No Fly Zone

That_Annoying_KidThat_Annoying_Kid Sire of Titles Join Date: 2003-03-01 Member: 14175Posts: 5,579Members, Constellation
announced for Libya
If you have been following the Libya drama as of late you will notice that Gaddafi has been using his air force as a trump card against the rebels, however as of thirty minutes ago he apparently has lost this.


Russia and China abstained from the vote, which was 10-0, but curiously enough they were one of the first states to support (purportedly they were okay with the concept as long as neighboring countries like Syria, and Egypt agreed, and what do they have to loose?) asking for a no fly zone...

Either way, with recently assaults of rebel held cities by armored truck being beat back by militias comprised of thousands of seventeen year old ak wielding volunteer soldiers, and the only real thing standing in the way of a trouncing now gone, I think the situation in Libya will accelerate. I predict massive attacks come morning!


iirc the United States has a carrier that is in the Mediterranean that is more than capable of enforcing this no fly zone.


Interesting times in North Africa these days

Comments

  • lolfighterlolfighter Snark, Dire Join Date: 2003-04-20 Member: 15693Posts: 9,006Members
    It would've been nice if the military had stood aside in this case rather than support that bloodthirsty lunatic.

    Speaking of which, what's going on in Egypt these days? Haven't heard anything lately. And what about Tunis? Tunis seems to get no attention at all. Or maybe I'm just not paying attention.
    Military cemeteries around the world are packed with brainwashed, dead soldiers who were convinced God was on their side.
    - George Carlin
  • SopsSops Join Date: 2003-07-03 Member: 17894Posts: 1,483Members, Constellation
    edited March 2011
    US Carrier positions as of March 9th

    I can't imagine the Libyan Air Force is in any condition to put up much of a fight against Western air power but I am not sure how I feel about enforcing a no fly zone.

    Foreign energy interests in Libya

    QUOTE (Stratfor.com)
    The Europeans, however, are not showing a united front on the issue. Italy, which has the most energy investments in Libya and derives the greatest proportion of its energy from Libyan oil and natural gas, has hedged its bets toward Tripoli throughout the crisis. It is now faced with the prospect of Gadhafi returning firmly in power and has backed off from even its initial statement that it would allow its territory — but not military — to be used to enforce the no-fly zone. Germany, faced with three important state elections in the next 10 days, is backing off for largely domestic reasons. France and the United Kingdom, however, have little to lose by being forceful on Libya — their energy assets in Libya are nowhere near as productive and crucial for their energy companies as for Italy — in fact, both benefit domestically by seeking to lead on the crisis.

    However, it is unlikely that either the USNC or NATO countries will unanimously support operations. This means that if they decide to go ahead with airstrikes, France, the United States and the United Kingdom would go alone. This is at this moment an unlikely scenario considering that the United States is still embroiled in operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and with France facing European disunity on the issue.


    Full article
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • juicejuice Join Date: 2003-01-28 Member: 12886Posts: 1,044Members, Constellation
    QUOTE (lolfighter @ Mar 17 2011, 08:51 PM) »
    Speaking of which, what's going on in Egypt these days?


    U.S. lost our puppet in Egypt so we have to move to Libya.

    ---

    The "No Fly Zone" way of excusing ourselves into war is kind of like this:

    Hey jerk! Don't cross this line! If you do, I'll take that
    as an act of aggression, and be forced to defend myself!
    <me draws chalk line on ground, BEHIND you>
    OMG you crossed the line! How dare you! I am forced to defend myself...
  • lolfighterlolfighter Snark, Dire Join Date: 2003-04-20 Member: 15693Posts: 9,006Members
    By the way, is there oil in Libya? It's sort of the default assumption in a case like this, but I don't know if it's actually true.
    Military cemeteries around the world are packed with brainwashed, dead soldiers who were convinced God was on their side.
    - George Carlin
  • RobRob Unknown Enemy Join Date: 2002-01-24 Member: 25Posts: 2,604Members, NS1 Playtester
    QUOTE (lolfighter @ Mar 29 2011, 11:58 PM) »
    By the way, is there oil in Libya? It's sort of the default assumption in a case like this, but I don't know if it's actually true.


