Poll: DELETED_74993

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Payback is a bitch.

The Rafale is still overpriced though!

You should see the political tricks the French are playing so they can win the Brazilian FX-2 fighter competition.

 

[dirtydog]

Why dont we!

International law?

Basic right and wrong?

 

[dalin80]

Which would be?

The massive arms deals that they had been securing with gadaffi and the billions of dollars worth of deals covering industries from rail to pipe lines that they have essentially just lost.

A regime change could potentially cost the russians billions.

 

[Castiel]

Why do we have the right to assassinate him!

The reason why we have a right to do anything.

Because we can, and who is to stop us.

That is how these things work, international law is only as good or as effective as we decide it to be. If we decide that killing Gaddafi is the best policy we will simply make it a targeted killing, which is lawful.

Funny thing international law, it all depends on what you call something, not what that something actually is.

 

[snowball1]

Why do we have the right to assassinate him!

Lockerbie

 

[arknor]

Lockerbie

most likely it wasnt even libya who was responsible...

doubt the arab league are happy with assasination attempts no doubt china and russia are getting upset now.

if people arent careful its going to start ww3 as it was suposed to be a no fly zone not a lets assassinate gaddafi resolution

 

[godinman]

This is a bad thing and will end badly. Why do we always have to **** about in the east? This will only generate more hate for us, as the people we're 'protecting' (HAHAHAHAHA) don't think we're doing enough and the people we're attacking see it as what it is.

 

[Danthus]

The reason why we have a right to do anything.

Because we can, and who is to stop us.

That is how these things work, international law is only as good or as effective as we decide it to be. If we decide that killing Gaddafi is the best policy we will simply make it a targeted killing, which is lawful.

Funny thing international law, it all depends on what you call something, not what that something actually is.

So we can't really moan then if someone decides to shoot David Cameron.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

The massive arms deals that they had been securing with gadaffi and the billions of dollars worth of deals covering industries from rail to pipe lines that they have essentially just lost.

A regime change could potentially cost the russians billions.

Nail = head.

 

[Glaucus]

No wonder they are getting upset, blowing tanks and buildings up. I didn't think that was allowed under this UN resolution?

 

[arknor]

No wonder they are getting upset, blowing tanks and buildings up. I didn't think that was allowed under this UN resolution?

its all about protecting civilians aparently

must be why they attack gaddafis bunker with bunker buster bombs....

i like how these ceasefires are aparently broke within minutes... china should send over its army for peacekeeping and to make sure a ceasefire doesnt get broken

 

[meghatronic]

its all about protecting civilians aparently

must be why they attack gaddafis bunker with bunker buster bombs....

Dr John Gearson, from King's College London, tells the BBC it is not surprising that Col Gadaffi's compound was targeted during the air strikes: "Completely reasonable military logic is, if you want to stop a country's or a leader's capacity to threaten his civilians, you have to take away his ability to communicate and to direct his forces. So it's entirely logical, and a reasonable target - but it's a very difficult sell in the international community. So I'm sure there'll be an effort not only to explain it, but to emphasise that this is not the main mission today."

No wonder they are getting upset, blowing tanks and buildings up. I didn't think that was allowed under this UN resolution?

Oh?

Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-General, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, and acting in cooperation with the Secretary-General, to take all necessary measures, notwithstanding paragraph 9 of resolution 1970 (2011), to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory, and requests the Member States concerned to inform the Secretary-General immediately of the measures they take pursuant to the authorization conferred by this paragraph which shall be immediately reported to the Security Council;

So we can't really moan then if someone decides to shoot David Cameron.

He's not a god, or a monarch. I'd expect a serious retaliation though. Compare his security to the US Presidents'.....

 

[CaptainRAVE]

I really hope we don't assume control of this.

+1

It seems to be going that way at the moment.

 

[Surfer]

All you people voting that yeah we should be attacking another sovereign nation...shame on you.. I wonder if one day History will remember us (UK, US, France etc) as being the war aggressors and manipulators of regime change in foreign nations.

Ashamed to be british tbh.

 

[RoboCod]

Originally Posted by guardian reader comment
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.

Nail and head.

And yet people like yourself jump in your cars, switch on your lights, watch TV and live a generally cushy life regardless. You can't go around banging the morals drum when you don't appear to be one bit willing to give up your modern life consuming oil like we do. It's easy for people like yourself to point at politicians and label them as scoundrels out to plunder nations oil but after all said and done it's clear we're all in it together.

You're living in a country that was made rich by war, rape and pillage. Despite however much people may have developed their morals and concern for human rights today the inevitable truth is that this will always be the way for a nation to continue successfully. Whilst this doesn't make it right, it does unfortunately make it necessary... unless of course we were all willing to live in caves?

 

[snowball1]

All you people voting that yeah we should be attacking another sovereign nation...shame on you.. I wonder if one day History will remember us (UK, US, France etc) as being the war aggressors and manipulators of regime change in foreign nations.

Ashamed to be british tbh.

Hate to tell you, but we've been doing it for hundreds of years!

 

[RoboCod]

Before 9/11...


http://www.institute-for-afghan-studies.org/AFGHAN CONFLICT/Drugs/Taliban Wipes Out Opium.htm


Today...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_production_in_Afghanistan


Wake up.

You clearly don't know what you're on about with the Taleban and Opium.

Having studied for some time I could probably enlighten you further; the Taleban don't give a monkey about whether Opium is permissable or not, it's not as if they follow the Koran for guidance on the matter. The Taleban constantanly change their regulation of Opium production depending on how it would benefit their cause at the time. By restricting poppy growth, for example, they were able to inflate the price of Opium (simple really), meaning more "tax" from the farmers they would brutalise.

Don't be misguided in thinking the Taleban have good motives and practice the five pillars of faith properly. They don't.

EDIT: if you believe Wiki, I just read that is explained on there too!

 

[meghatronic]

All you people voting that yeah we should be attacking another sovereign nation...shame on you.. I wonder if one day History will remember us (UK, US, France etc) as being the war aggressors and manipulators of regime change in foreign nations.

Ashamed to be british tbh.

Feel free to burn your passport and leave if you can't live with yourself anymore.

Personally, I'm relieved we're preventing another Sovereign nation from firing anti-aircraft weaponry at civilians.

 

[mmj_uk]

BBC propaganda machine was in overdrive this morning, some Libyan bloke in full support of us obliterating Gaddafi and a story about planes aborting a mission because they feared for nearby civilians (convenient given the Arab league concerns).

 

[meghatronic]

BBC propaganda machine was in overdrive this morning, some Libyan bloke in full support of us obliterating Gaddafi and a story about planes aborting a mission because they feared for nearby civilians (convenient given the Arab league concerns).

There is no pleasing some people.