Poll: DELETED_74993

Were we right to get involved in Libya?

  • Yes

    Votes: 306 50.9%

  • No

    Votes: 295 49.1%
  • Total voters
    601
Status
Not open for further replies.
OldCoals said:
It is easy to list various actions by the west that are comparable to what you have listed.

We are not the white knight that you think we are.
Click to expand...

But who gives a ****, you live in the West mate, worry about whats going to bomb you.
 
XRAY said:
Again: irrelevant. I don't know what will happen in those countries. I also couldn't tell you that the West's motives are purely altruistic.

The point I was making is that Gaddafi is no longer - if he ever even was - fit to legitimately rule his people. Regardless of the hypocrisy of said actions, preventing him from killing his own people IS morally justified.
Click to expand...

You are just digging a hole for yourself to be honest, what makes King Abdullah bin Abdul-Aziz the legitimate ruler of Saudi Arabia?
 
Castiel said:
Old Coals is not quite as fervent on Immigration and Race as DD.
Click to expand...

Our country is full of state run propaganda and media outlets which don't tell the truth, what sort of country do we live in?

Actually in the real world we live in a country with some of the best factual news reporting in the world, free from government influence (unless the information they wish to broadcast would effect the security of the nation that is).
 
arknor said:
news flash america suported the ira and gave them weapons to and no were best friends with them :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Your right, a small , no sorry minute section of irish americans donating is the same as a country wholesale backing a terrorist organisation is the same thing, **** me sorry i got that wrong.
 
Firestar_3x said:
Our country is full of state run propaganda and media outlets which don't tell the truth, what sort of country do we live in?

Actually in the real world we live in a country with some of the best factual news reporting in the world, free from government influence (unless the information they wish to broadcast would effect the security of the nation that is).
Click to expand...

Complete bull, if you want unbiased and less propaganda, you should watch RT, they provide the best source of news.
 
XRAY said:
I don't quite see how I am. You asked why Gadaffi should be removed. I gave you a list of reasons.

I wasn't responding to anything but your question regarding Gadaffi. As I've already said, hypocrisy shown by the West with regards to Middle Eastern dictatorships may be the case, but that has nothing to do with whether or not it is morally justifiable to allow Gadaffi to kill his own citizens.

The question was regarding Libya. I gave an answer regarding Libya.
Click to expand...

But the reason for the action being taken in Libya is a humanitarian one, does that reason only apply in Libya?

Why is it defined by a boundary on a map?
 
LateX'Dog said:
Shimples....

Oil reserves in Libya are the largest in Africa and the ninth largest in the world with 41.5 billion barrels (6.60×10^9 m3) as of 2007. Oil production was 1.8 million barrels per day (290×10^3 m3/d) as of 2006, giving Libya 63 years of reserves at current production rates if no new reserves were to be found. Libya is considered a highly attractive oil area due to its low cost of oil production (as low as $1 per barrel at some fields), and proximity to European markets. Libya would like to increase production from 1.8 Mbbl/d (290×10^3 m3/d) in 2006 to 3 Mbbl/d (480×10^3 m3/d) by 2010–13 but with existing oil fields undergoing a 7–8% decline rate, Libya's challenge is maintaining production at mature fields, while finding and developing new oil fields. Most of Libya remains unexplored as a result of past sanctions and disagreements with foreign oil companies.[1]

Cumulative production through 2009 was 27 Gbbl.[2] Given the stated number, this would be 65% of reserves.
Click to expand...

This action has come from the UN though and it's pretty rare that they pass something as serious as action rather than just impose sanctions, so it's obviously quite serious.

This isn't a case of a few allied countries deciding to go in somewhere that hasn't been UN backed, this has been passed by a 192 member security council.

Crucially if it was about Oil, notice how the US hasn't gone wading in. Thus far all they have done is make available some of their assets to other forces.
 
LateX'Dog said:
Complete bull, if you want unbiased and less propaganda, you should watch RT, they provide the best source of news.
Click to expand...

Sorry but thats BS, go fly round the world go watch other nations TV news channels then come back home and watch ours, every single media outlet in the world is always going to try and put the country of origin in the best possible light.

However the blatent lies other countrys tell its population is just laughable, our media in this respect is very good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom