Operation Odyssey Dawn

[JDFP]

Congratulations, Mr. President on the "Change You Can Believe In!" with your administration! If anything, we might see some more Bush "Miss me yet?" billboard signs across the nation now. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Odyssey_Dawn So, I haven't been keeping up with the news much recently due to my growing tired of nothing really worth watching being listed on the news. But, between the tsunami and the new war, well, things are getting interesting again so I may have to start keeping an eye on it again. According to the most recent Fox News poll 65% of Americans believe this whole thing is "batshit crazy". And, coming from Fox News stating that 65% of Americans are against military intervention somewhere that means a great deal more than More Socialism NBC (MSNBC) or the Commie News Network (CNN) saying it because Fox News is generally pro-America uber alles. So, is this a new Kosovo where we'll have very limited troops on the ground (i.e. black ops people that don't count as "troops on the ground") or will this turn into another Afghanistan or Iraq? Can the U.S. handle another ground invasion with 2 fronts currently happening right now? My prediction is that Iran and N. Korea are watching this whole thing with great interest. Perhaps Mr. Obama is just making a point that he's not the dove he claimed to be in wanting to "Sit down with terrorists and dictators in a civil manner" during the campaign in 2008. Goodness, his ratings have been waning, he wouldn't want to carry that image with an election only being 18 months away. Anyway, what are folks opinion on this new possible Charlie Foxtrot we're getting into in Libya? j.p.

[p2501]

Admittedly, i've been away for a while, and perhaps i've spent too much time with the hivemind. but the fact your siting foxnews as a source of anything other than punchlines for The Onion is moderately concerning. That said, our push right now seems to be in providing AWACS and refueling support in addition to those tomahawks. while the Brits and the French are taking the lead with combat aircraft, As for teams on the ground, that's anyone's' guess. but we're I'd betting i'd say it's us or the Brits. All of that said, supposedly this is just a move to hamstring Queef-toffe whilst the Arab league gets it's shit together and steps in to provide some form of stability for the new government. the ETA on that varies by nation, day and lunar cycle. As does an end plan for what's going to happen to Quarks-Boppy. If this actually happens, then we're all golden. Bad guy dethroned, civilian massacres stopped, and we can all kick back relax and enjoy a nice double rainbow. Personally, I'm skeptical that it's going to be that quick, clean or cheery of an outcome. But i think if were going to attack another country, the situation in Libya checks off all of the righteous boxes. Yes we are stuck in two useless and fucking redundant quagmires in the same region, but in this specific case were actually being the good guys.

[Yojimbo]

Bad guy dethroned, civilian massacres stopped, and we can all kick back relax and enjoy a nice double rainbow. That is all we really aspire to do nowdays - to hell with reality and trip on that double rainbow! But I agree wholeheartedly that this dictator is one of those cartoon characters that truly deserve their day in The Hague. On a side note, it may be purely sentimental but I kind of miss the Iraqi Minister of Information in this particular conflict!

[p2501]

but I kind of miss the Iraqi Minister of Information in this particular conflict! Agreed. that guy was a hoot.

[Tricky]

And yet British troops are still fighting & dying in Afghanistan, which barely gets a mention these days in the news! we cant even afford to run that war properly, never mind suddenly launching into another one in Libya. I think this is an Arab problem that requires an Arab solution. The Arab league & the Saudis have more than enough firepower to flatten Gadaffis army, if they wanted to they could remove him themselves.

[Danny]

And yet British troops are still fighting & dying in Afghanistan, which barely gets a mention these days in the news! we cant even afford to run that war properly, never mind suddenly launching into another one in Libya. I think this is an Arab problem that requires an Arab solution. The Arab league & the Saudis have more than enough firepower to flatten Gadaffis army, if they wanted to they could remove him themselves. aint that what the americans of the time said about nazi germany when they started to gain power though? a european/continental problem they didnt need to be a part of? granted its not at all the same but just because its easier to ignore a problem doesnt mean its the right thing to do. Not that a full scale operation is either but if there are people attempting to fight for freedom from a dictator shouldn't we help our fellow human beings try? Sometimes we need to step in and help even if there is no immediate problem for us a that time because a: that might not always be the case and b: if not why should we ever expect help should anything bad happen to us?

[Yojimbo]

Sometimes we need to step in and help even if there is no immediate problem for us a that time because a: that might not always be the case and b: if not why should we ever expect help should anything bad happen to us? agree with Hellsing- occasionally there is a need to step up in a conflict. I am not saying that war is always the best course of action, however sometimes an armed conflict appropriate. War is sometimes the answer.

