So, is the left denouncing Obama's "unlawful" war in Libya?

[Avatar4321]

You know what I really love? How the neocon whackjobs absolutely foamed at the mouth over Bush being criticised over an unjust war such as Iraq II, and are doing the same - for a very different reason - over a justified action like what is happening in Libya.

Bear in mind these are the same loons - on this very board - who wanted Gaddafi taken out when Scotland released the alleged Lockerbie bombers back into Libyian hands...

How on earth can you conclude that Saddam was unjustified and Khadafi is?

I can state very clearly why I supported one and why I don't support this one. Much of it has to do with the speed by which we are moving in, the lack of information being provided by the public, the lack of any sort of interest on our part, and the lack of authorization from Congress.

Gulf War 1 -totally justified
Gulf War 2 was a "he tried to kill my daddy' action, that was full of spite payback

You do realise that the UN, with regard to Libya, are only doing what Bush said he would do with regard to the Marsh Arabs etc just after Gulf War I. And we know what happened to those poor people due to Bush Snrs' lack of action. What Obama is doing is showing balls and leadership, which must really stick the craw of neocons (not that you are one btw)

With all due respect, what leadership is Obama showing? He's following the lead of others. That really doesn't take leadership in my book. Im surprised he was able to take time off his vacation to acknowledge we are at war.

 

[dilloduck]

It's a UN sanctioned action...and there is no subtefuge...

Did the NZ ambassador to the UN fill you in on that one ?

You know Dillo, I reckon 99 percent of 40,000+ posts are full of one liners with nothing to say. When you want to have an indepth debate, let me know. I'm not interested in one-liners that wouldn't even make the grade at amateur hour at the Yellowknife comedy club..

was that a yes or a no?
yada yada yada----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Avatar4321]

Apparently, it's the UN who decides what is just to the good Dr.

Personally, I don't agree.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Ahh Hope & Change. Enjoy.

 

[Dr Grump]

How on earth can you conclude that Saddam was unjustified and Khadafi is?

I can state very clearly why I supported one and why I don't support this one. Much of it has to do with the speed by which we are moving in, the lack of information being provided by the public, the lack of any sort of interest on our part, and the lack of authorization from Congress.

Gulf War 1 -totally justified
Gulf War 2 was a "he tried to kill my daddy' action, that was full of spite payback

You do realise that the UN, with regard to Libya, are only doing what Bush said he would do with regard to the Marsh Arabs etc just after Gulf War I. And we know what happened to those poor people due to Bush Snrs' lack of action. What Obama is doing is showing balls and leadership, which must really stick the craw of neocons (not that you are one btw)

With all due respect, what leadership is Obama showing? He's following the lead of others. That really doesn't take leadership in my book. Im surprised he was able to take time off his vacation to acknowledge we are at war.

Of course he is showing leadership. Bush showed it in Iraq too, just not very well. You are letting your partisan eyes cloud your judgement...

 

[Dr Grump]

Did the NZ ambassador to the UN fill you in on that one ?

You know Dillo, I reckon 99 percent of 40,000+ posts are full of one liners with nothing to say. When you want to have an indepth debate, let me know. I'm not interested in one-liners that wouldn't even make the grade at amateur hour at the Yellowknife comedy club..

was that a yes or a no?
yada yada yada----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh, look, another post from Dillo where the word count barely passes double digits...and even then, three of them are nonsensical...

 

[LibocalypseNow]

It's definitely the 'D' by his name that's giving most on the Left so much trouble. They're just not sure how to spin these bombings. If he just had that 'R' by his name,things would be so much easier for them. I really do think the Left/Democrats would be much happier people if DA BOOOOOOOSH was still around. He gave their lives some meaning. Right now they just seem so rudderless & clueless. They desperately need another Republican President Boogeyman. So why don't we give them what they want in 2012? What do ya say?

 

[Trajan]

Well, it's too late to be for or against the Obama War in Libya.

Now, it's a matter of winning it. We're in it, so we must win it. How do we win it? Leaving Ghaddafi in power would be seen by the Arab world (aka Al Qaida) and propagandized to a Muslim defeat of the USA. Not good.

So, lets see how the Commander in Chief fights his very first self-initiated war.

He didn't initiated Jack. The UN did.

