You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Allied Forces act over Libya
johndivney wrote:i LOVE how the americans are saying it's about Oil when it was only a few years ago the rest of the world were saying that 'no, american intervention in Iraq isn't justified, it's merely to shore up their oil supply (& a personal vendetta).' yet when there is actual justification the americans suddenly think intervention is a bad idea. the hypocrisy of the american people & state over libya & gaddafi would be laughable if it wasn't so disgusting & evil.
Whoa down there! This isn't a US action, it is a European action with the US having an ancillary role that is limited in scope and duration. It is Europe that gets about 85% of Libyan oil while the US buys about 3% of Libyan exports.
whoa yourself. that was exactly my point. try reading & understanding what i said first.
there is NO strategic gain for the US to be involved here, which is why they are reluctant. the only reason for the US to get involved is a HUMANITARIAN one, which is obviously an insufficient excuse for them intervene.
this Libyan intervention is about humanitarian intervention - which imo is the ONLY JUSTIFIABLE REASON for conducting military action.
my point was the shocking and evil hypocrisy of the American state & it's people in their initial refusal & reluctance to get involved in helping people who were asking for help, who have been asking for help since Feburary when their own government start killing their civilians.
& then to dismiss this humanitarian crisis as a European coup for Oil is the most extremely distasteful hypocrisy of recent times considering the American WAR/intervention in Iraq was completely ILLEGITIMATE & solely based on Iraq's oil reserves & a personal vendetta, when the rest of the world was against US involvement in Iraq. WMD's anyone?? yea right. But suddendly when an African warlord (and not in the good sense) STARTS a civil war against peaceful protesters you can't intervene?! WTF?!?!
Gaddafyi's troops are STILL killing innocent people.
if anything it's in America's interests to let Gaddafyi kill as many people as he can.. which is actually what the Pentagon & a lot of Americans (& others) want..
edit & on that bolded point - of all the submarines firing missiles, how many of them are British? ONE. the rest are all American!
Re: Allied Forces act over Libya
try reading & understanding what i said first.
there is NO strategic gain for the US to be involved here, which is why they are reluctant. the only reason for the US to get involved is a HUMANITARIAN one, which is obviously an insufficient excuse for them intervene.this Libyan intervention is about humanitarian intervention - which imo is the ONLY JUSTIFIABLE REASON for conducting military action.
my point was the shocking and evil hypocrisy of the American state & it's people in their initial refusal & reluctance to get involved in helping people who were asking for help, who have been asking for help since Feburary when their own government start killing their civilians.
& then to dismiss this humanitarian crisis as a European coup for Oil is the most extremely distasteful hypocrisy of recent times considering the American WAR/intervention in Iraq was completely ILLEGITIMATE & solely based on Iraq's oil reserves & a personal vendetta, when the rest of the world was against US involvement in Iraq. WMD's anyone?? yea right. But suddendly when an African warlord (and not in the good sense) STARTS a civil war against peaceful protesters you can't intervene?! WTF?!?!Gaddafyi's troops are STILL killing innocent people.
if anything it's in America's interests to let Gaddafyi kill as many people as he can.. which is actually what the Pentagon & a lot of Americans (& others) want..
edit & on that bolded point - of all the submarines firing missiles, how many of them are British? ONE. the rest are all American!
Yeah, I got your point. You think Americans are hypocrites and evil. Perhaps, Americans are tired of their tax dollars being wasted on the security of ungrateful foreigners. You seem to proscribed to a perverted version Neoconservatism-- one where the contemptible Americans should liberate freedom loving peoples where ever they exist.
And, once again you seem to fail to grasp the geopolitical implications of a finite resource, and the area where that resource is located. But keep on fooling yourself as to the motives of your governments, if it helps you sleep.