    I believe Libya is one of Europe's bigger suppliers.
    -Rob
  • lolfighterlolfighter Snark, Dire Join Date: 2003-04-20 Member: 15693Posts: 9,006Members
    Guess that explains a lot. Gotta make sure we get a pro-western regime in place once the old one falls.
    Military cemeteries around the world are packed with brainwashed, dead soldiers who were convinced God was on their side.
    - George Carlin
  • juicejuice Join Date: 2003-01-28 Member: 12886Posts: 1,044Members, Constellation
    Too bad the rebels we're supporting are religious extremists.

    Is that better than a secular dictator who wears funny hats? I don't know. Maybe we should have thought about it first and Obama could have maybe asked Congress. You know, that representative government thing that is supposed to help make important decisions and stuff.
  • SopsSops Join Date: 2003-07-03 Member: 17894Posts: 1,483Members, Constellation
    "The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."

    "As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch. It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action." Sen. Barack Obama, 2007.
  • UnderwhelmedUnderwhelmed DemoDetective #?&#33; Join Date: 2006-09-19 Member: 58026Posts: 756Members, Constellation
    This is going to be my only post in this thread, I just wanted to make a counterpoint to juice's stupid. Egypt did not have a regime change anymore than having Clinton impeached was a regime change for the US. Mubarak is gone but the military is still running the show. Egypt remains the US' ally. In fact, there are reports of Egypt supplying the Libyan rebels. In case you missed the news, the Arab league voted unanimously in favor of the No-Fly-Zone, but I guess they're a bunch of Western capitalist pigdogs as well. I wonder how juice is so sure the rebels are all religious fundamentalists, considering every reliable source I've read usually reports it's a broad coalition whose exact makeup is unknown. Libya was already letting Western companies extract oil and NATO isn't putting any troops on the ground, so the "HURR OIL" argument falls flat on its face. If we really just cared about the oil flowing, we'd just let Gaddafi win and go back to business as usual.

    I'm sure if we didn't intervene, the same people criticizing the action being taken now would be complaining about how we didn't do anything while Gaddafi slaughtered his own civilians later.
    QUOTE (SmoodCroozn)
    Don't bother posting, because it seems to me, you don't even know how the game works.

    THIS SIGNATURE IS IN VIOLATION OF COMMUNITY RULES
    image
  • juicejuice Join Date: 2003-01-28 Member: 12886Posts: 1,044Members, Constellation
    edited April 2011
    You completely failed to address the main point: the president's authority.

    So it doesn't surprise me that you have pre-emptively refused to actually participate in any discussion.

    Instead, you are content to call me stupid, make a "HURR WAR" argument that falls flat on its face, and then run away and hide. Typical for a chickenhawk.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • That_Annoying_KidThat_Annoying_Kid Sire of Titles Join Date: 2003-03-01 Member: 14175Posts: 5,579Members, Constellation
    who cares about the presidents authority?

    All this was done thru the UN at the behest of France and the neighboring countries were just a coalition of the willing... Arab league has also ran sorties, England has been chucking tomahawks as well.

    As mentioned in the first post, China and Russia worked behind scenes to have this gain momentum as well


    Besides, no troops on the ground and we've destroyed air defense, air force, along with the armor that was being used to crush rebels with lots of inadvertent casualties


    and preventing civilian deaths is why the world intervened


    besides the US should really be more concerned with stopping the poppies in Afghanistan but that is a whole other topic in and of itself
  • juicejuice Join Date: 2003-01-28 Member: 12886Posts: 1,044Members, Constellation
    QUOTE
    All this was done thru the UN at the behest of France...

    So the President can ignore Congress and act like a military dictator so long as some foreign countries say they don't mind?

    QUOTE
    who cares about the presidents authority?

    Well, Obama did, according to his own words as quoted above.