[Tricky]

I generally agree with what your saying, but as I said in the other thread on this, why have we not intervened in Zimbabwe, or Burma? theres equally terrible things happening in those places as a result of despotic governments, but nothing is done about it. Its all about the oil...

[Danny]

I generally agree with what your saying, but as I said in the other thread on this, why have we not intervened in Zimbabwe, or Burma? theres equally terrible things happening in those places as a result of despotic governments, but nothing is done about it. Its all about the oil... aye thats true, but i dont think that matters to the rebels under gaddafis rule does it? im sure its more selfish reasons on our part but as long as it helpd out these people its a good thing- if it does. Now come back when we have to go to north korea, THEN we can talk about another gulf war style conflict, oy...

[Mr. Clean]

Not defending Obama but this is NATO driven....and why do everyone always forget the B-2?

[p2501]

I generally agree with what your saying, but as I said in the other thread on this, why have we not intervened in Zimbabwe, or Burma? theres equally terrible things happening in those places as a result of despotic governments, but nothing is done about it. Its all about the oil... I would imagine oil does play a part. but one critical difference here in regards to Libya there is some manner of interim/new government that seems to be popularly supported. One that could step in a fill the vacuum once Queefy is deposed. Additionally, the Arab league has been pushing hard on the UN and NATO for this action, which is not a very common thing in the least. With Africa, really i'm not even sure most of those warring countries could be fixed. It's tribal genocide that has spanned decades and in some cases centuries. A condition that has led to a overt lack of stability in those countries and destroys any chance of constructing a socially supportive infrastructure (schools, hospitals, ETC) that would allow for a lasting stabilization. Even if the UN were to go in and break up the fights. with the lack of education, jobs and really hope, these groups would just go back at it within months. I'm not saying we shouldn't be making the effort. but for the life of me i just don't see a solution there.

[krakenslayer]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not necessarily anti-this war, particularly if it does turn out to be as simple as case of a few bombs and shooting a few cruise missiles from the comfort of a boat somewhere in the Med, but I'm still a little confused as to why we're after this brutal dictator specifically. Sure, Gahdaffi as a murderous, totalitarian arsehole and no right-minded human being would miss him if he were to disappear. But he is far, far from the worst there is. One word: Mugabe. Why's no one ever bothered to get involved there? Now, I'm not one who really sides with the Team America ideology of constantly charging out there on a white horse, setting the world to rights, but if they were at least serious about spreading Truth, Justice and the American Franchise, if they were consistent in their supposed determination to right all wrongs, then you'd imagine they'd start by targeting the worst offenders. Call me simple-minded, but if there wasn't Other Incentives, Like - oh, I don't know - involved in our decision-making process then we should have started with Mugabe. ---------- Post added at 02:14 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:06 AM ---------- With Africa, really i'm not even sure most of those warring countries could be fixed. It's tribal genocide that has spanned decades and in some cases centuries. A condition that has led to a overt lack of stability in those countries and destroys any chance of constructing a socially supportive infrastructure (schools, hospitals, ETC) that would allow for a lasting stabilization. Even if the UN were to go in and break up the fights. with the lack of education, jobs and really hope, these groups would just go back at it within months. Ahh, but this is the tragedy of Zimbabwe. For a long time, the country was considered the great African success story, Mugabe was, initally, a great leader. Very liberal and benevolent, people loved him, the country went from strength to strength... but then, like the outwardly-nice guy who becomes a racist asshat after a few beers and is always the last to leave a party, he began to outstay his welcome. The time for elections came and went, people started wondering when he was going to leave. Then... from out of nowhere, things got really ugly.

[Publius]

I would imagine oil does play a part. but one critical difference here in regards to Libya there is some manner of interim/new government that seems to be popularly supported. One that could step in a fill the vacuum once Queefy is deposed. Kind of like what we thought about the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan? There, the Taliban hadn't even been in power for all that long compared to Gadhafi. Additionally, the Arab league has been pushing hard on the UN and NATO for this action, which is not a very common thing in the least. So why didn't the Arab League take action themselves? So they could blame us for the outcome, that's why. Didn't take long: Arab League condemns broad bombing campaign in Libya With Africa, really i'm not even sure most of those warring countries could be fixed. It's tribal genocide that has spanned decades and in some cases centuries. Libya is in Africa. It's more tribal than most Arab nations. More like Afghanistan, say, than Egypt. What makes you think it doesn't fit your description?

[shootemindehead]

The "West" shouldn't be there. It's an internal struggle. The "West" has no business being involved, unless it's about... Libyan oil...the largest in Africa and the 9th largest in the world. "civilian massacres"...don't make me laugh.

[thxleo]

I guess it'e time to impeach Obama? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adpa5kYUhCA