Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

USA's Liberation of Libya has begun.


  • Please log in to reply
469 replies to this topic

#1 Royal

Royal
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,218 posts

Posted 19 March 2011 - 08:01 PM

Along with the French, we are kicking ass.

#2 jg

jg
  • VibeTribe
  • 2,936 posts

Posted 19 March 2011 - 08:03 PM

according to a CBS reporter in Tripoli, nothing is going on.

Also he's reporting that the Libyans are massing civilians near all major targets.

#3 robberry

robberry
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,219 posts
  • LocationNew York

Posted 19 March 2011 - 08:04 PM

I feel bad to make light of the situation, but:

Posted Image

#4 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,520 posts

Posted 19 March 2011 - 08:06 PM

U.S. Launches Cruise Missiles Against Qaddafi's Air Defenses


The U.S. Navy fires the first U.S. Tomahawk cruise missiles against Libyan leader's Muammar al-Qaddafi's air defenses Saturday, a military source tells Fox News.

The U.S. military strikes clear the way for European and other planes to enforce a no-fly zone designed to ground Qaddafi's air force and cripple his ability to inflict further violence on rebels, U.S. officials said.

Hours after Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton attended an international conference in Paris that endorsed military action against Qaddafi, the U.S. was poised to kick off its attacks on Libyan air defense missile and radar sites along the Mediterranean coast to protect no-fly zone pilots from the threat of getting shot down.

"We have every reason to fear that left unchecked, Qaddafi will commit unspeakable atrocities," Clinton said.

A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity in order to discuss sensitive military operations, said the Obama administration intended to limit its involvement -- at least in the initial stages -- to helping protect French and other air missions.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.c.../#ixzz1H4t4DB67

#5 Speckta

Speckta
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,110 posts
  • LocationQueens, NY

Posted 19 March 2011 - 08:41 PM

I have a bit of a bone to pick with the wording of the title, there, Ry.

#6 Chip

Chip
  • VibeTribe
  • 1,856 posts

Posted 19 March 2011 - 08:43 PM

USA's Liberation of Libya's Oil has begun

.

#7 Depends

Depends
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,927 posts

Posted 19 March 2011 - 08:50 PM

Maybe the Libian people will see us as liberators. Parades. Heros. Where have I heard that before.

#8 Speckta

Speckta
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,110 posts
  • LocationQueens, NY

Posted 19 March 2011 - 08:53 PM

It's actually not at all what's being said by the US, international community, or the press...

This situation is nowhere near the same as Iraq...

#9 Dagan

Dagan
  • VibeTribe
  • 2,907 posts
  • LocationThe X-Men Mansion, Hoth, VT

Posted 19 March 2011 - 09:05 PM

Posted Image

#10 Jwheelz

Jwheelz
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,837 posts
  • LocationNutmeg State

Posted 19 March 2011 - 09:05 PM

I get the sense that these are airstrikes to help prevent a mass murder of the rebels by Ghaddafi... but as with any recent US military action, I will paying attention to the language our leadership uses, and it would be disastrous for us to send any ground forces.

#11 beerzrkr

beerzrkr
  • VibeTribe
  • 716 posts

Posted 19 March 2011 - 09:09 PM

How

#12 Speckta

Speckta
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,110 posts
  • LocationQueens, NY

Posted 19 March 2011 - 09:19 PM

:rotf: Kk.

#13 freshwater dan

freshwater dan
  • VibeTribe
  • 149 posts

Posted 19 March 2011 - 09:34 PM

Of course U.S. ground forces will be the eventual outcome. Once Gaddafi and sons are deposed, someone is going to "lay claim" to all that territory and oil. The French, UK, and US have already put in their dibs. Russians and Chinese will probably get a piece too. No way that can take place without a "UN peacekeeping force", which of course equals American Soldiers, equipment, supplies, contracts, logistics, etc.

#14 Java Time

Java Time
  • VibeTribe
  • 9,972 posts
  • Locationthe Island

Posted 19 March 2011 - 09:39 PM

Our President is growing up right in front of our eyes! Way to go Mr. President :thumpup:

#15 blindmule

blindmule
  • VibeTribe
  • 835 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 01:52 AM

Posted Image

#16 williscat2000

williscat2000
  • VibeTribe
  • 2,446 posts
  • LocationNorthern NJ

Posted 20 March 2011 - 03:30 AM

what are we going to do about a government, after kaddafy falls?

#17 Java Time

Java Time
  • VibeTribe
  • 9,972 posts
  • Locationthe Island

Posted 20 March 2011 - 11:18 AM

Set up a democracy...hopefully find a group of Libyian folks that are willing to run a country giving everyone the same rights (in theory) and have the UN monitor them...and hopefully the Kaddafy faithful won't run interference in the process.

