Jump to content

U.S. launches airstrikes on Libya


bmags

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 876
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Apr 21, 2011 -> 04:49 PM)
Who cares what people think, people have been on the wrong side of many things.

 

All that matters is what YOU think.

 

If you dont think the US should try and stop Gaddafi from killing people in Libya, you wont support the US involvement. If you do think the US should try and stop Gaddafi, youll support it.

 

I dont care if Im the only American in the world who supports it, its not about what other people think.

 

 

Quite arrogant, to put it mildly.

 

I seem to recall a hell of a lot of people who were at least as pissy about some excercise in Iraq. And, hmmm, the target seems to keep moving about Iraq/AfPak (thanks, Balta)/Libya, etc...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kap,

 

Im pretty sure that Bush or any other world leader worth his salt would feel the same way as me. The only reason they pretend to care is that they have to get reelected. Im on a message board, I dont have to care about whether or not I pander to the people in my statements.

 

All that matters is the opinions of the people in this thread, not the opinions of people that I have no clue about.

 

 

Balta,

 

The sooner you stop comparing the effectiveness of weaponry on completely different battle fields, the better. That is not to say drone attacks will work, but its pretty pointless to assume they will automatically fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Apr 23, 2011 -> 02:00 PM)
Balta,

 

The sooner you stop comparing the effectiveness of weaponry on completely different battle fields, the better. That is not to say drone attacks will work, but its pretty pointless to assume they will automatically fail.

But it is very, very easy to conclude, based on the fact that they have caused high numbers of civilian casualties when used in urban areas in Afpak, that if they're used in urban areas here, we will see the same result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

War has changed. Today's urban warfare will result in increased civilian casualties and, sadly, our acceptance of them. In a world where young children and pregnant women strap on bombs and board buses, it seems that anything goes. In 1775 the US won our independence by changing warfare, we started shooting at commanders. The British were mortified that we would use sharpshooters to take out their leaders. Now everyone on a battlefield is fair game. Again, in the Revolutionary War US employed snipers hiding in trees, again, it totally was against all acceptable rules of war at that time. Proper rules of war called for you to come out of the woods and fight in formation.

 

In the Civil War, instead of the armies producing everything they needed, civilians were employed in factories building weapons and ammunitions. Union forces destroyed a broad swath of the south in what became Sherman's March to the Sea, thus eliminating the Confederacy's ability to feed its citizens and support a war effort. Again, the US changed the rules of war.

 

Of course I am not saying this is right, just passing on my opinion as to where modern warfare is going. I pray I am wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Just read a report(rumor???) via Reuters, that Gaddhafi is no longer in Tripoli and has most likely been wounded Italian Foreign Minister Frttini said on fRanco Friday. Fratini told reporters in Tuscany that he believed what he had been told by Giovanni Innocenzo Martinelli, the Catholic Bishopin Tripoli, that "Gahhafi was most probably even wounded" by Nato airstrikes.

 

 

Unable to link so just poste verbatim what I read.

 

 

Watch oil to see any reaction. Should be negative for oil. ight now crude down .95 at 98.02.

Edited by Cknolls
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, as of the end of this week, we'll get to celebrate 2 months of successful humanitarian bombing of Libya, and I'll officially get to say that this is an illegal war.

This week, the War Powers Act confronts its moment of truth. Friday will mark the 60th day since President Obama told Congress of his Libyan campaign. According to the act, that declaration started a 60-day clock: If Obama fails to obtain congressional support for his decision within this time limit, he has only one option — end American involvement within the following 30 days.

 

Obama has not only failed but he hasn’t even tried — leaving it to Sen. Richard Lugar, the ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, to call for a “specific resolution that would give [the president] authority.” Neither the president nor the Democratic congressional leadership has shown any interest. They have been sleep-walking their way to Day 60.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 18, 2011 -> 01:56 PM)
All while voting for Obama again...

I don't think anyone who ever voted for McCain or Bush has a right to lecture anyone about candidates supporting illegal wars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh ****, now I have to agree with Rand Paul.

 

On the bright side, this might actually put the War Powers Act in court. That's constitutionally fascinating.

Angry lawmakers in both parties say part of the problem now is that their own congressional leaders are not raising a stink about Obama's failure to come to Congress about Libya.

 

"Very few people are talking about this; they're just letting the president do whatever he wants, and I think that's Congress abdicating the rule of law and abdicating constitutional restraints that he should obey," Paul said.

 

Paul and five of his GOP Senate colleagues are thinking about taking this to the Supreme Court, which has never formally ruled on the constitutionality of the War Powers Act.

 

A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid suggested no urgency to force the president to comply with the War Powers Act when it comes to Libya.

 

"The administration has done a good job of keeping Congress informed about operations in Libya. U.S. operations appear to be limited and intermittent, but we are examining whether further Senate action is needed," said Jon Summers, Reid's spokesman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 20, 2011 -> 02:33 PM)
Oh ****, now I have to agree with Rand Paul.

 

On the bright side, this might actually put the War Powers Act in court. That's constitutionally fascinating.

I agree as well, I'd like to see this played out. I actually am not vehemently against the Libya thing, but I do think we need to clarify and harden some of these executive rules on warfare a bit.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BEIRUT -- Syrian security forces opened fire on a funeral procession for slain anti-government protesters Saturday, pushing the number of people reported killed in a two-month uprising to more than 900 and making it one of the deadliest of the Arab Spring.

 

The latest bloodshed suggests that crackdowns by President Bashar Assad's regime show no signs of easing despite international sanctions and condemnations from the U.S. and its allies.

 

Excluding Libya – where battles between Moammar Gadhafi's forces and his opponents have left possibly thousands dead since February – Syria's death toll is now higher than any country that has been gripped by uprisings.

 

via

 

Where are the UN air assaults? Why doesn't the US care about the people of Syria? How can we let innocent civilians die like that? Up to a million people can die here without us doing much about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ May 22, 2011 -> 08:13 AM)
via

 

Where are the UN air assaults? Why doesn't the US care about the people of Syria? How can we let innocent civilians die like that? Up to a million people can die here without us doing much about it.

 

The important thing is that they aren't American's so who cares.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...