Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[jerry]

"we should not stand aside whilst a dictator murders his own people".hmmm. A valid humanitarian statement but perhaps shouldve been followed by the words "but only if there is our own money at stake" in brackets. So what exactly have we been doing re these middle east leaders for the past how many years ? The west only gets involved if its got a personal stake in the area or there is something to be had. The west was perfectly happy to support saddam for years and Im sure his attitude towards his "people" was no different then than it was when we decided he was a "dictator" with "WMD". Dont get me wrong, all this is perfectly  understandable in terms of the geopolitical realities and needs in the world we live in. Just wish that politicians wouldnt keep trying to dress up any military interventions purely as being under a humanitarian guise. (Be even better if we had no need to get in bed with some of these rather unsavoury characters for reasons of need/greed/politics in the first place but that isnt ever going to change).Lets just hope that the decisions taken from now on do not lead to too much more bloodshed and destruction.

[Dishevelled Den]

Aah but Jerry this is the stock in trade of any politician.

International politics (particularly) embraces to art of saying many things - often with great gravitas or sincerity -  but when those words are examined they bear (in most cases) no relation to the true intentions of the speaker.

I think this intervention is a mistake.

[cem_devecioglu]

"we should not stand aside whilst a dictator murders his own people".hmmm. A valid humanitarian statement but perhaps shouldve been followed by the words "but only if there is our own money at stake" in brackets. So what exactly have we been doing re these middle east leaders for the past how many years ? The west only gets involved if its got a personal stake in the area or there is something to be had. The west was perfectly happy to support saddam for years and Im sure his attitude towards his "people" was no different then than it was when we decided he was a "dictator" with "WMD". Dont get me wrong, all this is perfectly  understandable in terms of the geopolitical realities and needs in the world we live in. Just wish that politicians wouldnt keep trying to dress up any military interventions purely as being under a humanitarian guise. (Be even better if we had no need to get in bed with some of these rather unsavoury characters for reasons of need/greed/politics in the first place but that isnt ever going to change).Lets just hope that the decisions taken from now on do not lead to too much more bloodshed and destruction.

 

Cameron compared to Sarcosy is an angel   at least he doesnt use the money from Qaddafi for his election campaign (as far as I know)   

[cem_devecioglu]

besides Bahrein, Saudi Arabia are well known conutries where there is no freedom.. but they obey the rules!

[Mysteryman]

"we should not stand aside whilst a dictator murders his own people".hmmm. A valid humanitarian statement but perhaps shouldve been followed by the words "but only if there is our own money at stake" in brackets. So what exactly have we been doing re these middle east leaders for the past how many years ? The west only gets involved if its got a personal stake in the area or there is something to be had. The west was perfectly happy to support saddam for years and Im sure his attitude towards his "people" was no different then than it was when we decided he was a "dictator" with "WMD". Dont get me wrong, all this is perfectly  understandable in terms of the geopolitical realities and needs in the world we live in. Just wish that politicians wouldnt keep trying to dress up any military interventions purely as being under a humanitarian guise. (Be even better if we had no need to get in bed with some of these rather unsavoury characters for reasons of need/greed/politics in the first place but that isnt ever going to change).Lets just hope that the decisions taken from now on do not lead to too much more bloodshed and destruction.

Jerry! You'll have us believing politicians are liars next.

[Banjax]

we all know why we befriended Gaddaffi and why we're going to befriend whoever from the opposition replaces him, the minute Gaddaffi lost control of Libya his worth to the west vanished 

I understand your reticence Zulu in yet another middle east misadventure, and this will go on for years not the weeks some wishful commentators are saying this time at least we have broader support from Gaddaffi protesters, Arab countries, France - we dont have a mandate for leadership change tho so its really keeping the playing field clear for the rebels to hopefully take power quickly - i doubt it will be quick, necessary? yes. we place such premium on oil, again, like iraq, we have no choice.

nothing else matters to the west - for proof again look at Ivory Coast, Congo, unrest throughout the world where we stand back and do nothing and ask yourself what makes Libya special? answer that and you've just unlocked the key foreign affair strategy of the west 


(oh, alright, the answers oil  )

[Martin_1962]

I found the pictures of Blair hugging Gadaffi sickening. Gadaffi used us, and Blair to be honest is scum.

