No Fly zones over Libya?

Mycroft said:
Do you consider the "left" to be inherently anti-Israel and anti-United States?
Click to expand...

Most of the left is not that short sighted and dim-witted. Just like most on the right are not that way.

The driving force on the left is based on producing real and positive policies, and one of the defining aspects of the Left is a strong sense of empathy. There is nothing inherently anti-Israel or anti-US in that.

There are some on the radical left (Chomsky, Anarchists, radical Communists) just as there are some on the radical right (Timothy Mcveigh, radical militias, LaRouche, etc.) who have adopted a pointless blanket anti-American and Anti-Israeli mindset without spending any time on actual solutions.

However, most people who are not on the radical realm on either side are interested in actually getting things done, even if they differ on the substance of how to do that. They realize that a blanket anti-Western, anti-Israel, or anti-US policy is ridiculously dumb and pointless.

The people who are blanket Anti-Western without taking any time to actually think about our problems has more to do with a lazy radicalism than anything else.
 
Last edited:
HoverBoarder said:
Most of the left is not that short sighted and dim-witted. Just like most on the right are not that way.

The driving force on the left is based on producing real and positive policies, and one of the defining aspects of the Left is a strong sense of empathy. There is nothing inherently anti-Israel or anti-US in that.

There are some on the radical left (Chomsky, Anarchists, radical Communists) just as there are some on the radical right (Timothy Mcveigh, radical militias, LaRouche, etc.) who have adopted a pointless blanket anti-American and Anti-Israeli mindset without spending any time on actual solutions.

However, most people who are not on the radical realm on either side are interested in actually getting things done, even if they differ on the substance of how to do that. They realize that a blanket anti-Western, anti-Israel, or anti-US policy is ridiculously dumb and pointless.

The people who are blanket Anti-Western without taking any time to actually think about our problems has more to do with a lazy radicalism than anything else.
Click to expand...


What a joker (and spammer) you are, comparing Chomsky with Timothy Mcveigh!

:bunpan
 
Last edited:
Mycroft said:
Do you consider the "left" to be inherently anti-Israel and anti-United States?
Click to expand...

'the left' is really a meaningless concept in the states, since americans still view obama as 'socialist', which, at best, as laughable.
the rest of the world view the republicans as fascist, and the democrats as 'far-right'.
 
Last edited:
BeAChooser said:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalp...own-the-war-powers-act-gauntlet-on-libya.html
Click to expand...

Thunder said:
on this issue, I have to agree.

Obama should go to Congress and explain what our mission there is, regardless of the size and scope of our involvement.
Click to expand...

Ditto.

I agree with protecting the civilians in Libya with the No-Fly zone, and I think that the UN/Nato mission was warranted, but we need a clearly defined scope and mission.

Our involvement in Libya does not exactly fit the same definition as a usual war like Iraq or Afghanistan, but we still need to define what our role is and how we plan to meet the objectives of the UN resolution to establish the No Fly zone. The nature and speed of War has changed a lot since the founding of the War Powers Act, and we also need approval for our military involvements in Iraq, Yemen, and Pakistan.

Still, one of the problems with Congress is all of the unrelated stuff that gets put onto bills. A vote to continue to protect the Libyan people could also include a vote to cut STD testing, or to cut the Consumer Protection Agency, or any of the other unrelated aspects. With the election coming up, the bill and vote on this would be a lot more about scoring political points than forming a long term viable plan. We need to figure out a way for dealing with UN humanitarian wars like Libya and drone Strikes on targets from the War on Terror.
 
'Lawyers to sue Sarkozy for war-crimes over Libya campaign'

French lawyers say they plan to initiate legal proceedings against French President Nicolas Sarkozy for crimes against humanity over the NATO-led military campaign in Libya.

A Libyan justice ministry official Ibrahim Boukhzam told reporters in Tripoli that Jacques Verges and Roland Dumas had offered to represent families he said were victims of the NATO bombing campaign."
 
HoverBoarder said:
Ditto.

I agree with protecting the civilians in Libya with the No-Fly zone, and I think that the UN/Nato mission was warranted, but we need a clearly defined scope and mission.

Our involvement in Libya does not exactly fit the same definition as a usual war like Iraq or Afghanistan, but we still need to define what our role is and how we plan to meet the objectives of the UN resolution to establish the No Fly zone. The nature and speed of War has changed a lot since the founding of the War Powers Act, and we also need approval for our military involvements in Iraq, Yemen, and Pakistan.