I know you loons think the UN sucks, but us - who live in the real world - don't live and die by the thoughts/actions of a few. We take other opinions into consideration, and when they agree, do something about it. Unlike the last coalition of the willing that included such powerhouses as Albania and Slovenia, when the Brits, French AND Yanks agree on something, then its worth doing.

well be that as it may, I have to mention another multi European UN mission....do I need to say it? you could name one but we both know there were 2, each different but strewn with the same tripwires and dangers. Ethnic hatred, territorial division, one didn't even needs arms ( no pun intended).

Question- what is the end game here? we cannot seem to get a consistent answer from the admin. as they have contradicted each like 4 times in the space of 24 hours.....IF the UN is left in charge, well, god help them. Unless of course you see us moving troops in...or the French or Italians or the Brits.....for how long? Long enough? whats long enough?

They are making this up as they go along, if you think that that's adequate,even against an apparent nutty slob like Gadaffi, well, I beg to differ.

Did you hear the pres. today in Chile? hes going to turn over control, incl. operational control of our troops to......who? did you read the transcript?

Following a common geopolitical line is far better than some skewed neocon agenda designed to incorporate a New World order that will only benefit the greedy few...

the common geo-political line, do you mean then he has oil and Darfur doesn't?

I have no idea what the new world stuff is about. sounds Illumanitish to me....I should ask Toro.

 

[Dr Grump]

It's definitely the 'D' by his name that's giving most on the Left so much trouble. They're just not sure how to spin these bombings. If he just had that 'R' by his name,things would be so much easier for them. I really do think the Left/Democrats would be much happier people if DA BOOOOOOOSH was still around. He gave their lives some meaning. Right now they just seem so rudderless & clueless. They desperately need another Republican President Boogeyman. So why don't we give them what they want in 2012? What do ya say?

Obama will win in 2012. Be a lot closer than 2008, but unless something absolutely terrible happens, he'll be your pres in 2013

 

[Dr Grump]

Well, it's too late to be for or against the Obama War in Libya.

Now, it's a matter of winning it. We're in it, so we must win it. How do we win it? Leaving Ghaddafi in power would be seen by the Arab world (aka Al Qaida) and propagandized to a Muslim defeat of the USA. Not good.

So, lets see how the Commander in Chief fights his very first self-initiated war.

He didn't initiated Jack. The UN did.

I know you loons think the UN sucks, but us - who live in the real world - don't live and die by the thoughts/actions of a few. We take other opinions into consideration, and when they agree, do something about it. Unlike the last coalition of the willing that included such powerhouses as Albania and Slovenia, when the Brits, French AND Yanks agree on something, then its worth doing.

well be that as it may, I have to mention another multi European UN mission....do I need to say it? you could name one but we both know there were 2, each different but strewn with the same tripwires and dangers. Ethnic hatred, territorial division, one didn't even needs arms ( no pun intended).

Question- what is the end game here? we cannot seem to get a consistent answer from the admin. as they have contradicted each like 4 times in the space of 24 hours.....IF the UN is left in charge, well, god help them. Unless of course you see us moving troops in...or the French or Italians or the Brits.....for how long? Long enough? whats long enough?

They are making this up as they go along, if you think that that's adequate,even against an apparent nutty slob like Gadaffi, well, I beg to differ.

Did you hear the pres. today in Chile? hes going to turn over control, incl. operational control of our troops to......who? did you read the transcript?

Following a common geopolitical line is far better than some skewed neocon agenda designed to incorporate a New World order that will only benefit the greedy few...

the common geo-political line, do you mean then he has oil and Darfur doesn't?

I have no idea what the new world stuff is about. sounds Illumanitish to me....I should ask Toro.

You mean the repub admin in Afghan. and Iraq wasn't making it up as they went along? That aside, you have the French and Brits firmly onside. That right htere is a game changer.

You do know there was a vote in Sudan - under the auspices of the UN - that voted to split the country in half, right? Of course this has to do with oil. Unlike both Bushes with regard to Iraq, Obama AND the UN have come out and said so. Nice and refreshing to have a litlte honesty.

Hey Wolfowitz/Pearl and that deferment specialist and neocon god Dick Cheney wrote the story on the New World Order. Take it up with them.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

It's definitely the 'D' by his name that's giving most on the Left so much trouble. They're just not sure how to spin these bombings. If he just had that 'R' by his name,things would be so much easier for them. I really do think the Left/Democrats would be much happier people if DA BOOOOOOOSH was still around. He gave their lives some meaning. Right now they just seem so rudderless & clueless. They desperately need another Republican President Boogeyman. So why don't we give them what they want in 2012? What do ya say?

