jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (9 posts)

Iraq, Afghanistan and now Libya?

  1. Aiden Roberts profile image88
    Aiden Robertsposted 6 years ago

    I am watching our Prime Minister explain our pending conflict with Libya, he is arguing that we have a responsibilty to protect the citizens of the world, I agree but can we really police the world.

    It would seem that the UN resolution is in place and the usual countries are ready to go, Gadaffi himself has said "Hell will be released on any country that invades Libya". We are already aware of the capability of Gadaffi in terms of reaping carnage but realistacly can we afford to intervene even though I agree we should.

    Stretching our armed forces any further especially in light of budget cuts surely will have a detrimental effect on our ability to complete what we have started in other countries and leave our own national security open to attack.

    Were will it end!

    1. pisean282311 profile image58
      pisean282311posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      back to good old days when brit ruled half of earth...only thing is that this time UN would be needed to pay the bills of brits...so it would be like usa/uk on payroll of UN...no bad considering how economies are doing tongue

    2. Aiden Roberts profile image88
      Aiden Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      UPDATE:

      Looks like Europe are working together, that's a first.

    3. Aiden Roberts profile image88
      Aiden Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      GREAT NEWS

      Libya have announced an immediate ceasefire and have said they will protect all citizens.

      1. pisean282311 profile image58
        pisean282311posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        which means all gadaafi  loyalist!!!!!!!!

    4. recommend1 profile image71
      recommend1posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I thought the blatant BS of policing the world had been totally exposed by now as the cover for destabilising countries in favour of some puppet president or other who will bow to the UK or the US or one of the other colonial powers turned arms manufacturers.

      Whatever is touted as the reason - you can be sure it is to do with lining somebody's pocket and/or distracting attention from the disastrous economic policies of those countries.

  2. Aiden Roberts profile image88
    Aiden Robertsposted 6 years ago

    The funding is a big issue without question, it is the human cost that bothers me the most. I just don't see how we and the USA can continue down this road with no end in sight.

    I feel for any oppressed society, I feel isn't actually strong enough but you get the gist, realistically can we sort the worlds problems out and can we afford not to try?

  3. khmohsin profile image61
    khmohsinposted 6 years ago

    Iraq and Afghanistan had different situations but in Libya there is different situation because the people of Libya no more want to see Qazafi

  4. readytoescape profile image60
    readytoescapeposted 6 years ago

    Unfortunately this ‘resolution” comes way to late to make any difference. This situation has been ongoing for 31 days and is basically over. Qadaffi thumbed his nose at the rest of the world, solidified his grip of power and has primarily broken the rebellion.

    The resolution does contain language that is a harbinger of war that appears to signal the world community has decided to eliminate Qaddaffi. Of particular insight are the comments made by US UN Ambassador Susan Rice   "We need to be prepared to contemplate steps that include, but perhaps go beyond, a no-fly zone at this point, as the situation on the ground has evolved, and as a no-fly zone has inherent limitations”

    And further to paraphrase another of her comment made during a presser, “Qaddaffi has proved he does not deserve to stay in power”

    The latter comment seems to assure military action is imminent and indicates more that just establishing a now almost unless NO Fly zone.

 
working