    But don't worry, you're in good company, because as the great philosopher Spears once said, "Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision he makes and should just support that, you know, and be faithful in what happens."
  • lolfighterlolfighter Snark, Dire Join Date: 2003-04-20 Member: 15693Posts: 9,006Members
    edited April 2011
    She said that about a different president though. You can't just go applying the same standards to different presidents, that's not how it works.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    Military cemeteries around the world are packed with brainwashed, dead soldiers who were convinced God was on their side.
    - George Carlin
  • SopsSops Join Date: 2003-07-03 Member: 17894Posts: 1,483Members, Constellation
    QUOTE (lolfighter @ Apr 4 2011, 12:04 AM) »
    She said that about a different president though. You can't just go applying the same standards to different presidents, that's not how it works.

    That would be like communism.
  • lolfighterlolfighter Snark, Dire Join Date: 2003-04-20 Member: 15693Posts: 9,006Members
    That's not communism at all. Communism is when you make not-poor people and corporations pay taxes.
    Military cemeteries around the world are packed with brainwashed, dead soldiers who were convinced God was on their side.
    - George Carlin
  • RobRob Unknown Enemy Join Date: 2002-01-24 Member: 25Posts: 2,604Members, NS1 Playtester
    All I know is in a generation or two when the USA is approximately 10^3 times more in debt than it is now and the Middle East and South America are finally out of oil, the USA will be sitting on all those reserves that we're refusing to drill right now. And then. THEN.
    -Rob
  • X_StickmanX_Stickman Not good enough for a custom title. Join Date: 2003-04-15 Member: 15533Posts: 3,567Members, Constellation
    This annoyed me a lot. The story has been rewritten a bit since I first read it (I can't link to the version I first read because that *is* the link, they're editing that page not making new ones), but the overall idea is that NATO has bombed some rebel tanks and is refusing to apologise for it because they weren't aware that the rebels *had* tanks, and they just assumed they were Gadaffi tanks that were targeting civilians.

    There is so much wrong with that entire thing that it really does annoy me a lot, but I guess the main issue I have is that NATO doesn't have enough intel on the situation to make proper calls on bombing runs. If you can accidentally bomb the wrong side because you just plain didn't know they're the wrong side, then maybe you shouldn't be carrying out bombing runs. But in addition to that, there's the fact that this is their god damn explanation for it; the lack of intel isn't the thing they're apologising for, it's the thing they're using to justify something else as if that makes it all cool. They just out and admit that they have no idea what's going on in Libya but they're bombing anyway. That is horrible.
    QUOTE(T h e m @ Apr 10 2005, 06:19 AM)
    Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, elbow to the face.

    "It had a very sinister appearance. It had a battery behind it, and wires."

    QUOTE(Monkfish @ Jun 30 2008, 03:25)
    I just got banned from a "Christian teamwork server" in BF2142 for knifing one of the server clan snipers and proclaiming "you just got darwin'd"
  • ThaldarinThaldarin Alonzi&#33; Join Date: 2003-07-15 Member: 18173Posts: 6,132Members, Constellation
    I read that link during the week Stickman, I think at one point it read "NATO not sorry for rebel deaths" or something similar.

    I was on the "must get oil for America" bandwagon at the beginning lolf, although yeah, America instigated the offense and NATO are spearheading the entire operation, which some may look at as a US way to cover up, after non-NATO and UN support made America look really bad in the Iraq insurgence. Although it's up to us to all believe what we believe.

    Underneath it all, I think it's phase 2 of modernising the Middle East and Africa. Phase 1 being Iraq. There's only so long people will live with medieval type law and society in an age where communication is globally available and reaching out to the poorer regions. Our society is by no means fair in the West, although it seems the people of the Middle East and Africa are starting to find out that it's fairer than their way of life, particularly the role of enabling choice in society.

    A lot of the African and Middle Eastern countries get a fairly large amount of aid from the West, I think from our perspective it's about time the investment gets to see a return, from my own perspective, the people of those countries in conflict are looking to do that, and by doing that they're also looking to inject freedom, choice and move forward in the nation they live in by putting their lives on the line to get out of restricted lives they currently have imposed on them.

