Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=Lotus;790209]Sarah the Impaler from Alaska accused Obama of just that just hours before the bombs started falling.[/quote]

I'm sure Obama was following her presser to see if she gave him the green light to start bombing.This has to be the first time in the history of the world that a President sends 30,000 troops into battle, doubles down on Drone strikes in Pakistan, and engages in warfare in Libya yet is being accused of being weak on national security. Huh?

What's scary --really scary-- is that this woman is running for president and her followers believe everything she says.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

I think Yemen is different because, well, they are cooperating with us on al-Queda. So they are helping to serve our national security interest, as odd as that seems.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=SmootSmack;790200]Meanwhile in Yemen...[/quote]

It seems unlikely that places like Egypt and Tunisia will go the way of al Qaeda. Yemen, however, is a different story. It could easily come to resemble a failed state like Somalia and serve as a paradise for al Qaeda activity.

If this analysis is correct, should we get involved or not? Our involvement could backfire. Our noninvolvement could backfire.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=12thMan;790210]I'm sure Obama was following her presser to see if she gave him the green light to start bombing.This has to be the first time in the history of the world that a President sends 30,000 troops into battle, doubles down on Drone strikes in Pakistan, and engages in warfare in Libya yet is being accused of being weak on national security. Huh?

What's scary --really scary-- is that this woman is running for president and her followers believe everything she says.[/quote]

Yeah, overseeing three military theaters is "weak."

Perhaps my faith is blind but I feel that Governor Quitter will self-destruct, leaving her with only her most loyal zombies.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;790195]I know Iraq keeps getting thrown around, but let's not forget Bush received authorization for use of force from Congress....with bi-partisan support before the first bomb dropped.

[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution"]Iraq Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/URL]

Between Congress and the UN giving support, I'd rather have Congressional support.

Pres. Obama did not request congressional authorization for this action in Libya (although he's not required to get one). He had UN Security Council authorization, but keep in mind 5 countries abstained from voting, two who could have nixed the authorization (China, Russia). Putin BTW has come out blasting the US since the no-fly zone was imposed.

I would've much rather seen countries from the Arab League and Europe handle this from day one. We could've provided some logistics or intel support, but they should've taken the lead.[/quote]

Arab League? The ones being overthrown? You can't be serious!

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=BuckSkin;790197]A declaration of war is a formal declaration issued by a national government indicating that a state of war exists between that nation and another. For the United States, Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution says "Congress shall have power to ... declare War". The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541–1548) was a United States Congress joint resolution providing that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by authorization of Congress or if the United States is already under attack or serious threat. The War Powers Resolution requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war. The resolution was passed by two-thirds of Congress, overriding a presidential veto.
With that said the United States has only declared war 5 times in it's entire history. [b]Clinton set the precedent with Operation Desert Fox and his two successors have followed suit.[/b][/quote]

What about the Korean "War?"

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

After the Japanese surrender in WWII, the Allies divided the Korean peninsula at the 38 parallel(much the same as the majority of Europe). United States was assigned protectorate of modern day South Korea and the Soviets in the north. When the North Koreans invaded the US was forced onto the conflict by treaty. The same would happen today if say..... a member of NATO was invaded.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=BuckSkin;790217]After the Japanese surrender in WWII, the Allies divided the Korean peninsula at the 38 parallel(much the same as the majority of Europe). United States was assigned protectorate of modern day South Korea and the Soviets in the north. When the North Koreans invaded the US was forced onto the conflict by treaty. The same would happen today if say..... a member of NATO was invaded.[/quote]

In other words we didn't declare war and the United Nations gave us permission to go to war.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=saden1;790219]In other words we didn't declare war and the United Nations gave us permission to go to war.[/quote]

The Treaty (which has to be registered with the UN) with South Korea mandated that the US come to their aid when the North invaded. Failure to comply with a treaty is like breach of contract, in that a nation can be "liable" under International Law.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=Lotus;790191]False. A declaration of war, politically and legally, is different from a peace keeping mission. A declaration of war is a formal gesture which has not happened in terms of Libya.[/quote]

So Japan did not declare war in us when they dropped bombs on pearl Harbour?

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=12thMan;790210]I'm sure Obama was following her presser to see if she gave him the green light to start bombing.This has to be the first time in the history of the world that a President sends 30,000 troops into battle, doubles down on Drone strikes in Pakistan, and engages in warfare in Libya yet is being accused of being weak on national security. Huh?

