You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
[i]The UN Security Council has backed a no-fly zone over Libya and "all necessary measures" short of an invasion "to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas".[/i] (BBC website)
I'm not against so therefore I must be for. I just hope British and French forces use the mandate wisely.
The UN? The most useless and reactionary organisation in the world! Great idea on paper - hopeless in the real world.
Oh yes the no fly zone. Well I'm for it, as long as we enforce it....
Against it
Only about tn days too late though. They take there time to get going.
I see another behind enemy lines looming.
Against it unless we start taking action in other parts of the world where there are far worse leaders, things going on.
Don't forget this is basically a declaration of war.
against
its clearly not just about shooting planes out of the sky it seems justification for anything short of a ground war so that means bombing airports infrastructure etc
and it was pushed for by France who sold daffi his planes Germany who sold him guns and Britain who also sold him guns and who laughably don't even have an aircraft carrier and are sacking raf pilots at the moment
intact Cameron only just got back from his tour of the middle east with his merchants of death (and even stopped off in Egypt to praise the demonstrators there ) hypocrisy doesn't get much more blatant
For it in principle, however this has vast reaching consequences in the long term for the middle east, especially if other countries start going in the same direction. Where do you stop? How do you differentiate?
Simpler method would be to just send Jason Bourne in with a sniper rifle.
it was pushed for by France who sold daffi his planes Germany who sold him guns
From the beeb:-
Germany, which abstained, will not be contributing to the military effort. Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said his government sees "considerable dangers and risks" in military action against Col Gaddafi.
Be interesting to see what planes UK commit to this and what its going to do for the airframe life. You'll be needing those harriers back soon.
fair point on Germany looks like they have a lot of investment there [url=www.blackstarnews.com/news/135/ARTICLE/7167/2011-03-07.html]www.blackstarnews.com/news/135/ARTICLE/7167/2011-03-07.html[/url]
Its too late, looks like Gadafi has already taken the upper hand. I also suspect that Gadafi is getting support from Bahrain and Saudi now, if Gadafi gets overthrown, then it strengthens the protesters in their countries (which are equally as bad as Libya).
Surely true democracy can only happen if it happens from within, and not imposed from without.
I'm against starting another war at a time when we cannot properly care for our old and infirm.
Leave this to the Libyans and their neighbours.
Pointless now, it's too late. It will still be a few days before military action could be taken to enforce it and by then it will pretty much be over.
Great Britain World Police...
Why can't we sit this one out? are our armed forces not stretched enough as it is?
Not against it per se, unsure how effective it will actually be.
Well said Epicyclo.
We should decide whether he is a friend or a foe,it would seem we were courting him and his oil just a few months ago.
Tricky one isn't it - Western countries must be wary of setting a precedent as protestors in other countries may take this as a guarantee of western intervention in their own struggles, which won't happen.
too late? probably not, wars are won from the air, and since this resolution allows pretty much anything short of invasion, the west will make sure that gadaffi goes one way or the other.
What worries me is that Libya talk of talking the fight abroad. Lets not forget what this means. it won't be military action. Libya have a bit of form on making planes blow up.
Worrying times.
Something needs to be done but is this the right thing?
The can of worms this action could open is pretty hefty....
Well they are dammed if they do and dammed if they dont.
No one wants to see civilians killed by a tyrant, but no one wants to get involved.
This does seem a compromise that wont achive much. If it was me, Id invade it and colonise it and sell the oil to pay for it. Or I would ignor it and claim its not my problem - its not that easy to decide.
Where next - Bahrain ?
LHS - MemberBe interesting to see what planes UK commit to this and what its going to do for the airframe life. You'll be needing those harriers back soon.
Air defence variant was scrapped in 2006.
We might have a few up-armoured Chipmunks available.
Tornado GR4s
Air defence variant was scrapped in 2006.
Not sure that's really valid, a lot of money was spent on the harrier fleet to equip them with state of the art surveillance and designator pods for identifying targets etc. In fact tactically they were the most versatile aircraft out there for surveillance, ground attack and air defence.
Air [s]defence[/s] display variant. Corrected for you!
Maybe we could raid the museums too, do Avis rent F16s?
Stopping the use of planes against helpless civilian targets seems like a good idea. Looking forward to seeing one imposed over Gaza.
Anyone who thinks it will take days to act should think 45 minutes because unlike Saddam, France really can deploy weapons of mass destruction in 45 minutes from the base in Corsica.
I just hope the threat will be enough. Even if Sarkozy isn't bluffing he's hoping Gaddafi will act in character and back off rather than risk losing the power base he still has. Gaddafi knows that on a personal level escalation is now suicide for him and his family.
For - provided Arab League league countries join in in a significant way.
Britain readies it's contribution
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
DrJ - Member
Stopping the use of planes against helpless civilian targets seems like a good idea. Looking forward to seeing one imposed over Gaza.
Why? That would give the impression that the UN uses humanitarian principles and not the interests the security council to decide where and when to deploy troops.That would be a very dangerous precedent
Markie - MemberFor - provided Arab League league countries join in in a significant way.
The Arab league won't to get involved, they are too worried about protecting their own tyrannies, and would prefer the wave of uprising to come to a grinding halt in Libya.
Against......we will become the bad guys.
I'm amazed they have taken so long. You can't allow a leader to kill their own people. You have to smack them down to send a message to all the other despotic regimes out there.
Ridiculous.
We have no business interfering in the internal affairs of another country. It will all end in tears
Against
CaptJon - MemberI'm amazed they have taken so long. You can't allow a leader to kill their own people. You have to smack them down to send a message to all the other despotic regimes out there.
No-fly zones over Chechnya and Tibet coming never!
Ridiculous.We have no business interfering in the internal affairs of another country. It will all end in tears
Against
I'll bet if the RAF was shelling Edinburgh you'd change your mind on that.
I'm not sure sure we will be seen as the bad boys. Defending people that want to be defended is not the same as invading people that don't want to be invaded.
Saudi won't budge, it's just one big American base with a few oil rigs.
We have no business interfering in the internal affairs of another country
Must be really nice for you living in that cosy little bubble.
Chechnya, tibet, gaza city - where is the no fly zones?
LHS - how do you justify interfering in Libya but not in the other countries mentioned?
The Arab league won't to get involved, they are too worried about protecting their own tyrannies, and would prefer the wave of uprising to come to a grinding halt in Libya.
I agree - although there is talk in the papers (well, in the Guardian) about unnamed Arab League countries taking part... I guess countries like Saudi know that should they have the need to apply a little military pressure to their own citizens there is no chance of the world taking against them - the US would veto any such proposals. Gaddafi had started cosying up with the west and in doing so failed to maintain his links with Russia, hence he was left to swing.
Against......we will become the bad guys.
Without the Arab League help, a certainty. Even with it, possible 🙁
That said, how would Gaddafi have responded to the West once he had regained power?
how do you justify interfering in Libya but not in the other countries mentioned?
Why do we have to? Becasue YOU say so? Don't make me laugh!
Chechnya, tibet, gaza city - where are the reports of bombing civilian populations?
http://gizmodo.com/#!5768340/two-libyan-pilots-eject-after-refusing-to-bomb-civilians
LHS - how do you justify interfering in Libya but not in the other countries mentioned?
As far as I am aware the other countries aren't bombing their own people with war planes.
yes PP why should you have a universal moral principle you apply to all situations . .. fluid morality is a much better choice
Why not try and explain why this ok eh?
Why do we have to?
Depends on the question. If the charge is that the UN did nothing to help the Libyan people, then you're right. If the charge is that the UN is a bunch of self-serving hypocrites, then they do.
yes PP why should you have a universal moral principle you apply to all situations . .. fluid morality is a much better choice
Why not try and explain why this ok eh?
Becasue it's not my choice. I don't have to explain, I'm just asking questions.
Gaza and Chechnya both have done in the past - not so sure about Tibet.
Tibet however we see an illegal occupation of a sovereign state by another country
how do you justify interfering in Libya but not in the other countries mentioned?
It depends what this conversation is actually about.
Should the world community take an active role in the prevention of Gaddafi murdering his own citizens? I would say a definite yes.
Should the world community take an active role to protect civilians of any nation against state-led agression whether or not its the state against its own civilians or others? I would say a definite yes.
Is the UN capable and willing to accept the mandate? No
So those in support of intervention, would have no problem with another country supporting an uprising in the UK?
Like if some people in Northern Ireland decided that taking on the government with weapons was ok and say for example, Libya was to fund it.
That would be ok?
would have no problem with another country supporting an uprising in the UK?
Depends if I was winning or not......
(Good point though)
I don't get this bombing his own people bit, we can bomb libyans to knock out the air defences ...... and thats ok. I'm not a gaddafi supporter far from it, help the people fighting a dictator give them arms etc, but don't bomb their country.
So those in support of intervention, would have no problem with another country supporting an uprising in the UK?
If CallmeDave turned into an evil dictator and he decided to use Tornados to bomb the good people of Liverpool because they were protesting against the government I would like someone to step in I think yes.
epicyclo - MemberLike if some people in Northern Ireland decided that the use of terrorism was ok and say for example, Libya was to fund it.
Which actually happened, of course.
So did our great pals in the US...before they got a taste of the rough stuff on their home turf, obviously.
So those in support of intervention, would have no problem with another country supporting an uprising in the UK?
again this is a different question
the UN's integrity has been massively undermined by UK/US etc involvement in the Libyan situation.
