Un Military Coalition Has Invaded Libya. Approve Or Disapprove?

[ronin47]

Hi everyone. So, big news! The U.S, U.K, France, and other members of the U.N have officially sent their militaries to Libya and are conducting airstrikes against Gaddafi's forces. Naturally, plenty of people and countries have already come out with their criticisms, but what do you guys think? Do you think this invasion was justified? I personally feel that the U.S for one definately lost some credibility after Iraq, but this is different in that Gaddafi is openly waging war against his own people and the rebel forces have explicitly asked outside powers for help. As one rebel leader put it, "We wanted to say that we did this on our own, but if it's a matter of saving my people's lives, then we will ask for help."

Thoughts?

 

[Lucycat]

I am scared.

 

[ronin47]

I am scared.

How come?

 

[cherryblossom]

I disapprove. This is just my humble opinion, and I admit to not knowing enough about the politics, as perhaps I should do, to comment. While I understand the 'want' to save innocent lives, I can't help but be cynical, and think that the only reason other countries want to get involved is because of oil.

 

[Ruth09]

I disaprove. Because,...who is going to clean up the mess left behind? I'd hate to get stuck in another "nation building" war.

 

[Deleted member 487]

Unlike Iraq, part 2 and Afghanistan, I support hitting Libya. And I mean let's hit them as hard as we can, short of nuclear weapons.

They have supported terrorist groups in the past.
They have committed terrorist acts against Americans in the past.
And once again Khadafi is getting a bit big for his britches.

So I say we should go in and level the place. Nothing over one story in height allowed. Wipe out the ports and airports. Demolish their railroads and highways.

And let the other countries help rebuild Libya. We have better things to do, IMO.

 

[AmyO]

Unfortunately, it is a catch 22. We don't assert ourselves, we lose credibility. We do, and the US looks like it is trying to take over another country. I agree that in the long run every war we are involved in we are left to pick up the aftershocks, but where should the US draw the line? How much longer should the sons and daughters of our country die for foreign interests? I am torn in whether it is right or wrong because we are trained to follow the orders of our Commander in Chief, no questions asked, just go.

I will say this, as an opinion only, our forces are getting stretched to thin. Families are torn apart and children are left without Mothers or Fathers. I spent just shy of a year outside of Kuwait City and saw things no person should have to. I picked up the bodies of fallen comrades, and watched as the man I should have married sank to his death. I held the hand of a stranger burnt beyond help as he cried for his mother and asked me to stay with him until the end. I cry for the lost souls that are over there now and pray that they come home soon, but we are at the whim of the political bigwigs.

All we can do is hope that our elected officials get tired of playing "Risk" with lives that are not their own and wait to welcome a new batch of survivors to the forum.

 

[anthony]

I actually approve of what they have done, and that the USA has actually stayed out of it for the most part. It is majority being handled by the French, who are using US aircraft carriers and the UK have a contingent also. The US only led a hand with Tomahawks onto strategic military targets. The French and UK are primarily running it, and they aren't bombing or invading to the extreme, they are only taking out key military equipment that is firing upon aircraft or their Libyan People.

No ground troops, which is so nice to see, just a helping hand to get rid of some big issues that are killing lots of civilians.

I hope the US continue keeping at arms length with this one, don't get involved in it, and let the militia within sort it out for the most part, with the French and UK taking lead. I agree they needed help to make it a little fairer fight, which it is now. I like how they are maintaining only airspace restrictions, which stops Gaddafi dropping any more bombs on his own civilians.

 

[AngelaMarie]

I appreciated the information that Anthony added about the US. After the mess with Iraq it is concerning whenever I see the US getting involved with a situation in yet another foreign country. My oldest son was in the Navy during Iraq, so I had some insights into how the military men and families felt and it was a little disconcerting.

What does concern me is with unemployement being so high and health insurance a dream for alot of people in the US....how does this help the economy???

 

[Philippa]

I honestly don't have enough information at the moment, but I will say that stand over tactics against his own people suggests the need for action. When I saw boys bullying another boy, like in the library one day, and no one was doing anything, I felt compelled to go in and grab hima nd escort him out of the building and away from the bullies.

If he is doing that to his own people then something needs to be done, though I'm not sure it's the US's business to be the ones doing it, and anthony said they are staying out of it which is good.

I don't see blowing up the place as being the best idea either though...can't they just remove him from power and put him in a mental hospital or something. I think he belongs in one.

It does sound like the whole "lets kill saddam Hussein" campaign in Irag though...and I don't think that helping "free" the people of Iraq was at all their main motivation, but I guess if they are just wiping out the weapons causing the harm to the people there, then that seems reasonable force to me.

 

[anni]

Obama has handled it as well as possible, it's just that whenever the US is at all involved it tends to start to look worrying.If we stay as part of the UN group hopefully it won't grow into yet another US self-appointed responsibility.The Conservatives here are already screaming that he's gotten us into a non-sanctioned war ( Hi! We're still in Iraq ) which couldn't be further from the truth. It's just one more convienient piece of misinformation with which to help the press bludgeon G.Public into voting Obama out next election. I thanked CB's post because it always, always just plain smells bad whenever a conflict arises where there's an oil rich nation involved. This thing also blew up seemingly out of thin air. One day there were small,scattered, disorganised groups of ill-equipped protestors perhaps shooting a few rifles in the air and burning flags and the next week there were organized units of actual rebel forces waging war. Something's seemingly missing beyond Ghadafi's eternal power-mongering, that's all.

 

[Philippa]

I get the feeling it may have had something to do with the situation in Egypt recently. Maybe Ghadaffi was getting a little antsy about the possibility that his people would catch on in the rebellious fever that was sweeping that part of the world and decided to impose a little bit of his own special intimidation tactics, as a way of ensuring they didn't uprise against him?

I don't know...he's pretty screwy so it could have been anything really?