What's scary --really scary-- is that this woman is running for president and her followers believe everything she says.[/quote]

Now that you mention all that it seems like he is more into the war for oil then Bush.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=Lotus;790207]I definitely agree with your argument about the Arab League and Europe. Hopefully it will work out that way in the long term: we make a lot of noise on the first day (can't change that part now) but [B]then drift into the shadows in the weeks ahead[/B].[/quote]I hope so to.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=12thMan;790208]Essentially this is what's taking place. France dropped the first bomb and while we are launching Tomahawks, we're also providing logistical supand intel support. I think Obama is very eager to hand this Op over to NATO and the Europeans and recede into the background. [/quote]This was drawn up by the French and Brits, they're capable enough and should have been point on this IMO. My concern is that as the Arab League tempers its response in the wake of "claimed" Libyian civilian deaths, and eventually cools in its support along with the Europeans, who gets left holding the bag....US.

[quote]The bottom line is this, had President Obama waited longer many on the right would have accused him of being "weak" and "dithering". Their favorite word lately. Congress would still be, at this very moment, deciding whether or not to launch, how much the cost, calling in Generals to testify. All sorts of BS drawing this out even longer. Had he gone in sooner it would have been a unilateral campaign drawing the ire of everyone, except for John McCain and Joe Lieberman. So I think he got it right based on the little Constitutional wiggle room he has as Commander-in-Chief.[/quote]President Obama shouldn't give a $hit what the right accuses him of. He should have a clearly defined strategy here for entry (if he and his advisers deem appropriate), execution, and exit. If we've learned anything over the past decade, it should have been the last part is more important that the other two.

If he's confident enough to commit US forces, he better be confident enough to argue his position to Congress and the American people (I'm not saying he needs to wait for Congressional approval, but he needs to have a damn strong case). Believe me, I would love to see Gaddafi deposed or dead, but it isn't the best thing for his blood to be on our hands....publicly. If we were going to take him out, I'd rather it be the "rebels" with some US Special Forces "advisors" getting the assist behind the scenes. Now that this has really blown up, it is best for our national interest to get to the background quickly.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=saden1;790214]Arab League? The ones being overthrown? You can't be serious![/quote]The Saudis, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, Jordan and Egypt (military is running the show there anyway) all have capable militaries. Not counting Egypt, I think the estimated 2011 spend of the 7 countries was $70B. They have the capability to impose a No Fly Zone in Libya without European or US assistance if they wanted to. If they were so concerned about a civilian massacre, they should've stepped in and simply requested US support.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adpa5kYUhCA]YouTube - Could Obama be Impeached over Libya? Let's ask Biden[/ame]

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=firstdown;790188]You have declared war when you drop bombs on another nation.[/quote]

BS, it is not an official declaration of War. If that is the Case then we declared War on Iraq back in 2008 and I was there. I did not recieve a combat patch for that "conflict". Get a clue before you post some crap like that.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=Angry;790332]BS, it is not an official declaration of War. If that is the Case then we declared War on Iraq back in 2008 and I was there. I did not recieve a combat patch for that "conflict". Get a clue before you post some crap like that.[/quote]

Did I say its an official declaration of war. I just said when you start dropping bombs on another nation you have declared war on them. The only reason people take this so lightly is because Lybia cannot strike back. If we bombed China or Japan people would view it declaring war because they have the military to strike back.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=GMScud;790305][URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adpa5kYUhCA"]YouTube - Could Obama be Impeached over Libya? Let's ask Biden[/URL][/quote]


Talking about using your own words against you. I think Obama should have gone to congress first but I don't think I'd call for him to be impeached.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=firstdown;790346]Did I say its an official declaration of war. I just said when you start dropping bombs on another nation you have declared war on them. The only reason people take this so lightly is because Lybia cannot strike back. If we bombed China or Japan people would view it declaring war because they have the military to strike back.[/quote]

They wanted us to intervene. The Arab nations wanted us to intervene. The only ones that didn't was Ghadafi and his few supporters.

We are not striking at the Lybian people; we are striking down an oppressive dictator and his military who shoot innocent people who are finally standing up for themselves.

We would not need to bomb China or Japan because their officials are elected on a regulare basis. No dictators there dic*.

