Nuke Libya?

So... someone is seriously floating the idea of nuking Libya. Has someone finally come to their senses in how to deal with Arabs in war? Has the situation in Libya simply become so bad that there's only one way out? Is NATO really so ineffective at what it does that there's no other way to win this thing?

Some people would probably answer yest to that. One person in particular seems to think this is the ironclad truth: Libya's Prime Minister, who had this to say:
They have tried everything and failed. All that’s left for them is to use a nuclear bomb on us. Maybe that’s their only way out of this.


While I for one would love to happily oblige the man in his heartfelt and sincere request to end things the only way possible, my guess is the rebels would appreciate having a habitable country left for them when they actually win this war. Oh, didn't the Prime Minister tell you? The rebels in Libya have given Qaddafi's government a thorough pasting in recent weeks. Qaddafi's government isn't even recognized by numerous countries around the world anymore as a legitimate authority. The guy's days are indeed numbered.

So, Mr. Prime Minister, much as I'd love to see you glowing in the dark with your other deposed cronies, I think we'll just have to pass this time. NATO can deal with you just fine as we have been. Illegal war or not, we're in it, and victory is clearly right around the corner.
.........................
"It is pointless to resist, my son." -- Darth Vader
"Resistance is futile." -- The Borg
"Mother's coming for me in the dragon ships. I don't like these itchy clothes, but I have to wear them or it frightens the fish." -- Thurindil

Well. I guess that's that then.

       
« Oblivion: Creating Alternative Start Mods
Rise of the Planet of the Apes »

Posted on Aug 8, 2011 1:27 am by Samson in: | 52 comment(s) [Closed]
Comments
Actually, Qaddafi may do it himself.

Anyway, I don't think Tripoli is going to much more than a few months away now. The rebels have shown that they're willing to die for democracy, so that's one of the boxes ticked. It'll be interesting to see if they can tick the other boxes 'make a free and fair democratic country' and 'don't sponsor guys go to other countries, strap bombs to yourself, shout "Allah Akbar!" and then explode'.

       
Edited by prettyfly on Aug 8, 2011 2:54 am
Whether the rebels establish democracy remains to be seen. What is established is that said rebels are willing to die for "something other than what they already have." At this point, it's entirely possible for the new government to be more radically muslim than the existing one.

       
I was under the impression that Qaddafi was fairly secular and more just generally insane than anything else. That being said, I'm quite sure that the rebels do want to create a more muslim nation, it just remains to be seen whether it is a moderate one or a sharia law style Iran one.

Its quite spectacular for to see the rebels fight while they shout praises to Allah, but then, by the same token terrorists shout praises to exactly the same God when they kill innocent people (or NATO troops). :tongue: But then, the Klu Klux Klan worshiped and generally thought they acted in the name of the exact same god that Martin Luther King worshiped and no doubt drew felt empowered by. :shrug:

       
Well, yes, Kaddafi has been relatively moderate on the religious front for the last 20 or so years. This was not always the case. The fact that the rebels shout praises to Allah while they fight is what worries me: they may very well set up a Sharia state. Also, Kaddafi hasn't sponsored any suicide bombers in a number of years-they very well may.

Finally, yes the Ku Klux Klan does consider itself a Christian organization; albeit with a slightly different interpretation of scripture than is now considered the norm. It should be noted however, that their belief system was very mainstream ~160 years ago when they were founded; the rest of protetestantism has moved on-the klan has not.

       
I have to agree with Dallen, about all we know is that the rebels do not want Kaddafi repression, but might be really happy with Taliban repression. Until they set up the type of government and society they want, its really anyone's guess.

       
At this rate, perhaps the end is much closer than I though.

Granted, the report doesn't mention that no reporters have been allowed into Gharyan, so we don't acutally know how the fighting is going there, and Zawia clearly isn't fully secure yet, so the rebels aren't going to moving straight on to Tripoli at this point; if they've got any sense (which they seem to now) they should get the city firmly under their control and in the city and organize their forces to be on the defensive while they wait for the assaults on Gharyan Al Aziziya to conclude so that they can attack Tripoli on multiple fronts.

Best case scenario is that Zawia will be shelled a bit in the mean time, if not subject to a quite an intense counter attack. Obliviously having support from the residents will help quite a bit, but the locals aren't going to be proper substitutes from the now fairly experienced rebel soldiers.

       
AnImpatientFan [Anon] said:
Comment #7 Aug 14, 2011 3:19 pm
I think the NTC seems pretty reasonable from what we have seen so far.
I highly doubt they will choose to seize absolute power in a few weeks once Gaddafi is gone.

The question is: Who will the Libyan people elect?
If it turns out to simply be another "liberator" like Gaddafi I think things will turn for the worse.

       
The big main difference here vs Afghanistan is that the Libyans seem to genuinely want to get rid of Qaddafi whereas the Afghans don't seem to care who's in charge and just aren't of a mind to fight to get what they want. It took the Iraqis awhile before they mustered up that same desire, but now that they have it, they're doing a lot better. Libya may well turn out to be just fine before long.

The one place that appears to need genuine intervention to resolve the issue is Syria. The people there seem mightily determined, but they're badly outgunned. And it would be in the world's best interest to get Assad out of power there as quickly as possible.

       
I agree on Syria. They've got plenty of spirit but they don't have a centralised opposition leadership. And for that matter, Syria actually has a competent and well armed army, unlike Libya.

But of course, its never going to get past the UN because of a couple of nations who don't want a good example to be set (i.e. China and Russia), and I think after the experiences of Iraq and Afghanistan the west is in no hurry to rush into another unsanctioned war.