Re: Allied Forces act over Libya
i just think it's strange that it's only NOW Americans are tired of their tax dollars being wasted on the security of national foreigners, when those people are actually asking for their help. when there was a time not to long ago the exact same people were gung-ho over invading a country, without just cause, where they weren't asked.
i guess it's just easier for you to see thru to the real reasons for intervention (oil) now you've already lived thru one lie.
i believe the British & french should intervene in Bahrain as well. obv they won't because it's not as advantageous to them. but the priority is obviously civilian casualities. if you can't see that it's because you have a lack of trust in your political leaders, which is understandable.
- Communist China
- Rep: 130
Re: Allied Forces act over Libya
I guess it's just easier for you to see Americans as a cohesive group. Not true at all. Any action by the US government is not an expression of the will of the people of the country. Yes a lot of people were pro-war, but that came as a result of the fear-crazed post-9/11 political climate and misplaced trust in the Bush administration. They SOLD us the war and it cost the Reps Congress in 06, we didn't ask for it.
Just wait, if Obama decides he wants to deploy ground troops (which probably won't happen because as others have pointed out, this is largely a European thing) then they'll go around selling the war to the country. And then people will be pro-war in Libya too, for a little while.
Americans can always be sold a war if the administration tries hard enough. But if they sell it on bad justification we usually don't fare too well, and soon enough those leaders get tossed out.
Re: Allied Forces act over Libya
DCK wrote:Errr...this oil deal.
We've been buying oil from them in large amounts for decades.
So, with this in mind....we stop buying so we can invade them and THEN get the oil?
We have always had their oil. Why would we attack for oil we already have????
'Cause right now, Europe is not getting the oil out of Libya due to the conflict. As soon as that shipment stopped, suddenly the attacks began.
Go figure.
Funny though, my country have contracts in Libya. Because of the recent no-fly-zone, those contracts will now most likely be terminated and given to the Chinese or the Brazilians.
So let me go through this again....
We weren't getting the oil out of Libya (like you say), then we attacked, and then the oil will be given to the Chinese et al.
I'm very confused.....
When are we supposed to be getting the oil?
I also thought this one was amusing...
Re: Allied Forces act over Libya
It is confusing, ain't it...
Problem with Europeans getting their oil out of Libya, is most of those countries had their deals as a direct result of what Gadhafi would allow. Once a country is invaded, and the main leadership thrown out of power, the businessmen of the world swoop in an auction off the rights to either pumping the oil out of the ground, or the actual barrels of crude.
Thus, the smaller European countries never get ahold of the oil like they thought anyways. The bigger countries swoop it up, like China & Russia.
The U.S. doesn't need it, and never had a reason for it. That's the reason the "War For Oil" thing in 2003 was bullshit. America might get most of it's oil from the Middle East, but even if all else fails we can still pump the stuff out of our own ground - even in 2011. We give them our money to hold on to our resources as they are left for a rainy day. But at the end of the day, the U.S. doesn't NEED Middle East oil.
Europe on the other hand does, but unfortunately due to the powers that be will never get it.
- IRISH OS1R1S
- Rep: 59
Re: Allied Forces act over Libya
To sum it up briefly, ITS ALL A LOAD OF BOLLOX.
Re: Allied Forces act over Libya
So we attacked for the oil which is now going to China? Wasn't it going there anyway if we didn't intervene? And how were we supposed to obtain this oil by using F-16 fighter jets? Putting soldiers in was never an issue.
I'm sorry, the oil theory is flawed and way to easy. The oil might be a positive sidenote, but it's not the major goal. We already had contracts. They are now terminated.
What quacks like a duck..is usually...just a duck.
There's a limit when you put in MiG's on your own people.
Re: Allied Forces act over Libya
'Cause it certaintly ain't humanitarian aid, that's for goddamn sure.
fuck me.
the object is to protect civilians; create space for the opposition to topple gaddafi & form a provisional govenment leading to a democratically elected government. the mere fact that Benhgazi has been saved thus far is evidence of the legitimate & true aim of this intervention.
& ftr, lybia produces LESS than 2% of the worlds oil - LESS than the UK.