Still, one of the problems with Congress is all of the unrelated stuff that gets put onto bills. A vote to continue to protect the Libyan people could also include a vote to cut STD testing, or to cut the Consumer Protection Agency, or any of the other unrelated aspects. With the election coming up, the bill and vote on this would be a lot more about scoring political points than forming a long term viable plan. We need to figure out a way for dealing with UN humanitarian wars like Libya and drone Strikes on targets from the War on Terror.
Click to expand...

Since when was a "No_Fly Zone" a "war"?

What is "humanitarian" about waging war to replace one despot with another?
 
JihadJane said:
What a joker (and spammer) you are, comparing Chomsky with Timothy Mcveigh!
Click to expand...

It's absolutely valid in the sense that they are both pointlessly anti-American with no ideas to help improve our Country or the world. One through violence the other through dishonesty.
 
JihadJane said:
Since when was a "No_Fly Zone" a "war"?

What is "humanitarian" about waging war to replace one despot with another?
Click to expand...

A no fly zone could classify as a war because there are a lot of war-like actions that have to be taken in order to implement a no-fly zone. Although as I noted it is different than wars in Iraq or Afghanistan.

We did not go into Libya to replace a despot with another. We went in under a UN mandate to protect civilians from the indiscriminate mass slaughter of civilians under Gaddafi. It's the same reason we went into Kosovo, and the same reason we put pressure on Sudan and are putting sanctions on Syria. All of which would be considered "humanitarian."

The UN likes to prevent mass killings of civilians, and one of the main reasons that they have been able to do that is because of the actions of the US. If you think all of those people should have been killed, than maybe you can write a petition to the UN asking them to stop working to prevent the mass killings of civilians.
 
HoverBoarder said:
It's absolutely valid in the sense that they are both pointlessly anti-American .......
Click to expand...

if you believe that mcveigh was 'pointless' in his hatred of his hatred of the american government, then you know nothing about him.
read gore vidal's perpetual war for perpetual peace

it's a fast read, and readily available online as a pdf.
 
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-gates-nato-20110611,0,6744535.story

June 11, 2011

Reporting from Brussels— Outgoing Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates lashed out at some of America's closest European allies, complaining that NATO's shaky air assault in Libya had laid bare shortcomings that are pushing the alliance toward "collective military irrelevance."

… snip …

"The mightiest military alliance in history is only 11 weeks into an operation against a poorly armed regime in a sparsely populated country — yet many allies are beginning to run short of munitions, requiring the U.S., once more, to make up the difference," he complained.
Click to expand...

:popcorn1
 
bikerdruid said:
i did....and the majority of the rest of the world.....even australia.
thankfully, your views do not represent most of your country.
most australians don't dream of being american.
Click to expand...

Nobody I know considers the Republicans to be fascists.

Only the loony left think that. And nobody pays attention to the loony left.
 
JihadJane said:
'Lawyers to sue Sarkozy for war-crimes over Libya campaign'

French lawyers say they plan to initiate legal proceedings against French President Nicolas Sarkozy for crimes against humanity over the NATO-led military campaign in Libya.

A Libyan justice ministry official Ibrahim Boukhzam told reporters in Tripoli that Jacques Verges and Roland Dumas had offered to represent families he said were victims of the NATO bombing campaign."
Click to expand...

Jacques Verges and Ronald Dumas are ****-ed in the head.
 
bikerdruid said:
if you believe that mcveigh was 'pointless' in his hatred of his hatred of the american government, then you know nothing about him.
read gore vidal's perpetual war for perpetual peace

it's a fast read, and readily available online as a pdf.
Click to expand...

Gore Vidal is a truther.
 
Virus said:
Gore Vidal is a truther.
Click to expand...

irrelevant.
in his book, vidal prints letters from mcveigh in which he explains his motivations.
the point is, that hoverboarder said that mcveigh's hatred of the american government was 'pointless'.
mcveigh's explanation certainly shows that his hatred was anything but 'pointless'.
whether or not you agree with his motivations is irrelevant too.
 
Last edited:
bikerdruid said:
irrelevant.
in his book, vidal prints letters from mcveigh in which he explains his motivations.
the point is, that hoverboarder said that mcveigh's hatred of the american government was 'pointless'.
mcveigh's explanation certainly shows that his hatred was anything but 'pointless'.
whether or not you agree with his motivations is irrelevant too.
Click to expand...

His motivation was being ****-ed in the head.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Does that follow from my post?
Click to expand...

If you think being pro-USA and pro-Israel is evidence of not being far left, then yes. However, since there is always the possibility that you either phrased it wrong or interpret in in a different way, I though it best to ask for clarification.

So, care to answer the question?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom