Conquer Club

jay_a2j wrote:Yes, lets get into another meaningless war so that the US will be too weak to stop the Chinese invasion!

newflash, the Chinese don't need to invade us militarily. They already own us.

In the long run, the US need stop supporting dictators. But, that means saying "no" to some big corporate interests.

In the short term, I am on the fence. If the UN approves something like a "no fly zone", I could see it. If we can go in quickly, depose Khaddafi and GET OUT,t hat would be OK, but it seems that "ge out" part is complicated.

PLAYER57832 wrote:In the long run, the US need stop supporting dictators. But, that means saying "no" to some big corporate interests.

In the short term, I am on the fence. If the UN approves something like a "no fly zone", I could see it. If we can go in quickly, depose Khaddafi and GET OUT,t hat would be OK, but it seems that "ge out" part is complicated.

So you approved of the second Iraq war (apart from the "not getting out quick" part)?

qwert wrote:

"bigbalinstalin-
This isn't just about attacking people for the hell of it.


Gaddafi is gearing up to kill as many of his own people as he can. He doesn't care anymore. He's lost $30bn in frozen assets, so he's got nothing to lose.

He has some portions of his military under his direct command, and he's moving into position to strike his rebelling cities. There's going to be immense civilian casualties, and if you were in a position to stop such senseless killing, would you?

The US in this situation wants to stop him, but the top shots are limiting their actions for now. The US has moved the 6th fleet from Italy to nearby Libya and Tunisia, and they've denied Gaddafi control of his own air space. Why? So he can't bomb his own civilians and destroy his people's oil facilities."

How many time ,the history repeating. North Corea-Vietnam-Iraq-Afghanistan-Iran-Libya.
Ofcourse if US have 18 year old soldier who ready to die,in some coutries who are not thread for US, then its ok by me. Do you belive,that if US send troops, war will be over? Do you belive that in iraq war are over? What abouth Afghanistan? or Pakistan. And iran.
But this time its a little diferent, US want to try to involve other NAto members to participiate, but its look that they not want to send soldier into something what its not hes business. Im not in danger,and probably you are not in danger to, but young boys who are going to be in these crap, will be in danger to die, and for what? If you are comanding officer,what will you tell to familiy of soldier who die in libya " He die for American freedom" or what?

I'm not sure what you said, Qwert, but I think I agree with it -- some time ago I kept saying, but no one would listen, that these rebellions are all NATO plots. As a Serbian you already know this well since it was the CIA who manufactured OTPOR ... the last "spontaneous youth movement" that captured everyone's imaginations.

1 - I said - weeks ago on this forum - it would emerge that the CIA-run OTPOR is behind this whole thing. For the first time, yesterday, VEST reported that their reporters have spoken with Egyptians who said they were flown to Serbia last year to receive revolutionary training (http://www.vest.com.mk/?ItemID=3D619CB1 ... A078B604A3). I guess ol' Saxi does know what he's talking about? And yet, despite the serious and significant implications of this, the article has appeared only in this one Macedonian newspaper.

2 - Russia yesterday reported their satellite imagery has shown zero evidence of air attacks by the Jamahiriya's Air Force on "protesters." (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TncgsS0F ... r_embedded) Yet CNN keeps reporting YouTube videos and press releases saying there have been as fact.

3 - Libya spends less on their military than Denmark. Denmark! They have 50,000 troops. If everything we've been told is to be believed, how on Earth can a brutal dictatorship not only keep power but continue to control more than half the country and launch a counter-offensive in a nation of 6 million with a 50,000 man army half of which has defected? (hint: because the insurgency is, in fact, small to the point of comedy ... if the US intervenes it will because their agents have been unable to do the job in toppling Qadaffi and securing the oil)

The west must stop sabre rattling, demilitarize the Mediterranean and lift the sanctions. Even so much as a no-fly zone is a euphemism for a declaration of war. There is no basis in law for any state to unilaterally impose a no-fly zone over a sovereign nation and, if Russia says there is no proof any aircraft have been used against protesters at all, the UN will be unable to pass an authorizing instrument. If OTAN dares to impose a no-fly zone over Libya they will reveal their true, brigandish nature once again.

qwert wrote:

"bigbalinstalin-
This isn't just about attacking people for the hell of it.


