AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 4, 2011 10:39:50 GMT -5
John McCain can shove it- time for the old Vietnam era Senator to retire. We don't need to expend more resources 'helping' people anywhere. We gotta stop being the world's 911.
We have no national interest in helping Lybian rebels. We don't even know who these people are. Do we need to set up another Taliban somewhere like we did in Afghanistan?
We CAN do whatever we want. The question has to be is it the RIGHT thing to do?
We don't need to get in the middle of another country's civil war.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,453
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 4, 2011 10:44:05 GMT -5
Just glad it is not "President" McCain announcing we are stepping in.
|
|
burnsattornincan
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 23:05:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,398
|
Post by burnsattornincan on Mar 4, 2011 11:12:15 GMT -5
I probably don't even have to chime in but just for the record... McCain, shut your idiotic mouth and go away quietly into the sunset.
|
|
burnsattornincan
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 23:05:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,398
|
Post by burnsattornincan on Mar 4, 2011 11:24:53 GMT -5
Mr. deminmaine, you can count on me to support the resistance to any policy that bleeds cash or puts any American (Canadian ect.) in harms way for no good reason.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 4, 2011 13:39:51 GMT -5
My goodness, me, bills, burns and beach all agree on something? Is the world upside down? me too, WOW
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 25, 2024 11:12:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2011 15:42:04 GMT -5
I almost hate to admit it...
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Mar 4, 2011 15:45:05 GMT -5
Me 7, ooh oooh me 7 please
|
|
bean29
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 22:26:57 GMT -5
Posts: 9,923
Member is Online
|
Post by bean29 on Mar 4, 2011 15:51:28 GMT -5
Eight
|
|
|
Post by marjar on Mar 4, 2011 15:57:57 GMT -5
Nine.
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Mar 4, 2011 17:29:24 GMT -5
NO Intervention In Lybia!
There has NOT been any military intervention in Libya but our Navy aircraft are flying in humanitarian aid for the Libyans who are fighting for their freedom from Col Qaddafi, a No Fly zone would also require taking out all the Libyan air defense batteries and radar stations which could be seen as an act of war against Col Qaddafi who you know would ask other Muslim Countries to come to his aid...so far he has Hugo Chavez but there are many others who might join in with him.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,425
|
Post by Tennesseer on Mar 4, 2011 17:35:32 GMT -5
Where is Lybia?
Yes. No intervention in Libya.
|
|
handyman2
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 23:56:33 GMT -5
Posts: 3,087
|
Post by handyman2 on Mar 4, 2011 20:28:58 GMT -5
This is an issue for the UN not any individual country. The only problem with the UN is it vacillates for months instead of being decisive. In effect they really accomplish little.
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Mar 4, 2011 20:44:26 GMT -5
...twelve...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 25, 2024 11:12:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2011 20:51:56 GMT -5
me too.
|
|
burnsattornincan
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 23:05:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,398
|
Post by burnsattornincan on Mar 4, 2011 22:46:05 GMT -5
There has NOT been any military intervention in Libya but our Navy aircraft are flying in humanitarian aid for the Libyans who are fighting for their freedom from Col Qaddafi
I'm not exactly sure what your position is on this matter Mr. Private Investigator however I would even go so far as to disagree with "humanitarian aid" because I view it as an interference with the natural cycle of oppression and rebellion. They need to resolve this matter on their own. We are not a one world government and never should be unless threatened in a prolonged way by outside forces.
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Mar 5, 2011 7:51:05 GMT -5
There has NOT been any military intervention in Libya but our Navy aircraft are flying in humanitarian aid for the Libyans who are fighting for their freedom from Col QaddafiI'm not exactly sure what your position is on this matter Mr. Private Investigator however I would even go so far as to disagree with "humanitarian aid" because I view it as an interference with the natural cycle of oppression and rebellion. They need to resolve this matter on their own. We are not a one world government and never should be unless threatened in a prolonged way by outside forces. I agree, if our government wants to blow money on humanitarian aid they should do it right here at home.
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Mar 5, 2011 7:59:06 GMT -5
There has NOT been any military intervention in Libya but our Navy aircraft are flying in humanitarian aid for the Libyans who are fighting for their freedom from Col QaddafiI'm not exactly sure what your position is on this matter Mr. Private Investigator however I would even go so far as to disagree with "humanitarian aid" because I view it as an interference with the natural cycle of oppression and rebellion. They need to resolve this matter on their own. We are not a one world government and never should be unless threatened in a prolonged way by outside forces. 1. I am not Private Investigator but just Ole Private Investor whose forte is trading stocks and bonds and NOT politics at all.. 2. However I was in the military and helped with humanitarian aid in this country and abroad...as did some of our Canadian military allies who belong to NATO and the UN.. 3. But I would be opposed to military intervention in Libya right now since a noted Middle East expert said the Muslim Countries in North Africa and the Middle East would see this as an act of war by the US and that could spark an open war on the US and Israel in the Middle East. This expert I am referring to is Ms Robin Wright if you want to goggle her and read more about her opinions @ Libya..
