I know you did and as I said it wasn't aimed at you bro
I ended up reading this whole thread tonight since my last post and saw a few people using your, quite right, posts to fuel a more deviant side topic. I should probably stop getting pissed off with bitter people.
Anyhow, again MrC it was not aimed at your monkey loving self and I do actually agree with a chunk of your points, I justfforgot to mention them in my rant
I do get the "foolish optimism" angle, I really do.
I'd just like to point out that it was Libyans who asked for help, and the fight was well and truly on it's way when the UN and NATO got involved. How would it have looked if the rest of the world just stood by and let Gaddafi crush the uprising, especially in the wider context of the Arab Spring.
I still think that in the ugly history of armed conflict, this so far seems like one of the less dirty affairs... and doing nothing would have probably been worse.
<bp|> Maybe when I grow up I can be a troll like PsycH <bp|> or an obsessive compulsive paladin of law like Adept
Broodwich wrote:QUOTE (Broodwich @ Aug 30 2011, 08:47 PM) i dont see what is "shouting" about mrc's post, hes just telling it like it is. Adept has no rebuttal so he is attempting to claim the moral "high road" like he normally does in similar circumstances and say he's leaving the discussion
Too right mate.
Also anyone else find it laughable where adept brings up how the U.S. had to lead seeing as how the EU countries: didn't have enough ammo, didn't have the ability to take out the AAA grid, had a commando team captured by the rebels, had the CEO of one of their big merc companies killed, relied fully on the US for air based surveillance, bombed the very people they claimed to be helping, and god knows what else. Seems clear to me that they added nothing to this little jaunt we were dragged into on their behalf but will still reap oil.
On Syria: I can't think of any combination of EU countries(maybe you all should add turkey?) That could handle Syria better than the small country of Isreal could. Pfft!
I'm sorry I don't remember any of it. For you the day spideycw graced your squad with utter destruction was the most important day of your life. But for me, it was Sunday
Idanmel wrote:QUOTE (Idanmel @ Mar 19 2012, 05:54 AM) I am ashamed for all the drama I caused, I have much to learn on how to behave when things don't go my way.
I decided to relive the days gone by in my new blog.
---
Remember, what I say is IMO always. If I say that something sucks, it actually means "I think it sucks" OK?
Adept wrote:QUOTE (Adept @ Sep 1 2011, 04:09 PM) ...
I still think that in the ugly history of armed conflict, this so far seems like one of the less dirty affairs... and doing nothing would have probably been worse.
We'll see in 10yrs
- "History repeats itself for a reason" - "It's easy to cry for war when you've never experienced it" - "It's better to negotiate for 10 years then make war for 10 days" - "The strong do as they will, and the weak do as they must"
Adept wrote:QUOTE (Adept @ Sep 1 2011, 01:40 PM) I guess things look very different from the viewpoint of european news sources spidey & Co. Which is quite interesting in it's own right actually.
I'd be curious to hear which of the above your news sources disagree with?
I'm sorry I don't remember any of it. For you the day spideycw graced your squad with utter destruction was the most important day of your life. But for me, it was Sunday
Idanmel wrote:QUOTE (Idanmel @ Mar 19 2012, 05:54 AM) I am ashamed for all the drama I caused, I have much to learn on how to behave when things don't go my way.
i'm more intrigued by the recent "debate," if it can actually be called that, over sovereignty and how this whole intervention thing kind of $#@!s with the traditional definition of sovereignty.
I'm not really sure why we had to go directly intervene in libya but we can ignore bahrain and yemen and syria? should we go depose north korea's government because kim jong-il is a tyrant and lets millions of people starve? should we go invade somalia and install a government there because it's a completely anarchic state? what about the democratic republic of congo? I mean there's been an absolutely horrific war going on there for over a decade, surely we should go deploy soldiers there and bring peace and prosperity to everyone?
i'm also not sure how anyone can support the direct intervention of a sort in libya on behalf of regime change or call it good policy/strategy - look how well forced regime change went in iraq and afghanistan!
Supporting regime change called for by the populous is different to invading a country and forcing regime change whilst stripping out the public infrastructure. If we had piled on into Iraq at the end of the first gulf war and supported the popular uprising instead of allowing Saddam to brutally put it down then things might have been a lot less messy in Iraq. Hopefully Libya will establish a stable government quickly and stop relying on Europe and the US for support.
Certainly I think that a significant Western military presence in Libya 10 years from now is unlikely except possibly as trainers for the Libyan army. Compare and contrast with Afghanistan.
Spidey: Can't think of a reason I'd need to know anything