Gaddafi is gearing up to kill as many of his own people as he can. He doesn't care anymore. He's lost $30bn in frozen assets, so he's got nothing to lose.

He has some portions of his military under his direct command, and he's moving into position to strike his rebelling cities. There's going to be immense civilian casualties, and if you were in a position to stop such senseless killing, would you?

The US in this situation wants to stop him, but the top shots are limiting their actions for now. The US has moved the 6th fleet from Italy to nearby Libya and Tunisia, and they've denied Gaddafi control of his own air space. Why? So he can't bomb his own civilians and destroy his people's oil facilities."

How many time ,the history repeating. North Corea-Vietnam-Iraq-Afghanistan-Iran-Libya.
Ofcourse if US have 18 year old soldier who ready to die,in some coutries who are not thread for US, then its ok by me. Do you belive,that if US send troops, war will be over? Do you belive that in iraq war are over? What abouth Afghanistan? or Pakistan. And iran.
But this time its a little diferent, US want to try to involve other NAto members to participiate, but its look that they not want to send soldier into something what its not hes business. Im not in danger,and probably you are not in danger to, but young boys who are going to be in these crap, will be in danger to die, and for what? If you are comanding officer,what will you tell to familiy of soldier who die in libya " He die for American freedom" or what?

I'm not for some kind of amphibious assault. That's not necessary because the rebel factions seems to be doing that job well enough.


So, are you against the US's (with NATO) military action that consists of denying Gaddafi air control over his own country?

thegreekdog wrote:

spiesr wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

BBS wrote:There's going to be immense civilian casualties, and if you were in a position to stop such senseless killing, would you?

Would you, qwert? I'm not sure you answered your own question.

qwert did not ask that question, BigBallinStalin did. qwert quoted one of BigBallinStalin's posts that contained that line in his post but he got the format of the quote slightly off. You then made the mistake of attributing the contents of that quote to qwert.

Yes, qwert told me that via pm.

I believe qwert's answer is "no." And I agree.

Why do you agree?

BigBallinStalin wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

spiesr wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

BBS wrote:There's going to be immense civilian casualties, and if you were in a position to stop such senseless killing, would you?

Would you, qwert? I'm not sure you answered your own question.

qwert did not ask that question, BigBallinStalin did. qwert quoted one of BigBallinStalin's posts that contained that line in his post but he got the format of the quote slightly off. You then made the mistake of attributing the contents of that quote to qwert.

Yes, qwert told me that via pm.

I believe qwert's answer is "no." And I agree.

Why do you agree?

Not enough loot.

big balin, maybe you notice how Uprising going,,
In any country (even Mine), if you have majority of people against leader,or dictator, these uprising solve very fast, because army stop defend regime,and people take control.
If Quadafy lost control, and if people take control (6 milion people), then i dont see how can one guy with 20-30000 thousand soldier can hold power?
I read in all paper "Protester hold Control of half country" "quadafy are finish" its these trye?
Lets assume that Quadafy dont have support, so why will someone from foreign countries interfere in these situation, few more week and protester will win.
But what if these not true? What if these become tribal war, and you can owerthrow quadafy,but half of country ,if support quadafy will continue war,supporting jamahiria,and fight against east side of lybia. You will get very bad situation where foreign country will need to be buffer zone,because bouth side dont have enough power to win. If you interefer you give other side to do what they whant with other side,and you all ready have these effect in east side,where protester kill without any trial policemen and soldier who are surender-why nobody stop that. You see bouth side comite crime, but like many time in past, side who US decide to be frendly,are free from any crimes. Maybe you forget but Sadam whas Ally to US in Iran -Iraq war- and talibans have support also in hes war against Soviet Union.
I want to belive that NAto care for civilian, but its these for real, or something else its hide.
Sometime humanitarian action, are much worst then any war. And how many time civilian whas bombed from US Airplane, and these same can hepend in Libya to.
Think of that.

