- 21 Mar 11, 21:36#245638
It's only an internal matter if you decide it is, it will have international effects, undoubtedly. What do you think Gaddafi's going to do if he ends up crushing resistance?
Gadafi should've called of his troops, the firepower was directed at military troops, I don't respect Gadafi's right to military power anymore.
Do we have the right to interfere? It's probably best to have that particular discussion entirely neutrally, and theoretically.
In this situation though, it seems clearer to me, you obviously have your line drawn in a different place to mine, and I respect your personal principles. It's not always about moral choices, but practicality, there appears to be hope for Libya, the situation looks a lot simpler than many with dictators. The rebellion is already in place, should we watch them fall based on military power?
^ Think the last one is pretty much the question here. Obviously assuming you believe everything I said before.
I feel that it is another war over oil and commercial interests veiled as liberation. The US, UK and to a lesser extent France have no business in Libya; it's a civil war; an internal matter that really effects no-one outside of Libya. And frankly there are better ways to deal with it; for example sending in special forces to take out Col. Gaddafi and his key men; hundreds of cruise missiles being fired at Tripoli, Gaddafi will not roll over; this will end up being another long and costly war!
It could/will be twice as costly in the long run though. " Evil Prevails when good men do nothing" Westerners are the only ones with the power to sort it out.
its damn well plausable that its over Oil. but that excuse/reason IMO is getting a bit worn down. If all these wars were for Oil, there would have been a whistleblower by now.
But the UN are willing to turn a blind eye to events in African nations that are just as bad as or worse than what is happening in Libya; just take a look at Robert Mugabi in Zimbabwe.Of course it effects the world, refugees, the precedent set that someone will be able to do this and it'll be ok as opposed to the pretty clear condemnation Gadffi has received.
They don't want to kill Gaddafi, and troops foreign aren't supposed to be on the ground in Libya, the political decisions in Libya are crucially being left alone to a very large degree. These attacks simply try to tip the balance of military power.
Ensuring Gaddafi is overthrown will have massive consequences, the actions of the Libyan state will be completely transformed.
We live in a globalised world.
We may live in a globalised world but ultimately it's an internal matter; everyone agrees that Gaddafi is an evil man like all dictators but that doesn't mean that that western nations have the right to interfere. And it doesn't restore the balance of power; the US/UK has much more firepower than Libya could ever muster, it's just as much an uneven battle as Gaddafi's forces against the rebels.
It's only an internal matter if you decide it is, it will have international effects, undoubtedly. What do you think Gaddafi's going to do if he ends up crushing resistance?
Gadafi should've called of his troops, the firepower was directed at military troops, I don't respect Gadafi's right to military power anymore.
Do we have the right to interfere? It's probably best to have that particular discussion entirely neutrally, and theoretically.
In this situation though, it seems clearer to me, you obviously have your line drawn in a different place to mine, and I respect your personal principles. It's not always about moral choices, but practicality, there appears to be hope for Libya, the situation looks a lot simpler than many with dictators. The rebellion is already in place, should we watch them fall based on military power?
^ Think the last one is pretty much the question here. Obviously assuming you believe everything I said before.
