JTaylor

I agree, I just think we're missing a credible 'how'.

JTaylor

What are peoples' best guesses on this?

DCI Gene Hunt

"Guessing" is a dangerous pastime, when the fact is no one actually knows.

JTaylor

Turn of phrase, DCI. Western intelligence has a pretty good idea who's who, right? What do you speculate?

Leslie

I am sure you have twigged Paul that he just asks questions designed to give him the opportunity to ask even more questions should you give him an answer.

Not worth the candle really!

Les

The Zohan

Hi Les, yes it gets a little tedious.

I am pretty sure (i read) You have experience of operating in the ME albeit a while back but i am sure there where pilots and navigators for middle Eastern countries who trained with you or even by you or your mates.
It does seem as if a some people dismiss or underestimate their abilities given the opposition is at a similar level of technology and training so a pretty even pitch.

DCI Gene Hunt

I speculate that I'm amazed that people still jump blindly on the pro-insurgent bandwagon when they know nothing about them, their motives or intentions, that's massively naive in my book.

JTaylor

I appreciate you may see it like that, Les, but actually I'm interested in how people arrive at their conclusions. If somebody states the answer is 4 and I ask how they've arrived at that, they may say that they added 2 and 3 which would make 4 erroneous. If somebody says 2 plus 2 equals 4, i.e. it adds up, I understand, see their logic and don't ask any other questions. The dialectic, nothing more. Apologies for going off topic.

JTaylor

By being involved in the transition we can influence the outcome. The alternative was do nothing. Gadaffi talked of 'bearded men', in other words, if you stop me from murdering my people, the I*******s will fill the vacuum. What are we to do when there's also a strong pro-democracy movement building? We get behind them.

The Zohan

You can only influence the outcome if you are credible (seem to be using that word a lot today) and trusted or you end up with another Iraq/Korea/Vietnam/Afghanistan, etc.

Otherwise the 'influence' is really bullying and the ongoing threat of violence is purely down to you having the biggest stick and you have to keep beating the other guys just to remind them - Iraq for example.

Supporting, not leading the ALN is a much better option and may well lead to some real influence surely...

JTaylor

I'm still interested in the 'how' with regards your last statement, Paul. Long-term it's clearly the goal and I've agreed as much.

The Zohan

How many more times - Credibility, credibility, credibility!

There are many different agendas in the ME and we seem oblivious to them and those who want to attack the west and use anything they can to drive up resentment and hatred towards the west. The hatred and resentment could easily lead to another 911 or 7/7 or event much worse as the bodies mount up in Libya with the west in the driving seat - the buck stops here.

Sanctioned and led by the ALN is a better option - IMHO

Look i am not sure what your agenda actually is nor really much care for that matter This is going round in circles and i have made my stance clear, I have done my utmost to put my POV across and answer any comebacks, unlike some who just pick and choose (and if the shoe fits then wear it with pride).

Ultimately this is all bollox and as if anything anyone says here will make any difference.

Iraq part deux or some other outcome...Only time will tell...

tony de wonderful

Really? What has Libya got to do with a few disaffected British guys of Pakistani origin??

JTaylor

No agenda, Paul, just a strong conviction that our course of action in Libya is the correct one, and that the alternatives fall down under scrutiny. Thanks for the chat, it's been interesting.

DCI Gene Hunt

What makes you think that the West has influence? that's a massive assumption without basis of fact. You also have a view that there were only two options available... air intervention against Gadaffi or nothing.

Where is your evidence that the insurgents are actually pro-democracy? I've yet to see any evidence that they're actually a democracy at all.

tony de wonderful

So you would only save the lives of civilians if they are democrats?

The Zohan

You really need someone to answer that for you - i gave you a little more credit that that, will not make the same mistake again. I typed this slowly so you can hopefully keep up

What they have in common is RELIGION - Start killing or by your actions allow the killing of Muslims and see the easily led martyrs you then create come back to seek revenge on you and yours, happy in the belief they are doing it for their God and knowing they will go to a better place and their families will be looked after for life. Right or wrong and taking Koran out of context 911, Bali, 7/7 Madrid train bombings and many other acts committed by fellow Muslims on behalf of fellow Muslims believing their god would approve to make it all right to commit these crimes, that and there are always evil men who will do this for fun in the name of religion.

enough of this, it is getting real tiresome now

DCI Gene Hunt

Clearly what I'm saying (even for the hard of thinking) is that the UN should be an even handed coalition - not support an insurgency because it has the same tactical objectives as the UN. Do you understand that concept or would you prefer me to draw you a nice picture

tony de wonderful

Sure but you are taking this idea of muslim solidarity at face value and not thinking critically about it. Muslims were being killed by Gadaffi yet the response from much of the Muslim world was muted, similarly the insurgents in Iraq killed Muslims deliberately yet the death of a muslim accidentally by coalition forces is met with outrage and calls for Terrorist attacks in Britian.