qwert wrote:big balin, maybe you notice how Uprising going,,
In any country (even Mine), if you have majority of people against leader,or dictator, these uprising solve very fast, because army stop defend regime,and people take control.
If Quadafy lost control, and if people take control (6 milion people), then i dont see how can one guy with 20-30000 thousand soldier can hold power?

It depends, and it's how he's been in power for the past 30+ years, but yeah, I agree. For governments to continue operating, they need enough consent from enough people to do so.

qwert wrote:I read in all paper "Protester hold Control of half country" "quadafy are finish" its these trye?
Lets assume that Quadafy dont have support, so why will someone from foreign countries interfere in these situation, few more week and protester will win.

The reason why the US decided to deny Qaddafi control of the air is to prevent him from bombing the Eastern side of his country. What this does is denies him the ability to inflict more civilian casualties, but more importantly, it prevents him from destroying the oil facilities.

Had the US let Qaddafi have free use of his air power, then he would've most likely continued effectively stopping rebels from taking cities, and he would've most likely destroyed the oil production facilities in the East. If those are destroyed, the future government of Libya and its people would be set back for decades. Imagine how difficult it would be to run any kind of legitimate government in Libya with a severely crippled oil industry.

That's pretty much why the US and NATO get involved in Libya's conflict to that degree.

qwert wrote:But what if these not true? What if these become tribal war, and you can owerthrow quadafy,but half of country ,if support quadafy will continue war,supporting jamahiria,and fight against east side of lybia. You will get very bad situation where foreign country will need to be buffer zone,because bouth side dont have enough power to win. If you interefer you give other side to do what they whant with other side,and you all ready have these effect in east side,where protester kill without any trial policemen and soldier who are surender-why nobody stop that. You see bouth side comite crime, but like many time in past, side who US decide to be frendly,are free from any crimes. Maybe you forget but Sadam whas Ally to US in Iran -Iraq war- and talibans have support also in hes war against Soviet Union.
I want to belive that NAto care for civilian, but its these for real, or something else its hide.
Sometime humanitarian action, are much worst then any war. And how many time civilian whas bombed from US Airplane, and these same can hepend in Libya to.
Think of that.

Sure, I have, and it's something I wouldn't want the US involved in to that degree. Which is why earlier I was saying for the US to just side with the winners via rhetoric. I'm not opposed to denying Qaddafi control over air space, but I am against bombing them or starting a ground war there.

I was wondering: Since the EU (or some major members of theirs) rely heavily on Libyan exports of petroleum, then shouldn't the US just collect from them money in order to pay for the operations over Libyan air space that deny Qaddafi such control?

Really, before getting involved, the US government should've just asked EU for the money since the EU wants to protect its future exporter of petroleum.

BigBallinStalin wrote:I was wondering: Since the EU (or some major members of theirs) rely heavily on Libyan exports of petroleum, then shouldn't the US just collect from them money in order to pay for the operations over Libyan air space that deny Qaddafi such control?

Really, before getting involved, the US government should've just asked EU for the money since the EU wants to protect its future exporter of petroleum.

Yep, it affects the EU far more than the US, especially Italy and France, along with Scotland. Scotland, if you recall, released the Lockerbie bomber and in return got oil contracts from Libya. I say let the EU project their power. If they can, if they even have the ability. If they don't have the ability to project the required amount of force to protect their vital national interests, and instead have to rely on the US, then it is high time they start thinking about that.