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 5, 2011 8:25:39 GMT -5
I just was listening to a military commentator on NPR who was discussing the actions in Libya, their forces and what seems to be happening but also spent time on a possible no fly zone that some are calling for. As he says, while it might keep some helicopters and justs from taking action, first one has to take out the few missile batteries that might be working and that ratchets up intervention in a big way, now you are actively attacking the country, getting involved in a big way politically. You don't just announce a non fly zone and fly cover. The batteries , anti aircraft defenses HAVE to be taken out first..that basically is a offensive attack against the country.
|
|
Bluerobin
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:24:30 GMT -5
Posts: 17,345
Location: NEPA
|
Post by Bluerobin on Mar 5, 2011 8:40:11 GMT -5
Let the EU and Arab League handle it. It is in their back yard, not ours. Let someone else bear the cost for a change. We will be happy to freeze bank accounts, but that is it!
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Mar 5, 2011 10:56:48 GMT -5
<<< We will be happy to freeze bank accounts, but that is it! >>> ...upon request, as appropriate... absolutely...
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 5, 2011 11:29:33 GMT -5
If it's a threat to our country, or it is somehow in our national interest-- and consistent with our national character-- fine. We should act. But we have nothing to gain, and a lot to lose through intervention.
I'm not an isolationist, but I'm sick and tired of helping people who turn around and spit on us. Look at Europe. What did we get for liberating the entire continent? What did we get for locking down a tyrannical Soviet Union for 60 years? We got a centralized, command-and-control bunch of elitists who were able to enduldge decades of doomed-to-fail multiculturalist, liberal, welfare state social experimentation and sneering contempt.
And do you think they're helping us in the war on islamic extremism? Hell no.
Let's face it- the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are not being conducted properly. We're nation building before anyone has surrendered. Not that we should nation build anyway, but how many times do we have to build the same police headquarters and let it get blown up? How many times, and how many American lives should be lost clearing the islamic thugs from Faluja before we give them 24 hours to clear out and level the entire city?
I think it's time for a new strategy: You attack us, you lose a city. So, the attackers come from Pakistand, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen-- guess you lose three cities. This would make it THEIR JOB to stop the threat. Do you think we'd be motivated if we knew that if terrorists from Chicago struck someplace, Chicago would 100%, for sure, no doubt disappear? I think we would. I think we'd go to great lengths to foil plots. I think our sympathy for such people would evaporate pretty quickly.
Islamists, and those "peaceful" islamists who are their ideological brethren, who will not attack us directly, but who fund, and who at the very least will not devote resources to stopping them, must get a wake up call. We have to create a new world that is safe for free people. It's time to go back to the Reagan doctrine-- 100 of theirs for every one of ours and we need to kick it up a notch-- 1,000 or 10,000 of them for every one of ours.
|
|
burnsattornincan
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 23:05:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,398
|
Post by burnsattornincan on Mar 5, 2011 11:54:14 GMT -5
100 of theirs for every one of ours and we need to kick it up a notch-- 1,000 or 10,000 of them for every one of ours.
A good military policy and I have a good social policy; Any person who is suspected of terrorism (no trials required) who was not born here will be deported immediately along with his/her entire immediate family. This would be an executive order under the subject of National Security. If the person was born here he/she would be given the choice of indefinite incarceration or a free ticket to their true country of origin. Yes, I'm implying all that might fall under this category would not have deep roots in the US.
