And, your blanket statement that we "pushed Iraq in the direction of Iran" is seemingly false. Some elements in Iraq look to Iran for support, but that was the case before we invaded as well. I don't think Iraq is about to come a huge ally of Iran anytime soon.
 
Back
Top