You are such a hyprocrite. Why is it right to invade Iraq, but not ok to Bomb Lybia? When Regan Bombed Lybia you probably put on your "Rebel-Flag, bandanna", chugged a beer, and fired your 6 shooters in the air 12 times.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;790249]The Saudis, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, Jordan and Egypt (military is running the show there anyway) all have capable militaries. Not counting Egypt, I think the estimated 2011 spend of the 7 countries was $70B. They have the capability to impose a No Fly Zone in Libya without European or US assistance if they wanted to. If they were so concerned about a civilian massacre, they should've stepped in and simply requested US support.[/quote]

LOL...these countries are under a lot of pressure internally, especially Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Jordon, and you want them to help squash another countries internal turmoil? I refuse to believe you're that stupid. What is the objective? Get dictators under pressure to help defend civilians from being killed by their dictator? It's almost as laughable as having Libya a member of the UN Human Rights Council.

Oh look, Saudis are sending troops to Bahrain to help squash their revolution and save the royal family: [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/15/world/middleeast/15bahrain.html[/url]

I am very disappointed in you SS33!!!

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote]If we bombed China or Japan people would view it declaring war because they have the military to strike back.[/quote]

Be pretty impressive since Japan doesn't have a real military. They never re-armed themselves after WW2 restrictions were lifted.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=Angry;790358]They wanted us to intervene. The Arab nations wanted us to intervene. The only ones that didn't was Ghadafi and his few supporters.

We are not striking at the Lybian people; we are striking down an oppressive dictator and his military who shoot innocent people who are finally standing up for themselves.

We would not need to bomb China or Japan because their officials are elected on a regulare basis. No dictators there dic*.

You are such a hyprocrite. Why is it right to invade Iraq, but not ok to Bomb Lybia? When Regan Bombed Lybia you probably put on your "Rebel-Flag, bandanna", chugged a beer, and fired your 6 shooters in the air 12 times.[/quote]

When did I ever say I was against going into Lybia?

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=Daseal;790371]Be pretty impressive since Japan doesn't have a real military. They never re-armed themselves after WW2 restrictions were lifted.[/quote]

Probably not the best example but they do spend over 45 billion a year on their Military so they are not some harmless third world nation.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=firstdown;790379]When did I ever say I was against going into Lybia?[/quote]

Thats right FD you stand shoulder to shoulder with the President on this one

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=firstdown;790381]Probably not the best example but they do spend over 45 billion a year on their Military so they are not some harmless third world nation.[/quote]

What Daseal was referring to, is Japan's constitution forbids forming a standing army. They do however, have a para-military organization used outside of Japan for peace keeping and humanitarian operations/ missions.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=Chico23231;790386]Thats right FD you stand shoulder to shoulder with the President on this one[/quote]

Actually I don't agree with how he went about doing this but as long as we have men risking their life I stand behind Obama and them 100% until they are home safe. I'm just some guy on the internet having fun with a bunch of liberals who spewed this stuff for year at Bush and now their man has us off fighting an illegal war for oil. I think I'm going to by me one of these T Shirts and go have a protest this weekend.


[IMG]http://images9.cpcache.com/product/159243459v14_480x480_Front_Color-BlackWhite.jpg[/IMG]

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=Angry;790332]BS, it is not an official declaration of War. If that is the Case then we declared [B]War on Iraq back in 2008[/B] and I was there. I did not recieve a combat patch for that "conflict". Get a clue before you post some crap like that.[/quote]


Must have been a typo Angry, but were you referring to Desert Fox in December of 1998 instead of OIF in 2008?

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=saden1;790362]LOL...these countries are under a lot of pressure internally, especially Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Jordon, and you want them to help squash another countries internal turmoil? I refuse to believe you're that stupid. What is the objective? Get dictators under pressure to help defend civilians from being killed by their dictator? It's almost as laughable as having Libya a member of the UN Human Rights Council.

Oh look, Saudis are sending troops to Bahrain to help squash their revolution and save the royal family: [URL]http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/15/world/middleeast/15bahrain.html[/URL]

I am very disappointed in you SS33!!![/quote]OK ??? So the Saudis and UAE have enough juice to roll into Bahrain (on the ground no less) to protect their interests, but couldn't help lead a coalition of 7 or 8 Arab countries with the Brits & French to take out Libya's air defenses and impose a No Fly Zone.

