Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What was that about pulling their own weight?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    What is so bad about enforcing a no-fly zone so rebels who are fighting some dictator have a chance at winning?

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Asher View Post
      Meanwhile, 10 years later and the US still can't get to Osama. He's not even a North African strongman, he's a hermit living inside one of their allies' countries.
      That is embarrassing. It speaks to a lot of problems in our intelligence, and diplomatic acuity. But the U.S. military doesn't have a history of capturing fugitives, and they're not really intended for that kind of precision work. They are really good at blowing up Russian tanks. The Libyan military was basically provided by the Russians, and it's hard to believe that major NATO allies are having a tough time against decades old Soviet technology.

      This war seems to be pushed by the European powers, and it'd be nice if they could handle routine duties on their own. I don't expect them to operate anything like the B-2, but A-10s are a pretty cheap plane (~10-15 M). There's no reason for the French or British to lack such basic capabilities.
      John Brown did nothing wrong.

      Comment


      • #63
        The B-2's actually great for taking down air defenses initially. Once the stealth planes go in and wipe out the SAMs, everyone else can fly around unopposed. F-35 hopefully will be more economical for that though when they finish building it.
        If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
        ){ :|:& };:

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by gribbler View Post
          What is so bad about enforcing a no-fly zone so rebels who are fighting some dictator have a chance at winning?
          A - It assumes we want the rebels to win. - WE likely have no dog in the fight.
          B - It assumes that if our desire is to prevent mass killings instead of rooting for one side or the other, that enforcement of the no-fly will allow for a speedy resolution of violence. - The more likely is a protracted state of violence wherein many more people are killed including many more civilians than if no interference happened.
          C- It assumes that an accolade will result from the Arab league and Arab street for standing up for the little guy. - Actually LOL.
          "Just puttin on the foil" - Jeff Hanson

          “In a democracy, I realize you don’t need to talk to the top leader to know how the country feels. When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.” - Jimmy Carter

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe View Post
            You broke it you bought it. Oops we're broke, think Libya will take an IOU?
            Yeah - we're broke because of Big Bird and Elmo.
            A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.

            Comment


            • #66
              Simon Jenkins: Rather than protecting Libyans Nato is prolonging the agony of civil war. David Cameron should think on Suez and retreat



              If I were a Libyan rebel I would be furious. As a mere British citizen and taxpayer I only wonder what game is being played in north Africa in my name and with my money. How can Cameron say he is short of cash when he can blow £500,000 destroying one tank? Britain is using bombers not to support invasion but as an alternative to invasion. This strengthens sympathy for the bombed, not least because bombs constantly miss their targets. Nato, which presumably means the RAF, has already killed civilians in Sirte and blasted a rebel force it was supposedly protecting, despite denying it was acting as "a rebel air arm".

              The commitment of the Arab League to the venture has predictably evaporated. An article justifying the intervention, signed last week by Cameron, Sarkozy and Obama, was conspicuously not signed by the Arab League's Amr Moussa, who backed the bombing just a month ago. Libya's neighbours, Egypt and Tunisia, have not taken part in any military operation or even lent airbases.

              Al-Qaida hovers over the Maghreb, awaiting more pickings from western ineptitude. It must be overjoyed that the two powers still with a stomach for the Libyan fight are the region's past imperialists, Britain and France. The prospect of a western puppet regime in Tripoli – being planned, we assume, by the post-Chilcot Foreign Office – must answer every jihadist prayer.

              Both the coalition and the Labour frontbenches are beating the drums of war. None of them reads history. Cameron's bedtime book should be the Eden-Eisenhower correspondence during Suez, when the latter pleaded for Eden to stay out of this theatre and recognise how attacking one Arab forced all others to side with him. America, said Eisenhower, would have no part in an invasion. Eden ignored him and paid the price.


              Socrates: "Good is That at which all things aim, If one knows what the good is, one will always do what is good." Brian: "Romanes eunt domus"
              GW 2013: "and juistin bieber is gay with me and we have 10 kids we live in u.s.a in the white house with obama"

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by MrFun View Post
                Yeah - we're broke because of Big Bird and Elmo.
                Always hated those commie ****s.
                "Just puttin on the foil" - Jeff Hanson

                “In a democracy, I realize you don’t need to talk to the top leader to know how the country feels. When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.” - Jimmy Carter

                Comment

                Working...
                X