mrtheedge2u2

Maybe I am wrong, but Libya was mostly France. The UK had little (if any) physical presence in that one.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

The Libyan campaign was championed by both Cameron and Sarkozy. It was Cameron who came up with the no-fly zone and the 'notion' of protecting civilians which formed the basis of the UN resolution.

It was also Cameron that supported the 'removal' of Gadaffi as part of the resolution!

UK fire power was heavily involved initially from UK bases and latterly from bases in Italy!

Once again all involved never seemed to wonder what might happen if Gadaffi wasn't there, but I think they have their answer now!

mrtheedge2u2

You learn something new every day. You can never have democracy in these places. They know this. My personal opinion is we should stay out of all these places and let them succeed or implode on their own free will.

JTaylor

Define "these places", please.

mrtheedge2u2

The countries that are religiously labelled as "in need or foreign military assistance" e.g. Libya, Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq etc. Obviously they will not let them decide their own fate as they are too close to oil.

If the US/UK want to help then great....but do not do it through military or covert operations.

neil-h

Problem is they (by which I mean the UN etc) couldn't win. The human rights argument said we should be supporting the rebels as they were massively outgunned and Gadaffi was killing thousands of people both rebels and innocents. Our actions ultimately expedited the process to the point we're at now, i.e. the rebels overthrow Gadaffi etc.

If they'd left them to it, I can only see 2 possible outcomes. Either the rebels succeed and we end up in a similar situation to where we are now, just we're culpable for something else (the deaths of thousands of innocents as we stood by and watched). Or the civil war continued indefinitely in a similar fashion to the conflict in Syria.

Ultimately neither outcome is particularly palatable.



This should be interesting, where's the popcorn?

mrtheedge2u2

A Turkish girl I worked with said years ago that they should never of got rid of Hussein. She always stated it is about "maintaining a balance" and that a world of nice guys can never exist. I know Hussein killed a lot of people, but a damn site more have died in the short years since his demise. Same in Libya regarding Khadaffi

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

Agreed, but will the US be accepting any?

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Libya was a complete mirror of Iraq. We should have learned by now that sometimes the lesser of the two evils maybe the best we can hope for.

There is also a certain arrogance to the West in that 'we' automatically assume our way is the best way and that every other country in the world must be deep down inside aspiring to be like us. Take a look around the West and I'm not so sure we do have all the answers.

mrtheedge2u2

Some places cannot be run with democracy. Some need a heavy hand (for right or wrong)

jonc

The majority of the migrants at Calais are from East African nations such as Somalia, Eritrea and Sudan rather than the countries the UK have used military force.

mrtheedge2u2

which then supports the belief they are choosing the UK for finacial reasons and certainly not safety reasons.

dpb

And Afghanistan ...!

jonc

Not necessarily, look at what is happening in Syria. The West stand by having "learnt" from the Libya's "liberation", millions displaced, hundreds of thousands killed and continue to be killed by conventional and chemical means, human rights violations, rise of ISIS etc. There is no lesser of two evils. One thing we have learn is that conflicts and non-intervention have unpredictable consequences.

neil-h

And yet you still go on and on about politicians.

Agreed, to a certain extent countries need to be allowed to find their own way in the world. There certainly isn't a one fits all model for how to run a country.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Er... ISIS would probably not be what they are or certainly where they are if Saddam Hussein were still in control of Iraq.

Anyway as I said there is also a certain arrogance to the West etc., an arrogance that people like you exhibit a shining example of!

JTaylor

Yes, I think I've reached a similar conclusion. I'm on record as being pro liberal intervention, but as events have unravelled and history made, I've moved far away from that position. Liberal democracy in 'these places' appears to have been a pipe-dream. It seems that where there's a threat of sectarian violence, there needs to be an authoritarian leadership. It's very depressing for the people on the wrong side of that authority and for the young, educated middle classes in these countries; those who've seen the promised land. Sadly for them, the status quo is least bad and so it will remain until the Islamic reformation (should that ever occur). This leaves the rest of the world having to do business with tyrants and the absurd, mightily hypocritical, but ultimately plausible notion that we'd rather be partners with the likes of the Hussain crime family than witness murderous Islamists rip through hope.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Touche

Yes it needs some balance in terms of how certain countries involve themselves with other countries, a balance we have seemed unable to get anywhere near right in the last 25 years!

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Sadly James I think that is about the best we can hope for!

dpb

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct...96782255,d.ZGU


Shirking responsibilities again

Dirk Diggler 75

This ^^

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

http://api.viglink.com/api/click?for...782255%2Cd.ZGU


In what wayis anyone shirking respoinsibilities? Why should any state HAVE to take them? Why should they have the right to go anywhere? I haven't.

jonc

Yes the arrogance and, to add, your ignorance for which you can thank your leader you voted for for that!

Dirk Diggler 75

Cameron is in talks trying to get the UK a better deal in Europe,will he prevail? who knows?

jonc

Do you not move freely between the UK and France?

jonc

Forget getting a "better deal", Cameron will never be able to get agreement from all the member states for whatever negotiation he has in mind. The EU situation seems to be in a downward spiral, the whole thing either needs a complete reform/overhaul or the UK needs to leave the EU.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Here we go again

jonc

Well if your first response to me is yet another unprovoked snidey remark directed at me, you can expect the same back. So yes, it is "here we go again" start by you yet again, and I think people here are sick of it. So my advice to you is do try and stay on topic and refrain from anymore snidey personal attacks.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Er... I was actually referring to this belief you seem to have that somehow by voting for Blair in 1997 I condoned the Iraq war. I think, like a lot of people, I was utterly abhorred by what went on and to have someone like you poke jibes at me repeatedly hinting I somehow support it makes me despise you all the more! That's what I meant by here we go again!

As for you you do condone right of centre Capitalist and Western values with just about every espousal on any thread touching upon the subject so my statement that you share the West's arrogance stands as observed opinion rather than anything snidy (note the spelling please).

Now get back in your box and shut your fat uneducated illiterate gob for once!

jonc

The West's arrogance is match and often exceeded by your own with many of your "observed opinions", I've only said that you condone the Iraq war in your delusional mind. You can bitch all you like but, whether you like it or not, ultimately people like you helped put your leader in office who kicked off this whole mess in the first place and dragged this nation down this path and that is fact. People like you put Blair in office and you and the rest of the country are reaping what people like you sowed. So like I said, stay on topic and refrain from anymore snidey personal attacks (which is what I meant with "her we go again).