[Nickbat]

I found the pictures of Blair hugging Gadaffi sickening. Gadaffi used us, and Blair to be honest is scum.

Not just Blair, Van Rompuy (the unelected EU "President") has recently enjoyed Gaddafi's company. I'm pleased that people like Nigel Farage can seek out hypocrites and hold them up for the world to see.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHBMLil4JbI[/media]

 

[Nickbat]

Aah but Jerry this is the stock in trade of any politician.

International politics (particularly) embraces to art of saying many things - often with great gravitas or sincerity -  but when those words are examined they bear (in most cases) no relation to the true intentions of the speaker.

I think this intervention is a mistake.

I have to agree, Zulu. I thought it would be just enforcing a no-fly zone, but it seems to have a wider agenda and we appear to be wading into the midst of a civil war. Plus the fact that I have never trusted Cameron...

[Banjax]

I found the pictures of Blair hugging Gadaffi sickening. Gadaffi used us, and Blair to be honest is scum.

Not just Blair, Van Rompuy (the unelected EU "President") has recently enjoyed Gaddafi's company. I'm pleased that people like Nigel Farage can seek out hypocrites and hold them up for the world to see.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHBMLil4JbI[/media]

 

Funny the first time Nige - getting a bit old now m8 

[Varche]

And so it continues.

Boys with (expensive) toys and little oil

[Lizzie_Zoom]

Aah but Jerry this is the stock in trade of any politician.

International politics (particularly) embraces to art of saying many things - often with great gravitas or sincerity -  but when those words are examined they bear (in most cases) no relation to the true intentions of the speaker.

I think this intervention is a mistake.

I have to agree, Zulu. I thought it would be just enforcing a no-fly zone, but it seems to have a wider agenda and we appear to be wading into the midst of a civil war. Plus the fact that I have never trusted Cameron...

No, at the last minute, the USA inserted into the UN resolution authorization to take on and destroy land targets that were threatening and destroying the civilian or rebel populations.  No 'boots' will be allowed to fight on the ground however

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

I found the pictures of Blair hugging Gadaffi sickening. Gadaffi used us, and Blair to be honest is scum.

Not just Blair, Van Rompuy (the unelected EU "President") has recently enjoyed Gaddafi's company. I'm pleased that people like Nigel Farage can seek out hypocrites and hold them up for the world to see.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHBMLil4JbI[/media]

 

Funny the first time Nige - getting a bit old now m8 

Agreed.

Those who speak the most (shout the loudest in the case of NF).....often have the least to say.........

[Nickbat]

Agreed.

Those who speak the most (shout the loudest in the case of NF).....often have the least to say.........

Yeah, Blair shaking hands with Gaddafi is terrible. Van Rompuy having lunch with him, well...I presume that's OK in your book? 

[Dishevelled Den]

Aah but Jerry this is the stock in trade of any politician.

International politics (particularly) embraces to art of saying many things - often with great gravitas or sincerity -  but when those words are examined they bear (in most cases) no relation to the true intentions of the speaker.

I think this intervention is a mistake.

I have to agree, Zulu. I thought it would be just enforcing a no-fly zone, but it seems to have a wider agenda and we appear to be wading into the midst of a civil war. Plus the fact that I have never trusted Cameron...

No, at the last minute, the USA inserted into the UN resolution authorization to take on and destroy land targets that were threatening and destroying the civilian or rebel populations.  No 'boots' will be allowed to fight on the ground however

take on and destroy land targets that were threatening and destroying the civilian or rebel populations

Which, in the case of the regime using heavy military equipment against a less well armed opposition or civilians, is a logical step - however - the very great danger is that when action from stand-off positions does not render the intended targets void (the regime in this case) the next logical step is to have land forces deployed - as fighting from afar is never really successful.

There is no substitute for land warfare unfortunately and despite all the assurances and declared intentions to the contrary, it is more than possible that such interdiction (as presently envisaged) will escalate into a full commitment to theatre.

If we cast our minds back to the fragrant Dr Reid’s rather infamous statement that our forces could deploy to Afghanistan and achieve the stated aim 'without a shot being fired' we can judge whether or not assurances about the proposed operations in Libya have any real substance.

Mission creep in situations such as Libya is the rule rather than the exception sadly.