#18 williscat2000

williscat2000
  • VibeTribe
  • 2,446 posts
  • LocationNorthern NJ

Posted 20 March 2011 - 11:38 AM

Set up a democracy...hopefully find a group of Libyian folks that are willing to run a country giving everyone the same rights (in theory) and have the UN monitor them...and hopefully the Kaddafy faithful won't run interference in the process.


Exact same plan we used in Iraq and afganistan:rolleyes:

#19 Java Time

Java Time
  • VibeTribe
  • 9,972 posts
  • Locationthe Island

Posted 20 March 2011 - 11:53 AM

Exact same plan we used in Iraq and afganistan:rolleyes:


Indeed...I think it could actually work in Libya (I think it can eventually work in Iraq...Afghanistan is a different animal but perhaps in time or set em up as 4 or 5 countries... :dunno:) and at a rather fast pace to boot :ura1:

#20 scarfire

scarfire
  • VibeTribe
  • 1,415 posts
  • Locationmatzah pizza

Posted 20 March 2011 - 01:06 PM

Smells like saddam hussein without the wmd. Sanctions>no fly zone>
cruise missiles.......

#21 Deadshow Dan

Deadshow Dan
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,883 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 01:58 PM

There were no rebel forces, no democracy movement, no civilians being slaughtered in Iraq.
The US did not lead this decision.
And as far as I know, no obvious at the time big lies to get us in (maybe someone else who was following closely can correct me on these?).

As I understand it the French think this is a lot more like Rwanda than Iraq. Others think it's more like Egypt.


The only similarity I see is oilfields?
:dunno:

#22 Java Time

Java Time
  • VibeTribe
  • 9,972 posts
  • Locationthe Island

Posted 20 March 2011 - 02:06 PM

No civilians being slaughtered in Iraq?!? :eek:

#23 Deadshow Dan

Deadshow Dan
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,883 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 02:08 PM

No civilians being slaughtered in Iraq?!? :eek:

No at any time near the invasion.

Not to say there weren't human rights problems there similar to many other countries

#24 Java Time

Java Time
  • VibeTribe
  • 9,972 posts
  • Locationthe Island

Posted 20 March 2011 - 02:12 PM

Ahh...me entiendo! Gotcha!

#25 bigtoddy

bigtoddy
  • VibeTribe
  • 2,227 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 03:05 PM

I think we've officially broken through the other side with this action. We've lost all connection with sanity at this point. There's no turning back now, we've committed. Oh what interesting times we live in.

#26 robberry

robberry
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,219 posts
  • LocationNew York

Posted 20 March 2011 - 03:06 PM

what are we going to do about a government, after kaddafy falls?


Whatchu talkin bout willis? It worked in Iraq. :rotf:

#27 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 22,549 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 03:10 PM

Humanity needs to be 2012'd. :plain:

#28 Java Time

Java Time
  • VibeTribe
  • 9,972 posts
  • Locationthe Island

Posted 20 March 2011 - 04:25 PM

Whatchu talkin bout willis? It worked in Iraq. :rotf:

Communist party allowed to speak without being killed. Pro democracy demonstrations I'm Northern Iraq...I guess you're right it worked and is working in Iraq! Good call...appreciate the optimism :thumbup:

#29 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,445 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 05:20 PM

:rotf:

#30 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,445 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 05:34 PM

No, no seriously..... :rotf:

#31 Jwheelz

Jwheelz
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,837 posts
  • LocationNutmeg State

Posted 20 March 2011 - 05:35 PM

Humanity needs to be 2012'd. :plain:


that sounds all well and good, but I really don't want to be 2012'd... unless by 2012'd you mean a dramatic elevation in human consciousness where we all begin to recognize suddenly how interconnected we are and we see a dramatic decrease in intraspecies violence... probably too much to ask :undecided:

#32 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 22,549 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 05:37 PM

that sounds all well and good, but I really don't want to be 2012'd... unless by 2012'd you mean a dramatic elevation in human consciousness where we all begin to recognize suddenly how interconnected we are and we see a dramatic decrease in intraspecies violence... probably too much to ask :undecided:



That would be the preferred method. Thanks for the reminder that it still is a possibility. :smile:

#33 Dagan

Dagan
  • VibeTribe
  • 2,907 posts
  • LocationThe X-Men Mansion, Hoth, VT

Posted 20 March 2011 - 05:54 PM

Fuck war.

