Barack Obama is secretly pro-Gadaffi - or he's a *****.

[MOBIUS]

No, I thought it would probably happen, I just hoped they'd have learned their lessons by now...

It would appear that they have even managed to kill some civilians in Sirte as well. Morons.

[SlowwHand]

Way to take both sides yet again.

[Egbert]

OK, people have mentioned Hitler in this thread, so what about if the future allies had intervened when he started illegally rebuilding Germany's armed forces, or when he annexed Sudetenland - or Czechoslovakia as a whole...!?

You see where I'm going with this, don't you...?

Mr. Chamberlain did not have a crystal ball.

The wisdom of hindsight

[Egbert]

dude you must of been the only person who didn't see this coming. of course the 'no fly zone' was the west taking sides in a libya civil war.

I am wondering if this has more to do with Sarkozy wanting to look all "Presidential" in time for the forthcoming election in France. He pushed for this "humanitarian intervention" and it appears to have boosted his popularity, which was rather low. Looks like it's working for Sarky.

Did I just suggest a politician might be engaging in a very expensive "cheap political stunt" in the hope of getting votes?

[Wezil]

It's much broader than that. The Libya mission has wide public support (right or wrong) well beyond France.

[Egbert]

It's much broader than that. The Libya mission has wide public support (right or wrong) well beyond France.

True.

OTH Somebody had to push to make the intervention happen.

Of course, I am being a bit speculative and perhaps a bit cynical. Perhaps Sarky saw an opportunity and went for it? Perhaps the intervention would not have happened without him pushing for it?

[Wezil]

It was waiting on Obama to weigh in (politically) to get it done. I doubt "Sarky" was the reason he finally committed.

Politicians everywhere scrambled to get on board that popular wagon. Our House voted unanimously in support. *sigh*

[C0ckney]

it wasn't just him though, britain and some other european countries were pushing for it, and as wezil said, there is a lot of public support in the western world.

edit: was responding to braindead

[Egbert]

I was under the impression that Obama was distinctly less than enthusiastic about American involvement and was, at least partly, "jollied into it" by NATO partners. This whole thing seems to suggest politicians getting onto a populist bandwagon without a clearly thought out end game. eg. I have no idea how the rebels are supposed to take Tripoli without heavy weapons and substantial air support which would presumably cause significant civilian casualties and damage. Particularly since the rebels mostly appear to be a rabble with some army units. Gaddafi seems to be clearly militarily stronger and better organised than the rebels. We could see Libya split in two or perhaps a long civil war.

[Cort Haus]

Rule one of justifying a military intervention. Compare the enemy with Hitler.

Works for some people every time.

[Arrian]

See, this is the problem:

One the one hand, a no-fly zone and air strikes to protect civilians was absolutely necessary to prevent a bloodbath in Benghazi. The problem is that the morons just can't help taking sides and engaging in regime change - Libya: Coalition bombing may be in breach of UN resolution's legal limits - Legal expert warns that forces led by Britain, France and the US face 'a moment of danger' in justifying latest strikes

You have the gall to feign surprise? Hello? NATO got involved in a civil war. You expected... what, exactly? A no-fly zone and nothing more (when, of course, the only guys with planes were all on 1 side of the civil war, ergo the no-fly zone was by its very nature picking sides) and zero civilian casualties? From an bombing campaign? What happens, exactly, when a NFZ (only) results in a stalemate? Partition? You think that's simple, do you? I'm sure that you do, considering how you always seem to think things are simple/easy and then are SHOCKED, SHOCKED to find out otherwise.

I don't know how this will all turn out and will hope for the best, but seriously, shut the **** up with your shock/outrage that you've found WAR going on here.

-Arrian

[MOBIUS]

Way to take both sides yet again.

How's that taking both sides!?

I seem to remember calling for a no-fly zone and limited airstrikes when civilians were directly in danger. I also said I hoped that they wouldn't overreach this resolution - which they are now doing.

This isn't about protecting civilians any more - this is about regime change.

[MOBIUS]

You have the gall to feign surprise? Hello? NATO got involved in a civil war. You expected... what, exactly? A no-fly zone and nothing more (when, of course, the only guys with planes were all on 1 side of the civil war, ergo the no-fly zone was by its very nature picking sides) and zero civilian casualties? From an bombing campaign? What happens, exactly, when a NFZ (only) results in a stalemate? Partition? You think that's simple, do you? I'm sure that you do, considering how you always seem to think things are simple/easy and then are SHOCKED, SHOCKED to find out otherwise.

I see your hard on for me is still as throbbing as ever, Arrian!

No surprise, just a resigned state of deja vu...

Protecting an imminent massacre of innocent civilians is NOT taking sides, apart from choosing whether they live or die - apparently your choice was for them to die!

As for civilian casualties, these occurred in Sirte, not on the front line, but the next city that the rebels were threatening - until they were beaten back. Completely unnecessary casualties from a completely unnecessary attack.

Stalemate and partition? That simple? Yes, actually.

As for this 'SHOCKED' crap you're spouting, I don't know what you're on about, apart from the suspicion that you've lost it because all the blood has flooded from your brain into your raging hard on for me...

I don't know how this will all turn out and will hope for the best, but seriously, shut the **** up with your shock/outrage that you've found WAR going on here.

It's not supposed to be a war though, is it?

I know how it would have turned out without the NFZ, Gaddafi would be back in control of Libya after inflicting a bloody massacre on the people of Benghazi and busily torturing/massacring untold numbers more in the coming weeks and months...

THAT'S what you signed up for, Arrian, I hope some small part of your conscience where there's blood still flowing to your brain, allows you to feel shame for wanting to let thousands of civilians die...

[MOBIUS]

Rule one of justifying a military intervention. Compare the enemy with Hitler.

Works for some people every time.

Perfectly in this case, Neville!

[MOBIUS]

Mr. Chamberlain did not have a crystal ball.

The wisdom of hindsight

You're joking, right?