Clearly this idea of muslim solidarity or special 'caring' about the suffering/death of muslims is dependent upon the political situation and nothing then to do with a kind of humanism or whatever you want to call it.

Could it be that local muslims are exploiting overseas issues to leverage their own local political agendas? Now you start thinking.

And if you want to talk about interfering then why should Arabs be say interfering in the Balkans as 'muslim fighters', or Arabs in Chechnya or British Pakistani muslims interfering in the affairs of Iraq??

The Zohan

And surly you cannot be that naive, no actually i take that back given you current form. Christians/westerners killing Muslims trumps Muslims Killing Muslims everyday of the week!

Really, i am done, this really is beyond pointless!

tony de wonderful

It does trump it but no it's not a given. Like I said you are not thinking critically just assuming certain things are they way they are because they are!

Does it even make sense from a moral POV for it to be seen as worse for western forces to accidentally kill muslims than for muslims to deliberately kill muslims?

You don't realise it but you are being a useful idiot to the Islamist supporting their narrative that it is the west/christianity vs Islam and that everything should be seen through that lense, reducing everything to this thesis.

There is no logical reason to define a country by the majority religion of it's populace, or to define the Iraq invasion as being about religion or even to discuss religion! Religion is a personal choice, not political necessarily.

JTaylor

Keep it civilised fellas, please.

DCI Gene Hunt

It's never been about Islam, that's the fundamental point you've been missing since this debate (I'm being kind) first started - It's always been about the oil. Religion was just an obstacle, that is all.

Enjoy dragging this pointless thread onwards

Luan Pra bang

I actually agree that an ideal solution would have been Arab nations helping people to ditch dictators like gadaffi and the other evil c*unts we decided to get friendly with.
Saudi while sending tanks to Bahrain to stop any chance of genuine democracy was never going to get involved directly.

JTaylor

I said "by being involved in the transition we can influence the outcome." We're forging relationships, we've saved lives and we're supporting a popular uprising. Our influence is significantly greater in that country than it would have been had we simply condemned Gadaffi's 'no mercy' policy and then did nothing.

And I base that on how quickly Gadaffi moved towards Benghazi. What were the alternatives? Jam his TV station, use special forces to arm and train the rebels, finance and equip them? Yes. But this would have taken time, and we didn't have time. We do these things, but alongside the no fly-zone.

The evidence is anecdotal and rhetorical, granted. What hard evidence can be presented to prove an idea? Only history can do that. The alternative to not trusting democracy to win-out in the region, is to do business with tyrants forever. Change will come eventually, why not now?

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Totally agree, but some people have their pet subjects.

As for Libya the coalition have no real idea of what the current objectives are, how they will know when they are met or what happens next. There is no 'leader of the opposition' or indeed any structure to the 'rebels' whatsoever.

IMO and from what I see and read it will likely turn into another variant on Iraq and Afghanistan and won't be long before the dissent of other nations both Arab and non-Arab really starts and then we are just deeper in the **** with a conflict we just cannot afford anyway.

As Paul and others have said why us? Why the UK? Why the West? There is not one credible reason on this thread as to why it should be so other than some frankly 'do gooder' humanitarian crap that no one is really convinced by as if that were the case we would have been in Zimbabwe, for instance, long ago.

DCI Gene Hunt

Iraq anyone?

Let's agree that we're hoping that someone within their insurgency will actually listen to us once this is all over, probably highly unlikely - but we live in hope.

That's why this topic is pointless, you're (as am I) not a strategist so it's a case of you putting your limited views forward as "this is all we can do". Where in reality there are many, many more options that could've been used. For example you could have still held the UN no-fly zone but applied the same consequences to both sides of this revolt, ultimately protecting all civilians regardless of sides.

Evidence exists already to show that this approach has never worked, as you rightly say "history" so why do we not apply this learning?

AsifScoob

What was deleted? Must have been bad to have been deleted off this thread! Please let me know so I can measure any insults accordingly.

Those Chuckle Brothers definitely need to get out more. 'Twas a lovely sunny day today, went to Richmond Upon Thames and sat by the river, having an ice cream with my daughter while the Wife went for a massage at one of those posh spa places.

So, what's the latest with Libya then? Have we won yet?

Asif

andythejock01wrx

Evening Asif,

So tell us more about that massage.........

Andy

PS - I think it's a draw!

AsifScoob

Hi Andy,

How's it going? Long time and all that.

The wife received a gift from one of her customers, full hour massage at 'The Organic Pharmacy' (??) One of those pampering places for Burrds, as you would say.

Anyway, nearest one is in Richmond, so a good excuse to go down by the river there. All the beautiful people are out there (except me of course!) I was just leering at the young dolly birds going past through my shades, while the daughter was slurping her ice cream.

She even asked me, (she's three) "Daddy, why are you looking around at the people?" I felt busted!!

Anyway back to Libya, we're on to a loser I reckon.

Asif