#34 Java Time

Java Time
  • VibeTribe
  • 9,972 posts
  • Locationthe Island

Posted 20 March 2011 - 06:04 PM

that sounds all well and good, but I really don't want to be 2012'd... unless by 2012'd you mean a dramatic elevation in human consciousness where we all begin to recognize suddenly how interconnected we are and we see a dramatic decrease in intraspecies violence... probably too much to ask :undecided:


definitely not too much to ask...I may seem like a happy-go-lucky-war loving American...but all I really want is what you justed stated!!! :Phishfolk:

quite eloquently (sp?) I might add as well!

#35 HABIT

HABIT
  • VibeTribe
  • 2,619 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 06:06 PM

more american bombs killing muslims...how many countries did Germany invade before WE entered WW2, and then how many more do we have to enter before other nations turn on US.

#36 Tainted703

Tainted703
  • VibeTribe
  • 15 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 07:24 PM

I don't understand people being against this. Iraq, yeah, but that wasn't U.N. sanctioned and was different. One of the reasons the U.N. sanctioned action in Libya is because Qaddafi was ordering his air force to BOMB protesters (not sure if it succeeded, I know two of the pilots said fuck this and landed in a neighboring country). I see nothing wrong with taking out Libya's ability to bomb their own people. So far, nobody has invaded Libya. All anyone has done is bomb military targets. I don't foresee an invasion like Iraq.

Also, Libya is like 2% of the worlds oil supply, not a whole lot. The reason oil prices have gone up is something more sinister. Oil companies are "speculating" that protesting and unrest may spread to countries with larger oil supplies, such as Saudi Arabi.

#37 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,445 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 07:37 PM

I don't understand people being against this. Iraq, yeah, but that wasn't U.N. sanctioned and was different. One of the reasons the U.N. sanctioned action in Libya is because Qaddafi was ordering his air force to BOMB protesters (not sure if it succeeded, I know two of the pilots said fuck this and landed in a neighboring country). I see nothing wrong with taking out Libya's ability to bomb their own people. So far, nobody has invaded Libya. All anyone has done is bomb military targets. I don't foresee an invasion like Iraq.

Also, Libya is like 2% of the worlds oil supply, not a whole lot. The reason oil prices have gone up is something more sinister. Oil companies are "speculating" that protesting and unrest may spread to countries with larger oil supplies, such as Saudi Arabi.


Agreed. However, why cant the other U.N members stand up and take one for the team this go around, heh? I support the U.N decision to intervene, but that doesnt mean I think the US should have to be the one expending resources. Especially when it's a pretty well known fact that most other countries like to talk shit about the US because of our constant involvement in other people's affairs.

Let France, China, Russia and EU get their fucking hands dirty for a change. :rolleyes:

#38 capt_morgan

capt_morgan
  • VibeTribe
  • 15,523 posts
  • Locationatlantic ocean

Posted 20 March 2011 - 07:40 PM

shut up...bombs away:coffee:

#39 zomblin_jones

zomblin_jones
  • VibeTribe
  • 171 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 07:40 PM

I don't understand people being against this. Iraq, yeah, but that wasn't U.N. sanctioned and was different. One of the reasons the U.N. sanctioned action in Libya is because Qaddafi was ordering his air force to BOMB protesters (not sure if it succeeded, I know two of the pilots said fuck this and landed in a neighboring country). I see nothing wrong with taking out Libya's ability to bomb their own people. So far, nobody has invaded Libya. All anyone has done is bomb military targets. I don't foresee an invasion like Iraq.

Also, Libya is like 2% of the worlds oil supply, not a whole lot. The reason oil prices have gone up is something more sinister. Oil companies are "speculating" that protesting and unrest may spread to countries with larger oil supplies, such as Saudi Arabi.


i think it's because a lot of these actions being taken seem like old and all-too-familiar preliminary procedures that seem to do nothing but lead up to the "spreading of democracy"

#40 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,445 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 07:41 PM

Which is exactly why we should be sidelined this time.

#41 zomblin_jones

zomblin_jones
  • VibeTribe
  • 171 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 07:45 PM

Agreed. However, why cant the other U.N members stand up and take one for the team this go around, heh? I support the U.N decision to intervene, but that doesnt mean I think the US should have to be the one expending resources. Especially when it's a pretty well known fact that most other countries like to talk shit about the US because of our constant involvement in other people's affairs.

agreed

Let France, China, Russia and EU get their fucking hands dirty for a change. :rolleyes:

on this, not entirely. i don't even think it's a problem with "getting our hands dirty" cause i think the us does quite a job at that to say the least. however, the problem lies in how the us gets its hands dirty; the us can't seem to help bake the pie without putting their hands in it - or so it seems to me at least

#42 Java Time

Java Time
  • VibeTribe
  • 9,972 posts
  • Locationthe Island

Posted 20 March 2011 - 07:48 PM

Agreed. However, why cant the other U.N members stand up and take one for the team this go around, heh? I support the U.N decision to intervene, but that doesnt mean I think the US should have to be the one expending resources. Especially when it's a pretty well known fact that most other countries like to talk shit about the US because of our constant involvement in other people's affairs.