It is time for the US to stop being the strong man. Or pay us to do the job for them. That raises some other ethical questions though, since our military is supposed to be used to protect our sovereignty, not as a mercenary army for hire.

jay_a2j wrote:Yes, lets get into another meaningless war so that the US will be too weak to stop the Chinese invasion!

I think you mean that YOU will be too weak!

i just look on CNN report from attack on brega, and its so phatetic that they use almost same scenario from Kosovo War, where they report 100000 people killed.
One plane drop one bomb,and these is shocked for CNN- and when Hundred and hundred planes from nato bombarding mine country and kiling civilians,these whas ok. Propaganda are great thing for people to belive in some exageration. Also its phatetic,that how can someone belive in tv news,when they say that they bombard civilian, and that guadafy troops attack brega,and can not take control , and aftermath 4 unarmed civilian die.
What kind of army quadafy have,when can not take one city who hold unarmed civilian,and need US to involve.

What is happening in Libya is a different situation
than what occurred in Kosovo.

The US isn't "going to war" with Libya and there is no
invasion or occupation in the works that I've heard of
on the news.

What I have heard reported; the USA is considering the
establishment of a "No Fly Zone" over Libya to prevent
Khadafi from using his air force to drop bombs on
civilian demonstrators.

thegreekdog wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:In the long run, the US need stop supporting dictators. But, that means saying "no" to some big corporate interests.

In the short term, I am on the fence. If the UN approves something like a "no fly zone", I could see it. If we can go in quickly, depose Khaddafi and GET OUT,t hat would be OK, but it seems that "ge out" part is complicated.

So you approved of the second Iraq war (apart from the "not getting out quick" part)?

No. The situations were very different. That war was based on false information. Also, the situation was not entirely parallel. We perhaps should have invaded after he gassed the Khurds and such, but there was no particular uprising in Iraq like there is now in Libya. Also, while Saddam was cruel and evil enough to be considered "insane", he was not irrational in the same way Khadafi is now.

oVo wrote:
What I have heard reported; the USA is considering the
establishment of a "No Fly Zone" over Libya to prevent
Khadafi from using his air force to drop bombs on
civilian demonstrators.

Except, enforcing a no fly zone does mean bombing their anti-aircraft installations, etc. So, yes, it is a kind of invasion. Not the same as Kosovo, no. However, some people talking about this don't seem to realize what it truly means (not saying you don't, but wanted to clarify).

these is exageration, the guadafy air forces are opsolite,and many planes are grounded, and also protesters capture air bases with planes. Some planes are defected, and when you look on news,they say "one plane drop bomb"
Protester started revolution,but now they want that some from outside fight for hes goals.
They capture weapons, planes,tanks, and now dont know what to do?
If they all against quadafy,these situation will all ready finish,but its look that not all people against quadafy.
Like i say earlier,they have oil, and that why US EU care. Nobody care for Darfur,ruanda,somalia, because they dont have what lybia have.
darfur-300000 die and killed
ruanda-500000 killed
somalia civil war start 1991(still ongoing) 300000 dead
and many other coflict who dont have attention of US and EU.

I am hearing Libyan civilians requesting US military aid...

Phatscotty wrote:I am hearing Libyan civilians requesting US military aid...

If you're hearing voices that is a problem.

Which civilians? Who? Or according to whom? Any sources at all?

patches70 wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:I was wondering: Since the EU (or some major members of theirs) rely heavily on Libyan exports of petroleum, then shouldn't the US just collect from them money in order to pay for the operations over Libyan air space that deny Qaddafi such control?

Really, before getting involved, the US government should've just asked EU for the money since the EU wants to protect its future exporter of petroleum.

Yep, it affects the EU far more than the US, especially Italy and France, along with Scotland. Scotland, if you recall, released the Lockerbie bomber and in return got oil contracts from Libya. I say let the EU project their power. If they can, if they even have the ability. If they don't have the ability to project the required amount of force to protect their vital national interests, and instead have to rely on the US, then it is high time they start thinking about that.