    One thing that did make me laugh about the involvement of the USA and their initial laying down of a no-fly zone within Libya was one military source was quoted as saying "We wanted to put in place a no fly zone, but not with our planes." Maybe that shows the level of commitment the US is putting in to Libya, which is no where near as much effort as they put in to Iraq, if you're in to the oil conspiracy.

    blah blah blah
  • juicejuice Join Date: 2003-01-28 Member: 12886Posts: 1,044Members, Constellation
    edited April 2011
    As far as motive and "modernizing" the Middle East and Africa, I think you're right, that is sure to play a role. World events are typically not reducible to some unitary motive, be it: "liberating the oppressed", taking control of oil pipelines/fields, stifling an uppity central bank/currency policy, military contractor profiteering, or stopping Muslims from forming a Global Jihadist Caliphate (GJC) [tm] to take over the universe.

    In the real world, there are usually multiple motives that coincide which precipitate some action, right or wrong.

    However, it would be nice if our benevolent overlords let us participate in the discussion, as it's clear even those who agree with the actions don't believe it is simply for the purpose of saving lives.

    Then, once we knew the motives of our own government, we could have a fair and open debate in our free society. Maybe I would discover we are there to help them have a more free and transparent government as part of a broader campaign, and I could pat myself on the back for it. Although, in general, it's a good idea to lead by example rather than force freedom on people.

    But we just don't know exactly why we're there, despite the publicly stated goals.
    And that should concern you.

    .
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • SopsSops Join Date: 2003-07-03 Member: 17894Posts: 1,483Members, Constellation
    QUOTE (Thaldarin @ Apr 10 2011, 03:20 PM) »
    I was on the "must get oil for America" bandwagon at the beginning lolf, although yeah, America instigated the offense and NATO are spearheading the entire operation, which some may look at as a US way to cover up, after non-NATO and UN support made America look really bad in the Iraq insurgence. Although it's up to us to all believe what we believe.

    I like how you make it sound like England and other European countries had nothing to do with this.
  • ThaldarinThaldarin Alonzi&#33; Join Date: 2003-07-15 Member: 18173Posts: 6,132Members, Constellation
    France who are normally the most redundant military force of modern times, started the air strikes, iirc.

    My reply was simply just relating to lolfighter and the America/Oil conspiracy, which of course was the main theme around Iraq and last Middle Eastern intervention. It was not an anti-America stance.
    blah blah blah
  • lolfighterlolfighter Snark, Dire Join Date: 2003-04-20 Member: 15693Posts: 9,006Members
    It's a detail, but one I'd like to clarify: I didn't specifically mention the U.S., if this is about oil then it's about corporations, not countries. The reason why the U.S. and the oil companies are usually mentioned in one breath is because the U.S. government is one of the most influenced by oil companies AND one of the most powerful. No more influenced than the russian government perhaps, but with more military clout.

    But I don't know if this is about oil, really. That was just my first impulse, but it could be anything. The only thing I'm sure of is that I don't believe the fairytale about "exporting freedom and democracy." It's a touching story, but in light of the past western attitude to tyranny and oppression in other countries (indifference at best, support at worst), an utterly implausible one.

    Hell, look up Operation TPAJAX. THAT is what our governments do when they meddle in the affairs of foreign nations.
    Military cemeteries around the world are packed with brainwashed, dead soldiers who were convinced God was on their side.
    - George Carlin
  • RobRob Unknown Enemy Join Date: 2002-01-24 Member: 25Posts: 2,604Members, NS1 Playtester
    edited April 2011
    Well, it might be enough to get the U.S. involved just for the prospect of nurturing a new middle class that might finance more of our debt. I hear China is getting a little wary of us. ^_^
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    -Rob
  • That_Annoying_KidThat_Annoying_Kid Sire of Titles Join Date: 2003-03-01 Member: 14175Posts: 5,579Members, Constellation
    China can be wary all they want


    when the real estate bubble pops in China, it's going to make what went down in the US recently look like a walk in the park.

    I recall an article where some world bank was stress testing China and saying it was bound to happen, but that is another topic....
  • ThaldarinThaldarin Alonzi&#33; Join Date: 2003-07-15 Member: 18173Posts: 6,132Members, Constellation
    China is bound to happen because it's taken on Western models and applied them to a less affluent demographic. So yes, it's going to happen, yes it's going to be big, but it will be rather enclosed only to whom of which have DIRECT dealings with China; as opposed to the multi-level problem America and the rest of the world have seen.

    As off topic as I'll take that for now =]
    blah blah blah
Sign In or Register to comment.