Libya Superthread

Discussion in 'The Political/Current Events Coffee House' started by noelsoong, Feb 17, 2011.

  1. lukakiwi Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,353
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    98
    dude, im not on Ches side, but you got it the other way around, the US control NATO mainly not NATO the US
  2. Kalalification Guest

    Member Since:
    Message Count:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This would be an instance where it's the other way around. Happens relatively rarely nowadays, but sometimes we get dragged into shit by our allies.
  3. lukakiwi Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,353
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    98
    this instance, yes, but even you have to admit that US controls NATO (most of the time).
  4. Big J Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Apr 12, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,206
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    88
    I like how you've dumbed down how NATO works to simply "the US controls it". We have a lot of influence, but we can't FORCE our Allies to just simply deploy their military whenever and wherever we like.


    Also, It was the UN called for intervention in Libya in the first place.
  5. lukakiwi Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,353
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    98
    1. by saying controls it i ment influences it very, very, greatly.
    2. UN is no longer credible as being neutral.
  6. Big J Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Apr 12, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,206
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    88
    I'm pretty sure we didn't give a shit about Libya before this rebellion broke out. But as soon as the UN called for intervention and we knew it was going to be a NATO operation where the blowback can be shared, we jumped at the chance to get rid of Gadaffi and get some oil out of this. America just doesn't seem to be the primary instigator here. We're sure as hell being opportunistic though, so are France and Britain for that matter. It just seems like all three nations heard the UN's call and stood up saying "We'd be more than happy to!" Britain and France sure as shit hate Gadaffi as much as America does and they're oil-consuming nations too. So essentially, a nice juicy oil pie has been presented and these nations are all trying to get their slice.
    We have the greatest influence in the sense that we have the largest military and are more willing to use it. Also, in the end, it's still our allies decision to deploy their military.
  7. noelsoong This machine does not require caffeine to operate.

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,958
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Does not mean NATO mainly consists of US forces means that it controls NATO. Most of the NATO countries don't even want to contribute. The US has to pick up their slack which ends up with US getting all the blame.
  8. lukakiwi Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,353
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    98
    sums the whole situation up pretty well i think
  9. Big J Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Apr 12, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,206
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    88
    I just looked it up. The UN Security Council resolution to intervene in Libya was, in-fact, proposed by France, Lebanon, and the United Kingdom. There are your instigators.
  10. JayJayGT Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 28, 2011
    Message Count:
    1,569
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    89
    You do know it's mainly the French who are doing this and want us, the British, to help them... those Brits who watch BBC Parliment would know this... but the British Minister of Defence has stated that no British soldier will land on Libyan soil. The French have not stated that.

    @Kali

    Don't we all... I seem to remember a time not so long ago where we got dragged into a war.
  11. 0bserver92 Grand King of Moderation

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    6,746
    Likes Received:
    331
    Trophy Points:
    143
    Location:
    Canada
    How is the UN no longer neutral.
  12. SovietEmpireUSSR Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    2,648
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    108
    Location:
    Stalingrad, CCCP
    The UN is so clearly bias for the United States and NATO.
  13. 0bserver92 Grand King of Moderation

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    6,746
    Likes Received:
    331
    Trophy Points:
    143
    Location:
    Canada
    It's not our faults that that is what they vote for and blame other nations that have veto but don't use it.
  14. SovietEmpireUSSR Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    2,648
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    108
    Location:
    Stalingrad, CCCP
    United States should stop acting like the world police for once, and do something about your own god damn country. I'll give one thing to the United Nations, and that is they have confirm that the internet is for everyone and consider it a human right.
  15. 0bserver92 Grand King of Moderation

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    6,746
    Likes Received:
    331
    Trophy Points:
    143
    Location:
    Canada
    First of all the US isn't my country and second the UN votes on things and some countries have veto that's how it works.
  16. matthewchris Guest

    Member Since:
    Message Count:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Observer's actually right. The UN isn't bias to America, but the fact of the matter is that the only two countries that would be willing to veto anything are to busy protecting their own interest. China especially would much rather simply sell equipment and funnel money into both sides and then yell at them for their actions late. Which is smart in my opinion.
  17. 0bserver92 Grand King of Moderation

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    6,746
    Likes Received:
    331
    Trophy Points:
    143
    Location:
    Canada
    china is also bailing out countries when it still hasn't dealt with it's own debts.
  18. SovietEmpireUSSR Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    2,648
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    108
    Location:
    Stalingrad, CCCP
    I remember, your from Canada, i apologize for that one. UN decides the votes, and someone veto's on it. Of course the American's/NATO are going to vote on an no fly zone in Libya, and all that shit. In the end of the day. The US/NATO are there for their own interests and not the people of Libya.


    It's really all about the resources in the end of the day. China will defend their own interests, much like everyone else. It's all about greed.
  19. matthewchris Guest

    Member Since:
    Message Count:
    0
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah, which if America was smart, instead of fighting a few wars they can't win, they could be slowly rebuilding the economy and intervening economically in EU and abroad, thus beating China their own game. But of course they won't do that.
  20. 0bserver92 Grand King of Moderation

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    6,746
    Likes Received:
    331
    Trophy Points:
    143
    Location:
    Canada
    Well Russia was criticizing them and could have vetoed it but didn't so could China and India.

Share This Page

Facebook: