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.
dalin80 said:
China cant really back action against a leadership that kills its own people, imprisons protesters and crushes dissent when they do the exact same on a regular basis.
Click to expand...

Woke up this morning to find China and Russia condemning attacks on Libya. If they had such a problem with it, why not veto the vote at the UN? Hypocrites!
 
lfo0140l.jpg
 
CaptainRAVE said:
Woke up this morning to find China and Russia condemning attacks on Libya. If they had such a problem with it, why not veto the vote at the UN? Hypocrites!
Click to expand...

Because western media would have crucified them for supporting the alleged genocide and we'd have gone in anyway playing the heroes.

I like how it's quickly turned from simply a no fly zone to basically a war against Gaddafe and his forces.
 
mmj_uk said:
I like how it's quickly turned from simply a no fly zone to basically a war against Gaddafe and his forces.
Click to expand...

The UN decision was about stopping Gaddafi slaying his citizens, not just a no fly zone, so his army are fair game. Tanks and artillery kill people too ;)
 
Well well well, looks like i missed all the action last night, but my predictions do seem correct.

Nice to see a British sub launch some cruise missiles i hope we got to test the Astute class launch systems and give the crews some battle experience.

I love how the British do things, 3,000 mile trip, mid air refueling, stick some long range weapons into him and fly home, it's logistical things like this that make us one of the best in the world, shows the rest of the world that no matter how far away the theater of operation is we will get to it, knock seven bells out of you and fly home, Go Britain!
 
guardian reader comment said:
For the last twenty years all the West's wars have turned around one thing, that is, if one discounts the propaganda about "human rights" "genocide" "massacres" "weapons of mass destruction" "barbarism" "madmen" and all the rest of it; behind all the wars there's been one over-riding factor - access to and control of vital resources - specifically - OIL.

This is of course difficult to accept, despite the mountain of hard evidence supporting this anlysis, because, if true, this would make our democratic leaders look little better than Chicago-style gangsters involved in massive, global, racket. And if this is true, that our leaders are merely gangsters, then this means that our democracy isn't quite what it appears to be on the surface, and I'm sure we don't want to go down that particular road. So it's far easier and safer to accept the fairytales we'er told rather than the brutal truth.

The worst thing is that we are on a definite historic trajectory coming from war and leading towards more wars. They are coming because the West needs energy, is in decline economically, and war is about all we've got left open to us. We intend to go down fighting, like most empires do. The great, historic, irony; and tragedy, that imperialist wars don't delay, but actually increase the rate of imperial decline, is lost on our ruling elite, who have become drunk on their own brazen propaganda.
Click to expand...

Nail and head.
 
Zip said:
Afghan is just flowing with oil isn't it ;)
Click to expand...

No but it is the world's main producer of opium which the Taliban stopped production of, and we couldn't have that as it's just too profitable. Since we invaded they are the world's top producer again and all that lovely money is sloshing through London and New York.

Also Afghanistan is the location of an important gas pipeline: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Afghanistan_Pipeline

Finally there are supposedly trillions worth of mineral resources: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...claims-mineral-wealth-is-worth-3trillion.html

Or perhaps it's really about bringing peace and democracy to the Afghan civilians, and defeating 'terrorists' :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom