UN Votes 10 in favor, 5 abstaining to establish no-fly zone over Libya

[alix965]

As Tactonyx has mentioned The air campaign will only work if it's follwed by boots on the gorund to support the rebels. Otherwise qadaffy duck's forces will still shell and still basiclly run roughshod over the opposition. removing air support from the government troops just means it's gonna be tougher and more protracted slog for control of the country.

I'm all for well deserved public spankings, but this seems like a not very well thought out, short term solution. More of a "we-got-yer-back" operation on the part of the UN. I remember after the bombing of the USS Cole the Clinton administration fired a butt-load of Tomahawks into Afghanistan and the Sudan, and that was the end of that. What did it accomplish? I still don't know. I'm seeing a repeat of history with this no-fly zone ********.

The Nobel peace prize is officially a joke. This is a slippery slope we're on, but I predict this will be a blip in international history that will come and go as soon as the international press gets bored.

 

[Toacrabman]

Just another country mad at their dumb dictator, now we have libya, and we have korea dealing with asian hitler. I hope the Obama decides to get the U.S. involved.

 

[Templar 320]

If they want things done right, send in people as bad as Ghadaffi, call in Black Water!

Hey buddy, don't be making fun of Blackwater. They are good guys. I can tell you that from first hand experience.

 

[thorn696]

I'm not against a military op as long as there allowed to do the job. The question is who gets the bill in the end? Some times I just wish the US would take the time to take of its self. That said I'm probably going to loose more friends when the politics start to unfold in this new conflict. Luck to the Marine Scouts out there. Stay safe.

 

[ventrue]

I have to say... this is all getting a bit out of hand. Afghanistan, Iraq, now Libya and possibly Iran and other post-rebellion countries in the near future as well? I do think it's a noble goal to go save civilians from a tyrant, but where is this supposed to go? The "western world" occupying every country that has a desert in it, or a muslim, or a terrorist? Are you sure that occupation is sending the right message? I think that a large portion of today's terrorists (who, as a whole, are only minorities in these countries) don't really know what they're even doing, they just follow a very small number of crazy guys, who at least think they know what they're doing, while they really don't. But if you invade a country and harm a completely non-terrorist civilian in any way while doing so (and that is pretty hard to avoid if you drop bombs, blow stuff up and bring in heavy equipment), he might actually reconsider his peaceful attitude, develop hatred against you and become the very thing you were trying to fight and prevent in the first place.
I'm glad that at least German forces aren't going to join the mess this time. This whole "war on terror" thing has done more harm so far than it could ever have prevented. We're losing rights and freedoms because of anti-terrorism laws, we're spending money to pay for their implementation, we're spending money to send the military to some far-away country to pursue some goal nobody really understands and we are seeing more damage and casualties there than we would here if some terrorists were to occasionally blow up a bus or something. This sure sounds harsh, but it is true. And I for one would rather live in danger than be watched and tracked by my own government all the time, which is precisely what's happening.

 

[Trando434]

Hey buddy, don't be making fun of Blackwater. They are good guys. I can tell you that from first hand experience.

Haha, I have all the respect in the world for those guys, i wasn't making fun of them, but really they are as mean as Ghadaffi, which is true but they are some of the best people I know, btw they are called Xe now right? You have to admit they are brutal though.

 

[Devious]

The problem with contractors like Xe is that military law and war conventions don't apply to them so they can get away with anything. If they had the same rules applied to them as the regular forces, then they would not come under as much flak and scrutiny.

@toacrabman the U.S. is involved they launched 110 tomahawk missiles with the U.K. yesterday.

 

[Sangheili811]

I have to say... this is all getting a bit out of hand. Afghanistan, Iraq, now Libya and possibly Iran and other post-rebellion countries in the near future as well? I do think it's a noble goal to go save civilians from a tyrant, but where is this supposed to go? The "western world" occupying every country that has a desert in it, or a muslim, or a terrorist? Are you sure that occupation is sending the right message? I think that a large portion of today's terrorists (who, as a whole, are only minorities in these countries) don't really know what they're even doing, they just follow a very small number of crazy guys, who at least think they know what they're doing, while they really don't. But if you invade a country and harm a completely non-terrorist civilian in any way while doing so (and that is pretty hard to avoid if you drop bombs, blow stuff up and bring in heavy equipment), he might actually reconsider his peaceful attitude, develop hatred against you and become the very thing you were trying to fight and prevent in the first place.
I'm glad that at least German forces aren't going to join the mess this time. This whole "war on terror" thing has done more harm so far than it could ever have prevented. We're losing rights and freedoms because of anti-terrorism laws, we're spending money to pay for their implementation, we're spending money to send the military to some far-away country to pursue some goal nobody really understands and we are seeing more damage and casualties there than we would here if some terrorists were to occasionally blow up a bus or something. This sure sounds harsh, but it is true. And I for one would rather live in danger than be watched and tracked by my own government all the time, which is precisely what's happening.

Totally agree with this. America is a Republic, not an Empire. George Washington said, "Beware of foreign entaglements." and most if not all founders shared his sentiment and thus it was incorporated into the Constitution. Military engagements that make us the "world's policeman" or focus on Nation-Building are unconstitutional, weaken America, and costs us BILLIONS of dollars that could be used for the numerous problems at home.

Frankly, what happens in Libya isn't our business. It's their country, let the civil war run it's course and when it's over, we can decide whether or not we want to have diplomatic relations with them. But if the war doesn't turn out the way we want, it's not our responsibility or our business to "fix" the problem. We have enough problems at home without trying to fix the rest of the world's problems.

EDIT: About Blackwater/Xe/PMCs in general, I wrote a lengthy research paper about the mercenary issue in the GWOT. There are lot of mercs doing important jobs, and like it or not, they are facet of modern warfare that is not going away. But the industry is in need of drastic reform on all levels, from management down. Some of the PMCs are absolute loose cannons and totally out of control. Anyone who's looked into the issue would have no trouble seeing why EVERYONE hates them, particularly Blackwater/Xe.