Let France, China, Russia and EU get their fucking hands dirty for a change. :rolleyes:


Prolly because most of them are full o' crap regarding their military capabilities (outside of nukes) and their militaries
prolly couldn't even pull off a successful panty raid...:funny1:

Of course this is merely speculation on my part :coffee:

#43 Tainted703

Tainted703
  • VibeTribe
  • 15 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 08:41 PM

Agreed. However, why cant the other U.N members stand up and take one for the team this go around, heh? I support the U.N decision to intervene, but that doesnt mean I think the US should have to be the one expending resources. Especially when it's a pretty well known fact that most other countries like to talk shit about the US because of our constant involvement in other people's affairs.

Let France, China, Russia and EU get their fucking hands dirty for a change. :rolleyes:


France actually deployed the first fighter jets and fired the first shots in support of the U.N. resolution.

I do agree that we don't need to be leading the fight expending resources though. We've launched a ton of tomahawk missiles already, which cost upwards of several hundred million dollars, yet subsidized heating oil for low income families was recently cut from the budget.

If this was really over oil, we would be inciting Saudi Arabi, not Iraq and Libya. Even if the war in Iraq really was about oil, it wouldn't make any sense. We've spent so much money on the war alone and expended so much oil shipping troops, deploying tanks, and fighter jets that any possible return from the Iraqi/Libyan oil couldn't be justified. There just isn't enough there and we aren't just taking over their oil. We may install a government that favors us and lowers tariffs, but the amount saved could never justify the amount spent to get there. Saudi Arabia is the big oil country, if we wanted to invade for oil, they would be the target. Instead we play best friends with them, even though we've got plenty reason to believe they are acting as a safe haven for Al-Qaeda which could easily be used to justify an invasion.

#44 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,445 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 09:40 PM

This certainly does have oil drum written on it. For anyone who has any interest in understanding The United States relationship with Libya, here is a good crash course in history.

http://europe.theoildrum.com/node/4513


Also, if the U.N had a true interest in humanitarian efforts, why did we all stand by and let Darfur or Rwanda genocides take place without intervening?

#45 HABIT

HABIT
  • VibeTribe
  • 2,619 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 09:41 PM

this and all wars since 9/11 is just an attack on muslims... not oil..not for freedom or democracy, its to kill, threaten, waterboard, and destroy the Muslim strongholds.

#46 capt_morgan

capt_morgan
  • VibeTribe
  • 15,523 posts
  • Locationatlantic ocean

Posted 20 March 2011 - 09:44 PM

this and all wars since 9/11 is just an attack on muslims... not oil..not for freedom or democracy, its to kill, threaten, waterboard, and destroy the Muslim strongholds.


and you have a whole arsenal of "catch phrases" to get your point across:lol:

#47 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,445 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 09:50 PM

this and all wars since 9/11 is just an attack on muslims... not oil..not for freedom or democracy, its to kill, threaten, waterboard, and destroy the Muslim strongholds.


Posted Image
What is the most alarming part of this chart to you?



That whole thought, along with the "war on terror" are both diversions.

#48 seany

seany
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,770 posts

Posted 20 March 2011 - 10:14 PM

this and all wars since 9/11 is just an attack on muslims... not oil..not for freedom or democracy, its to kill, threaten, waterboard, and destroy the Muslim strongholds.


Perhaps you should stick to discussing the WWE, UFC, Arcane, and the latest celebrity gossip? :dunno:

#49 Java Time

Java Time
  • VibeTribe
  • 9,972 posts
  • Locationthe Island

Posted 20 March 2011 - 10:38 PM

Posted Image
What is the most alarming part of this chart to you?





That whole thought, along with the "war on terror" are both diversions.


Where's the U.S. On the list...and when will we invade ourselves since we export and produce more oil than half those countries?

Talk about diversion :funny1:

#50 capt_morgan

capt_morgan
  • VibeTribe
  • 15,523 posts
  • Locationatlantic ocean

Posted 20 March 2011 - 10:42 PM

Where's the U.S. On the list...and when will we invade ourselves since we export and produce more oil than half those countries?

Talk about diversion :funny1:


i was wondering the same thing
and for the record iraq is not on there either