       
Well the one thing about Syria is that we already have ~100K troops at the ready on a bordering nation should the need arise. Well, I think the need has arisen. If Obama wants to score some points with the hawks, that's where he could do it rather than rushing headlong into an illegal war in Libya cloaked as a NATO action where the rebels in the country are handling their own business already.

Yes, the no-fly thing probably helped turn the tide. But it is well and truly turned, and yet we're still there. Doing a lot more than just sitting back in the ocean watching.

       
whereas the Afghans don't seem to care who's in charge and just aren't of a mind to fight to get what they want.


Well the Afghans did a pretty good job at keeping out the Russians and anyone one else who wanted to invade them. Its just that the Afghans would rather have the tribal system of politics than have some central power that changes everything. Its kind of funny, they did not want communism but where happy with Talibanism.

       
[taking offensive exception to quote at the quote above] {yes, I'm saying I'm offended} Chrisrianity has led to more abortions than any religion in history....
Now that that's out of the way...
Yep...They want to get rid of the (religiously neutral) Quadaffi. The "no fly" thing helped absolutely NOTHING. When we had it over Iraq, NOTHING.... Over Pakistan..NOTHING...Over Afghanistan NOTHING... You get the idea...Only when ground troups were sent in did it result in Something!

       
Actually, ~80% of Afghans don't want the Taliban back in control of the country, but are evidently too afraid/hopeless/lazy to do anything about it. It'd be easy to say that they should just get what they deserve if it wasn't for the fact that the Taliban likes flying planes into skyscrapers in our cities, which consequentially makes things messy for everyone.

@ Dallen; depends how you define helped. Militarily, the no-fly zone in Libya has turned the tide of the conflict. That won't count for shit if the rebels decide to make a Sharia law state and suicide bomb us or break down into intertribal conflict, but since theres no sign of that right now for all events and purposes the Libyan no-fly zone has worked mighty fine. And ironically, its the only such intervention that the presisdent didn't seem congressional approval from... :shrug:

       
Edited by prettyfly on Aug 14, 2011 6:52 pm
The whole thing about Qadaffi being religiously nuetral doesn't mean that the rebels are going to be a bunch of extremists either. In fact, Qadaffi encouraged extremism in Libyan by deliberately disenfranchising the more pious communities within the country. The best way to turn a Muslim into a terrorist is to keep him unemployed and in poverty.

       
@Pretty- I never said it did- Just that we don't know what we're getting with the rebels so we'ed better excercise some form of caution.

       
Chrisrianity has led to more abortions than any religion in history....

Trololololo.......

But seriously? No. That would be atheism my friend, because Christianity specifically calls abortion murder under God's law.

       
ahuh so does Judahism (if their is such a word) and Mohadism (if there is such a word).

       
Yes, and you might take notice that none of those religions are running around advocating population control through pre-natal euthanasia.

       
Well, that is true. The last time I heard anyone doing that was the state of Virginia in 1978...and then it wasn't running around... it was more like running for cover.
The last time I heard of anyone OPENLY saying anything like that was the third reich, and we all know how that worked out...

       
Progressives learned not to be so vocal about it. The woman who founded Planned Parenthood was an open supporter of eugenics for example. You don't get them talking about that today unless they trust you. A lot.

       
Chrisrianity has led to more abortions than any religion in history....


Trololololo.......

But seriously? No. That would be atheism my friend, because Christianity specifically calls abortion murder under God's law.


Yeah, most Christians tend to believe that it is God that gives life and only God can take it away, so i fail to see how one can draw the conclusion that Christianity has led to more abortions. If anything, secular humanism or individualism has done more in this regard as they tend to hold the rights of the individual above all else. So the right of the woman is more important than the right of a fetus.

       
AnImpatientFan [Anon] said:
Comment #22 Aug 15, 2011 3:22 am
Killing of Assad would really, really hurt Irans foreign interests, :grinning:

But... I don't think military intervention would be wise because alot of the Islamists in the Middle East would go even more apeshit about US "meddling".

       
Yeah, most Christians tend to believe that it is God that gives life and only God can take it away...

Actually, I was mocking when I said that it led to more abortions.(and had had about a dozen to many) As far as Eugenics goes, there has to be something inherently wrong with the fetus to call it that. For example, the Virginia law I referenced called for the sterilization of individuals with certain mental/medical conditions;(whether they actually were still doing it in 1978 IDK;but that's when they took it off the books). Planned Parenthood is on the whim of the Mother. On the other hand, I have mixed feelings if I know, for absolute certainty, that bringing the child to term is going to mean a life sentence of pain and dependancy.

       
Edited by dallen68 on Aug 15, 2011 4:15 am
(and had had about a dozen to many)


LOL one of those days huh.

       
But... I don't think military intervention would be wise because alot of the Islamists in the Middle East would go even more apeshit about US "meddling".

Which is why we should wait until the Syrian people ask for our help. So far as I'm aware, they have yet to do so. Maybe we shouldn't have to do that, but as you say, the Islamic world would just go even more apeshit than they are already if we don't.

As far as Eugenics goes, there has to be something inherently wrong with the fetus to call it that.

Hitler believed that being the wrong race WAS something inherently wrong, and yes, so did the woman who founded Planned Parenthood. There's a reason their services tended to be targeted toward blacks back in the day. There's a reason their services still tend to be in areas where black populations are highest even today, but you won't ever get them to admit this.

       
<< prev 1, 2, 3 next >>
Comments Closed
Comments for this entry have been closed.
Anonymous
Register

Forgot Password?

SuMoTuWeThFrSa
 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31