Welcome to Gaia! ::

Airstrikes fired in Libya!

http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12796972
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/19/libya.us.missiles/
Groucho and Karl's avatar

Tipsy Codger

WAAAAAAAH

No fly zone dumbass
Are you implying the 4 Libyan tanks blown up by French fighters and the 110+ cruise missiles fired by the US is a no-fly zone?
coalition attacks, not just us. france has been way more involved in the recent no-fly zone situation.
Gamma Goblin's avatar

Wheezing Sex Symbol

6,700 Points
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
  • Brandisher 100
  • Tycoon 200
Erroneous Rex
coalition attacks, not just us. france has been way more involved in the recent no-fly zone situation.

I know, I realized that as soon as I posted.
i still don't get how Obama going in to war is ok. But Bush lied people died no war for oil blah blah blah. Obama was not even in the country at the time. He just got back.
southinthemouth
i still don't get how Obama going in to war is ok. But Bush lied people died no war for oil blah blah blah. Obama was not even in the country at the time. He just got back.

No occupation, consent of the UN, and we're in discussions on handing over control to another group; the no-fly zone is now in NATO's hands, and the ground assaults are in the works. Even if this was a war, it's not America's.

And what does being in the country change, exactly?
Erroneous Rex
coalition attacks, not just us. france has been way more involved in the recent no-fly zone situation.

Yeah, but when's the last time you heard people complain about France being too militaristic?
Garwaire's avatar

6,050 Points
  • Citizen 200
  • Tycoon 200
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
Not sure if you're implying that the UN are launching ground assaults, which if you are.. They aren't.

The whole point of the UN coalition (which currently stands to include; US, Britain, France, Denmark, Italy, Spain, Belgium, Canada, Qatar and UAE - though I think there are a few more..) is to keep Gaddafi from doing more harm to civilians, which to begin with was to stop the attacks on Benghazi and Minsrata. But since then Gaddafi's forces and his mercenaries have been attacking more cities since then, which has led to the broadening of attacks on Libya.

But in order to enforce a successful no fly zone, you need to eliminate, or significantly reduce the threat to coalition pilots; by taking out Air Defence and Command infrastructure, which is exactly what is happening.

Though some may argue "It's for oil!". Then tell me, before the riots started, and indeed in the initial days we were still getting oil from Libya. We were happy to pay for the supplies, and they were happy to sell them. So why would we go in to "invade", change the regime, just so we can cut off oil supplies and ramp up the fuel costs in the short term, whilst spending millions on the Armed Forces to carrying it out?
twigggs's avatar

8,850 Points
  • V-Day 2011 Event 100
  • Invisibility 100
  • Megathread 100
southinthemouth
i still don't get how Obama going in to war is ok. But Bush lied people died no war for oil blah blah blah. Obama was not even in the country at the time. He just got back.

are you implying that obama had nothing to do with this? LOL
This is sooooo against the constitution!
00bern00b
This is sooooo against the constitution!


Aha.
Wolfys Hope's avatar

7,250 Points
  • Pie Enabler 100
  • Tycoon 200
  • Hygienic 200
00bern00b
This is sooooo against the constitution!
I really believe you need to do a little more research on the Constitution maybe also a little research on the UN. People can say what they want but if you notice President Obama's doin it by the book which is new, considering what our past few Presidents did not.
Cruise missiles aren't part of a 'no fly-zone', a 'no fly zone' is specific to manned aircraft only.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get Items
Get Gaia Cash
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games