No reason not to be civilised about the whole business!

Les

 

If the cruise missiles are from brit and frenchie air platforms they will be Stormshadows not tomahawks

 

What about our sub though?

 

Our subs do use tomahawks.

 

.
Why get involved in Libya and not the rest of the conflicts around the world though Tony

 

Should we not intervene?

 

From this I deduce that not just your memory but also your comprehension is on the wane or that you're being deliberately dishonest and misleading; which is it to be? Because what Mark wrote was....

Now either get some support for your declining faculties, f1, or stop being dishonest. Either way, stop gurning.

 

OK, so the UN have declared a no-fly zone and we, and others, are to enforce it. The US has laready fired cruise missiles at Colonel Gaddafi's forces.

Why?

Why are we and the UN being seen to support the rebels? Why aren't we helping Gaddafi, who is their leader, to retain power?

If I can get enough people behind me, can I expect the UN and the USA to come in and help me depose OUR government?

 

Because the UN passed a resolution to protect Libyan people from attack.

We are not supporting the rebels per se. The UN resolution also called for an arms embargo.

You have a vote. The Libyan people don't.

 

And why couldn't you post on the seven page Libya thread 4 titles down?

 

I'm sorry but can someone clarify something for me ?

Who are the opposition in Libiya, how many people were there out of the whole population and why did why they want to change the regime ?

Why did the west straight away took sides with the opposition and not Kadafi ?

Why after accusing Kadafi of murdering a few hundred protesters as the breaking point for the relationship between Libiya and the world, the west is now bombing Libiya which usually kills thousands by friendly fire alone ?

 

Would you like to be run by Gadaffi?

 

While we've got the UN gang together focussed on N Africa, couldn't we just brim the fuel tanks and do a few sorties down to the Ivory Coast and do a BOGOF on dictator elimination?

 

Because I couln't be arsed to wade through seven pages to find the ansdwer to my question

Any obs?

 

Tony: but will the US fire at the rebels too?

It just seems that we are picking sides...........

 

A good point and they can't really send troops in like Saudi helping Bahrain as that is against the Resolution.

And I don't think the politicians do themselves any favours by saying they are not seeking "Regime Change" as the whole world knows that is exacly what they want. I suppose it's a throwback to the row about getting rid of Saddam.

dl

 

.
Why Libya and not all the other conflicts around the world Tony

 

The Arab league ? You mean the Iraq ( policed by US ), Egypt ( recently overturned ) and Saudi's ( US partners and biggest oil supplier since the ancient times ), i wonder what do they want..

 

I thought you were taking the **** with your post. But clearly not and that is worrying.

Does your logic lead you to conclude that we let that nice Mr Mugabe down as a leader of a nation that were clearly unhappy - the one's that stayed alive or avoided torture or a dash of starvation that is?

dl

 

Should we not intervene.

Just because we don't intervene in all conflicts does not mean we should not intervene in some.

 

This may seem simplistic but why cannot the Arab League of Nations enforce a no fly zone.

For a start Libya is a member and surely they should abide by what the league votes on and secondly the Arab League of Nations has the Aircraft, missile systems and the infrastructure in place to police this themselves (sold to them by the west including the UK and US) so why do they not do so + some of the league border Libya so easy to enforce?

I do not get it why us, why the UK yet again when the Arab League, instead of asking should have just got on with it with the backing of the UN, not the other way around...

 

Iraq, Egypt and the Saudis are not the sum total of the Arab league.

Besides did the Egyptians not just kick out their pro-US president???

I love the way now that the usual anti-west/leftist types are now all pro-Gadaffi?!

So here's your chance to defend Gadaffi. Go for it!

 

Sorted by the mods, now get reading.

 

Déjà Vu. The Russians and the Chinese veto'd punitive measures and, perhaps to appease the 'but it's illegal' crowd, the UK, France and the US honoured the outcome. So, on Iraq we were wrong because it was illegal and we took unilateral action and on Mugabe we were wrong because we didn't take unilateral action and on Libya we're wrong because we didn't take unilateral action against Robert Mugabe. Either acknowledge that this is an illogical position or explain why isn't but, please, please, don't keep posting the same circular, ill-considered proposition time and time again.

 

I dont have to defend anyone as it's more than pointless. The west will get what it wants by any means necessary.

 

The west isn't omnipotent. Look how Iraq turned out.

 

We are picking sides.

 

Not explicitly.

 

Oh and you know exactly what they want from Iraq and were planning for it, do you ? I'm not saying i do, but regional instability doesnt always mean its going bad, as there are so many factors involved.