TJ:
Gaza: who is going to impose a no-fly zone over an area controlled by the 51st American state?
Tibet: about half the population is of chinese origin and quite happy with being Chinese. It's a bit like protestants in NI under the protectorate of the British government. Who do you attempt to stop doing what? Declare war on China. A golden rule is don't start a fight you can't win.
Tchetchenie: I don't think anyone is capable of stopping the Russians flying.
If CallmeDave turned into an evil dictator and he decided to use Tornados to bomb the good people of Liverpool because they were protesting against the government I would like someone to step in I think yes
What about if it was Manchester?
We mustn't forget that just as in Iraq, what is happening in Libya will be a division along tribal lines. Regardless of how it looks from outside, UN/France/Britain will be backing one tribe against another. Never a recipe for long term harmony in a country.
Having said that I am in favour. A good friend of mine only just got out from Libya by the skin of her teeth- her husband is still there and they can't get him out.
we can bomb libyans to knock out the air defences ...... and thats ok
At a risk of posting without googling, the civilian death toll from US/UK aircraft enforcing the no fly zone in the Iraq war is pretty shocking.
[Edit] I believe it's estimated at 1400 [/Edit]
Edukator - Member
Anyone who thinks it will take days to act should think 45 minutes because unlike Saddam, France
It's not as simple as how long it takes a plane to get to Libyan airspace. There's a huge amount of planning and logistics that needs to go into coordinating airforces from multiple nationalities (both ground and carrier based) as well as ensuring those enforcing the no fly zone are sufficiently protected (including destroying Libyan radar & SAM sites in advance). Add to that all the political stuff (no troops allowed on the ground but what about SAR for downed pilots, what are the rules of engagement etc.).
Certainly the planning will have started weeks ago but I bet there's still a lot of stuff to work out and I can guarantee countries aren't going to have 100's of millions of pounds worth of aircraft buzzing around North Africa until all the details are resolved.
If CallmeDave turned into an evil dictator and he decided to use Tornados to bomb the good people of Liverpool because they were protesting against the government I would like someone to step in I think yes.
What if Callme used police to beat the children of London because they were protesting about education cuts? Does the evil dicatator have to be using planes before our moral rights are triggered?
[url= http://lci.tf1.fr/monde/afrique/2011-03/libye-l-info-minute-par-minute-6321302.html ]It's moving fast[/url] Anyone got an equivalent minute by minute news feed in English to link?
Qatar is on board and Saddam wants a cease fire.
Europe 1 reports gave the impression France was prepared to act immediately and alone initially if necessary FuzzyWuzzy.
#
TandemJeremy - MemberGaza and Chechnya both have done in the past - not so sure about Tibet.
Tibet however we see an illegal occupation of a sovereign state by another country
Posted 30 minutes ago # Report-Post
You may have missed this, but theres been a change of government recently
What if Callme used police to beat the children of London because they were protesting about education cuts? Does the evil dicatator have to be using planes before our moral rights are triggered
Arresting rioters for attempted murder, assaulting police officers, desecrating war memorials, destroying buildings and for a multitude of public order offences is a little different, but nice troll all the same.
Arresting rioters for attempted murder, assaulting police officers, desecrating war memorials, destroying buildings and for a multitude of public order offences is a little different, but nice troll all the same.
Agreed. But that is a [i]non sequitur[/i] to my post
Against it.
A war which would probably be over in the next 48 hours will now drag on indefinitely - possibly for years.
I can see why they've done it though. Despite the very carefully crafted propaganda, the claim that Gaddafi has no support within Libya, that his army was defecting on mass, and that he could only rely on paid foreign mercenaries (some as young as 13 - that's how evil he is) has proved to be a complete lie.
Otherwise the rebels would easily have managed to deal with Gaddafi's army of under-age foreign mercenaries.
.
CaptJon - MemberI'm amazed they have taken so long. You can't allow a leader to kill their own people.
That's a pretty serious allegation CaptJon - a leader killing his own people, therefore I'm sure you wouldn't make it without substantial evidence and without being able to provide facts and figures.
So how many has he killed ? Just an estimate will do. Because the only vaguely reliable estimates I've managed to find suggests no such thing has occurred.
One week ago in this article [url= http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/libyan-rebels-on-the-run-west-divided-20110311-1bqx5.html ]Libyan rebels on the run, West divided [/url] which is not sympathetic to Gaddafi, they reported : [b]"Medics say 400 people have died and 2,000 more been wounded in eastern Libya since February 17"[/b].
So even if you took it that not one single one of those 400 dead was a rebel fighter, ie, they were all civilians, then that it is an extremely low figure which is comparable to how many died in Egypt.