Obama will win in 2012. Be a lot closer than 2008, but unless something absolutely terrible happens, he'll be your pres in 2013

Hey i was trying to help the Left/Democrats. They really do seem lost without their BOOOOOSH Boogeyman around anymore. It was so much easier for them to just blame him for everything. They have no idea how to spin these bombings. The 'D' by his name really is throwing them off. His second term will only be worse. Are they really so sure they don't want a Republican President Boogeyman instead? They should think about it a bit more before answering.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

The Arab League has just withdrawn their support for this Intervention. They were told this would be a "No Fly Zone" but it's clear they're bombing hundreds of ground targets. I said their "No Fly Zone" was Bullshit right fom the start. Looks like the Arab League just caught on.

 

[Jack Fate]

The Arab League has just withdrawn their support for this Intervention. They were told this would be a "No Fly Zone" but it's clear they're bombing hundreds of ground targets. I said their "No Fly Zone" was Bullshit right fom the start. Looks like the Arab League just caught on.

Yeah. Some pissant around here used the Arab League support a few days ago in a thread. That didn't last long. You lefties are so damn stupid.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I thought the Democrats supported the Iraq war, isn't that what you clowns have tried to sell for the last 8 years?

Yes, it is...

They voted for it, unlike the current one in Libya.

Just saying.

 

[sinister59]

No? Well then what is the problem with Iraq again? (Not that I am defending Iraq, I thought it was dumb, I think military action in Libya is dumb too). So...where are the left's cries for peace like in 2003?

have a clue what your talking about ?

the UN tuck lead on this we are part of the UN .
not like the repigs invasion of Iraq ,

you would think its dumb to help anyone thats not you .
teabaggers suck

 

[Quantum Windbag]

He didn't initiated Jack. The UN did.

How did the UN initiate it? Did they fire the first missile? Drop the first bomb? Believe it or not, a resolution does not initiate anything.

BTW, Bush had UN resolutions backing his position, does that men he did not initiate anything?

I know you loons think the UN sucks, but us - who live in the real world - don't live and die by the thoughts/actions of a few. We take other opinions into consideration, and when they agree, do something about it. Unlike the last coalition of the willing that included such powerhouses as Albania and Slovenia, when the Brits, French AND Yanks agree on something, then its worth doing.

What do they agree on? Everyone one of them has a different goal.

Following a common geopolitical line is far better than some skewed neocon agenda designed to incorporate a New World order that will only benefit the greedy few...

Canada and the US want regime change, Britain and France want the oil, and the Arab League just wants Qaddafi to stay in Libya and leave them alone.

You are right, nothing beats a clear goal and a common geopolitical line.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Yea even their BOOOOOOOSH Boogeyman went to Congress. This should have been presented to our Congress for debate & authorization. I don't care if it's a UN Mandate or not. That's besides the point in my opinion. Why are we bombing & killing Libyans? Why are we involved with their Civil War? It just doesn't make any sense.

 

[Londoner]

We can no longer afford all these wars.

Cost of War to the United States | COSTOFWAR.COM

(Imagine if the taxpayer had the billions spent in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Libya? We can no longer afford to the cost of empire. All great powers learn this the hard way.)

Paul/Kucinich in 2012

 

[LibocalypseNow]

We can no longer afford all these wars.

Cost of War to the United States | COSTOFWAR.COM

(Imagine if the taxpayer had the billions spent in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Libya? We can no longer afford to the cost of empire. All great powers learn this the hard way.)

Paul/Kucinich in 2012

Amen Brotha.

 

[JamesInFlorida]

Yea even their BOOOOOOOSH Boogeyman went to Congress. This should have been presented to our Congress for debate & authorization. I don't care if it's a UN Mandate or not. That's besides the point in my opinion. Why are we bombing & killing Libyans? Why are we involved with their Civil War? It just doesn't make any sense.

Neither one of Bush's wars (I support the war in Afghanistan 100% for the record), were DECLARED wars-as written in the constitution.

Just because Bush went to congress, doesn't mean congress declared war (they haven't since WW2). Now we've obviously been to war since WW2-but we've never declared it.

If someone's logic is Obama is disregarding the constitution because congress hasn't declared war yet-therefore Libya is constitutional-that's fine. But that means every single military assualt/war since WW2 has been unconstitutional.

I do agree with you we have absolutely no business in Libya.

And to be fair "da booooosh" as you like to throw around-had a VERY different view on foreign policy than Ron Paul does. You can't brush all Democrats, or Republicans with a broad brush when it comes to foreign policy/wars.