Dalton McGuinty Burns III
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,453
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 5, 2011 11:58:58 GMT -5
You mean Ronnie "I'm not a tough guy President, but I played one on TV" Reagan. 1983 Beirut barracks bombing The Beirut barracks bombing (October 23, 1983 in Beirut, Lebanon) occurred during the Lebanese Civil War, when two truck bombs struck separate buildings housing United States and French military forces—members of the Multinational Force in Lebanon—killing 299 American and French servicemen Response USS New Jersey fires a salvo against anti-government forces in the Shouf, 9 January 1984U.S. President Ronald Reagan called the attack a "despicable act"[18] and pledged to keep a military force in Lebanon. Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger, who had privately advised the administration against ever having stationed U.S. Marines in Lebanon,[19] said there would be no change in the U.S.'s Lebanon policy. On October 24 French President François Mitterrand visited the French bomb site. It was not an official visit, and he only stayed for a few hours, but he did declare: "We will stay." U.S. Vice President George H. W. Bush toured the Marine bombing site on October 26 and said the U.S. "would not be cowed by terrorists."[20] In retaliation for the attacks, France launched an airstrike in the Beqaa Valley against alleged Islamic Revolutionary Guards positions. President Reagan assembled his national security team and planned to target the Sheik Abdullah barracks in Baalbek, Lebanon, which housed Iranian Revolutionary Guards believed to be training Hezbollah militants.[21] A joint American-French air assault on the camp where the bombing was planned was also approved by Reagan and Mitterrand. Defense Secretary Weinberger, however, lobbied successfully against the missions, because at the time he was not certain that Iran was behind the attack. In fact, there was no serious retaliation for the Beirut bombing from the Americans,[22] besides a few shellings. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beirut_barracks_bombing
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,453
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 5, 2011 12:03:47 GMT -5
100 of theirs for every one of ours and we need to kick it up a notch-- 1,000 or 10,000 of them for every one of ours.A good military policy and I have a good social policy; Any person who is suspected of terrorism (no trials required) ... If the person was born here he/she would be given the choice of indefinite incarceration or a free ticket to their true country of origin. ... Dalton McGuinty Burns III There is a policy ripe for abuse.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 25, 2024 11:12:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2011 12:15:03 GMT -5
Isn't that the type of justification the terrorists use for their attacks on us Paul?
So Burns... guilty till proven innocent? or... no i guess its more like guilty if I say so... Do you hate America and its tenets that much? You really want to destroy this country?
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Mar 5, 2011 12:29:51 GMT -5
<<< There is a policy ripe for abuse. >>> ...I gotta heartily agree with you here, bills...
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Mar 5, 2011 13:40:49 GMT -5
You mean Ronnie "I'm not a tough guy President, but I played one on TV" Reagan. 1983 Beirut barracks bombing The Beirut barracks bombing (October 23, 1983 in Beirut, Lebanon) occurred during the Lebanese Civil War, when two truck bombs struck separate buildings housing United States and French military forces—members of the Multinational Force in Lebanon—killing 299 American and French servicemen Response USS New Jersey fires a salvo against anti-government forces in the Shouf, 9 January 1984U.S. President Ronald Reagan called the attack a "despicable act"[18] and pledged to keep a military force in Lebanon. Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger, who had privately advised the administration against ever having stationed U.S. Marines in Lebanon,[19] said there would be no change in the U.S.'s Lebanon policy. On October 24 French President François Mitterrand visited the French bomb site. It was not an official visit, and he only stayed for a few hours, but he did declare: "We will stay." U.S. Vice President George H. W. Bush toured the Marine bombing site on October 26 and said the U.S. "would not be cowed by terrorists."[20] In retaliation for the attacks, France launched an airstrike in the Beqaa Valley against alleged Islamic Revolutionary Guards positions. President Reagan assembled his national security team and planned to target the Sheik Abdullah barracks in Baalbek, Lebanon, which housed Iranian Revolutionary Guards believed to be training Hezbollah militants.[21] A joint American-French air assault on the camp where the bombing was planned was also approved by Reagan and Mitterrand. Defense Secretary Weinberger, however, lobbied successfully against the missions, because at the time he was not certain that Iran was behind the attack. In fact, there was no serious retaliation for the Beirut bombing from the Americans,[22] besides a few shellings. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beirut_barracks_bombingJust a little aside and I didn't google, but if I remember correctly, that salvo of the USS New Jersey 16 " guns, aimed at the anti government forces, usually, even back then , extremely accurate, landed no where near the target aimed at, actually hitting civilian homes and killing innocent civilians. When it was investigaed as the military does in these things, very good in investigating, it found the powder in the powder bags use to propell the shell was tainted, whether from age , poor storage, and had to be replaced...so even our response didn't get the message across. A bit of history here..call it historicle trivia.
|
|
|
Post by marjar on Mar 5, 2011 14:05:00 GMT -5
Humanitarian aid, aside from being ............uhm humanitarian, may have positive results. If the people of Libya succeed in overthrowing Qaddafi, we may want them to think kindly of the US.
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Mar 5, 2011 14:52:30 GMT -5
100 of theirs for every one of ours and we need to kick it up a notch-- 1,000 or 10,000 of them for every one of ours.A good military policy and I have a good social policy; Any person who is suspected of terrorism (no trials required) ... If the person was born here he/she would be given the choice of indefinite incarceration or a free ticket to their true country of origin. ... Dalton McGuinty Burns III There is a policy ripe for abuse. Yeah, I have to agree with Bills on this. Suspected and not convicted? That is dream power trip for somebody, I think the temptation would be to great for a human.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Mar 5, 2011 14:53:23 GMT -5
If the people of Libya do, indeed, succeed in getting rid of Gadhafi, that would be the time for us to offer humanitarian aid, and try to help them bring their country together ... as long as we can resist the temptation to insist that it be a country that meets our expectations rather than theirs.
|
|