It is time for the US to stop being the strong man. Or pay us to do the job for them. That raises some other ethical questions though, since our military is supposed to be used to protect our sovereignty, not as a mercenary army for hire.

You are aware that Scotland is part of the United Kingdom , it has about as much influence in foreign affairs as South Dakota does
Do you seriously think that the US intervenes out of pure benevolence, it acts according to its own benefit or at the very least common benefit.

Team America to the rescue!

Hi, we're America, and there's no job we can't f*ck up. Need help because you're living under a brutal dictator? Don't worry, we'll invade and you won't have to worry about living any more. Team America, you request our help, and we'll be there, to bomb the shit out of your country. Having some problems with drug gangs? Don't worry, team America is here. We'll take that problem and multiply it tenfold, because we're just that awesome.

Team America, no problem too small that we can't make bigger, no job too easy that we can't utterly fail at.

We're team America, and we're in your corner(picking your pocket and fisting your wife, whilst singing 'With A Little Help From My Friends'), as long as there's something worthwhile in your corner for us to take.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

oVo wrote:
What I have heard reported; the USA is considering the
establishment of a "No Fly Zone" over Libya to prevent
Khadafi from using his air force to drop bombs on
civilian demonstrators.

Except, enforcing a no fly zone does mean bombing their anti-aircraft installations, etc. So, yes, it is a kind of invasion. Not the same as Kosovo, no. However, some people talking about this don't seem to realize what it truly means (not saying you don't, but wanted to clarify).

It does? How do you know that for certain?

Iliad wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:I am hearing Libyan civilians requesting US military aid...

If you're hearing voices that is a problem.

Which civilians? Who? Or according to whom? Any sources at all?

Well, today we sent medical supplies (America sucks) and food (America sucks). I can't find any sources, guess it's just a rumor for now.

I will keep you posted on what I "hear"

Phatscotty wrote:

Iliad wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:I am hearing Libyan civilians requesting US military aid...

If you're hearing voices that is a problem.

Which civilians? Who? Or according to whom? Any sources at all?

Well, today we sent medical supplies (America is so benevolent) and food ( all bow down to the grace and generosity and be thankful that America is always there to save the day). I can't find any sources, guess it's just autofellatio for now.

I will keep you posted on what I "hear"

Some sarcasm had somehow crept into your post scotty. Luckily for you, I'm always on hand to fix shit that needs a-fixin'.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

oVo wrote:
What I have heard reported; the USA is considering the
establishment of a "No Fly Zone" over Libya to prevent
Khadafi from using his air force to drop bombs on
civilian demonstrators.

Except, enforcing a no fly zone does mean bombing their anti-aircraft installations, etc. So, yes, it is a kind of invasion. Not the same as Kosovo, no. However, some people talking about this don't seem to realize what it truly means (not saying you don't, but wanted to clarify).

Saxi agreeing with Player?! Say it ain't so! ACK! LOL!

It seems popular to imagine No-Fly Zones as some kind of pacifist application of military force, ignoring the personnel manning ground-based SAM batteries that get hit with Anti-Radiation missiles within five minutes of the No-Fly Zone starting.

Well, today we sent medical supplies (America sucks) and food (America sucks). I can't find any sources, guess it's just a rumor for now.

I had to Bing-Dot-Com what you were referencing (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylon ... tinue.html). This, cautiously, seems okay but I'm skeptical that it's a beachhead to sending supplies to the eastern part of the country under the guise of helping refugees but, in fact, feeding and clothing the insurgents.

I saw that, last week, the UK and Germany both sent military-marked aircraft deep inside Libya, ostensibly to evacuate foreign nationals. This was done without any permission or authorization from the PLAF, is a horrendous violation of Libyan territorial integrity and speaks to Britain's neo-colonialist, paternalist attitude in dealing with the Arab world. Germany's operation is an even worse violation than Britain's considering their history in Libya.