How could it be possible if Gaddafi had ordered he daily bombing of civilians for 4 weeks, for the figure to be so low - the Americans can easily kill more civilians than that through collateral damage in just one bombing raid.
I would be interested in your figures and your sources CaptJon.
BTW in no way am I a supporter of Gaddafi, he clearly is a sandwich short of a picnic, and I remember when the first reports arrived from the opposition that he was bombing civilians, saying to my bother that they should impose an immediate no-fly zone.
Obviously at that point I wasn't aware that it was just worthless propaganda, along with the claims that Gaddafi's army was refusing to fight and he was having to rely on foreign mercenaries to do his fighting.
Lets put it in perspective.
The UN have voted for this action.
No one at the UN voted against it.
The arab league have voted for this.
At the same time as Gadaffi declares no mercy in benghazi.
This is not an American led directive, this is a world led directive. A bit disappointing for the conspiracy theorists out there i know
Lets put it in perspective.The UN have voted for this action.
Lets put that comment in perspective.
The UN voted that the Palestinian people should be driven off their lands so that a Zionist state could be created for Jews from across the world.
Lets [s]put[/s] troll that comment [s]in perspective[/s]
fixed it for you.
Is the UN a moral authority that stands for democracy?
A lot of its members are anything but democratic.
So your option would be to sit back and do absolutely nothing? 🙄
You think I'm trolling LHS ? You don't think I believe what I'm saying ?
Or couldn't you simply think of anything else to say ?
So your option would be to sit back and do absolutely nothing?
I don't think that necessarily follows. Whatever we do we, should not do it because the UN says we should.
Ok, so what would your solution be? How would you resolve this?
The UN was originally set up to fight the Axis powers in WWII. It's role afte the war became one of international policing. A US initiative, it has always been US led with all that that implies. Look at who has influence in america and you'll see how that is reflected in UN policy.
No country wants to do anything. Gadafi will be renegotiating oil contracts soon.
Shell and BP will have been lobbying Cameron hard over this. To dither means the matter is taken out of the politicians hands. By the weekend there wont be any opposition.
Then the misinformation will start, the opposition will be painted as commiting atrocities (lots of tortured bodies found in towns liberated)- pictures showing this of corpses dressed in Gadaffi troops clothing.
etc etc. It may only be 2% of the worlds resources but its high quality oil.
No doubt you have a point on that edukator but why wasn't there a UN backed invasion of Iraq?
How would you resolve this?
Well it would have resolved itself in the next couple of days without interference. The UN sanctioned interference will now guarantee that it will not be resolved.
I'll remind you that the UN has not sanctioned the invasion of Libya and the replacement of the government. It therefore has not offered a resolution to the problem, just the means to keep a war going on indefinitely.
LHS - Member
Ok, so what would your solution be? How would you resolve this?
By keeping out of a war that is not ours.
We go in and we will be at war for a long time.
The Iraq invasion was very much the US and UK going it alone. Check that news feed on TF1 and you'll find an increasing number of nations pledging military help in Libya. Countries such as Norway, Denmark and indeed France that refused to participate in Iraq. Remember Dominique de Villepin's prophetic speech in which he predicted exactly what would happen if the US and UK invaded Iraq.
This situation is very different, you have geographical separation of the factions and a clear request for help from those under attack.
We have no business interfering with this civil conflict!
I guess it might be something to do with BP's oil deal that Blair and Brown instigated, or that the government are thinking about the potential for new arms sales (world conflicts are big business, peace doesn't sell military hardware!).
We tax payers are getting caned by the revenue for all manner of the expensive inefficient schemes which successive governments have committed us to, wasting our money.
Considering the a massive and still burgeoning public debt, we should be butting the **** out of things like this!
The arab world resents our intrusion, we can add no stability to these regions as we don't understand their medieval ways which are dictated to by an overbearing religion! Fairness, democracy and equality are incompatible with the core values of Islam!
Once again, the governmnents of the west are foisting their soft liberal idealism onto a culture that rejects political correctness and pretty much everything western culture stands for.
All that will result is a lot of innocent lives wasted, families' lives torn apart, our reputation on the world stage further damaged and a huge amount of money wasted.
Well it would have resolved itself in the next couple of days without interference.
[b][i]Col Gaddafi has promised to retake Benghazi, saying his forces would show "no mercy".[/b][/i]
Yes, you are right, it would have been resolved!!
🙄
Resents or welcomes spongebob? Lets not forget that there's no love lost between many of these arab leaders and even allowing for the propaganda merchants it seems a lot of French flags are being waved. If you find an arab leader openly supporting Gaddafi please link it.
If a minority of this country rose up, started attacking the police and the army in major cities and tried re appropriating government resources do you really reckon it would be free of bloodshed?
Leave 'em to it I say, what right does any country have to interfere with the internal affairs of a sovereign nation?