Sorry to disappoint ???? C'mon man.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=firstdown;790403]Actually I don't agree with how he went about doing this but as long as we have men risking their life I stand behind Obama and them 100% until they are home safe. I'm just some guy on the internet having fun with a bunch of liberals who spewed this stuff for year at Bush and now their man has us off fighting an illegal war [B]for oil[/B]. I think I'm going to by me one of these T Shirts and go have a protest this weekend.


[IMG]http://images9.cpcache.com/product/159243459v14_480x480_Front_Color-BlackWhite.jpg[/IMG][/quote]

Given that:
a) the United States imports virtually no oil from Libya
b) the plans are to have no boots on the ground, making it impossible to take oil, and
c) Halliburton's oil firm is not involved in this conflict, unlike in other places

You have not at all established how our involvement in Libya has anything to do with taking oil.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;790405]OK ??? So the Saudis and UAE have enough juice to roll into Bahrain (on the ground no less) to protect their interests, but couldn't help lead a coalition of 7 or 8 Arab countries with the Brits & French to take out Libya's air defenses and impose a No Fly Zone.

Sorry to disappoint ???? C'mon man.[/quote]

Lets see, Saudis went into Bahrain to defend the Royal Family there and squash revolution. So the question becomes what do you expect them to do when they decide to go into Libya? To defend a similarly revolting population from Gaddafi?

I really can't understand your thinking process here. It baffles the mind. I want no part in letting the wolves protect the sheep and neither should you!

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=saden1;790407]Lets see, Saudis went into Bahrain to defend the Royal Family there and squash revolution. So the question becomes what do you expect them to do when they decide to go into Libya? To defend a similarly revolting population from Gaddafi?

I really can't understand your thinking process here. It baffles the mind. I want no part in letting the wolves protect the sheep and neither should you![/quote]

Libya and Bahrain are apple vs. orange. In Bahrain, the Saudis (Sunnis) were defending a Sunni regime against a Shi'i popular revolt. In Libya, both the government and the rebels are Sunni. And the Saudis have never been great friends with Qaddafy.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=saden1;790407]Lets see, Saudis went into Bahrain to defend the Royal Family there and squash revolution. So the question becomes what do you expect them to do when they decide to go into Libya? To defend a similarly revolting population from Gaddafi?

I really can't understand your thinking process here. It baffles the mind. I want no part in letting the wolves protect the sheep and neither should you![/quote]Great points by Lotus.

Look all I'm saying is, the Arab League called for the No Fly Zone. The French and Brits drew up plans. Let them take the lead if they want it so bad. Again, I'm not saying we should've withheld support. But with all we're dealing with in the Middle East (not to mention our perception with much of the Muslim population), let these guys take the lead and just provide Logistics/Intel. We didn't need to take point.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=Lotus;790414]Libya and Bahrain are apple vs. orange. In Bahrain, the Saudis (Sunnis) were defending a Sunni regime against a Shi'i popular revolt. In Libya, both the government and the rebels are Sunni. And the Saudis have never been great friends with Qaddafy.[/quote]

What is your point? Sectarian conflict is more problematic than clan-centric conflict (see Somalia)? That one is more acceptable than the other? That Saudis who are battling their own unrest are more open to killing Shia population on behalf of the Royal Family of Bahrain and willing to defend Sunni population against Gaddafi?

When people are oppressed there are no apples and oranges to compare...just body count numbers. Simply don't trust an oppressor like Saudi Arabia to do the right thing...OKay?

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;790419]Great points by Lotus.

Look all I'm saying is, the Arab League called for the No Fly Zone. The French and Brits drew up plans. [B]Let them take the lead if they want it so bad[/B]. Again, I'm not saying we should've withheld support. But with all we're dealing with in the Middle East (not to mention our perception with much of the Muslim population), let these guys take the lead and just provide Logistics/Intel. We didn't need to take point.[/quote]

Unacceptable! Talk about giving the keys to the car to a drunkard. If you don't want to take the point let the French take the point...they seem to be willing. I'm very disturbed that you place your faith in the Saudis to do the right thing.

BTW, the Arab League [URL="http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/03/ghosts-of-iraq-why-the-war-against-libya-remains-leaderless/72916/"]withdrew[/URL] its support for the no Fly-Zone within hours of granting it.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=saden1;790423]Unacceptable! Talk about giving the keys to the car to a drunkard. If you don't want to take the point let the French take the point...they seem to be willing. I'm very disturbed that you place your faith in the Saudis to do the right thing.

BTW, the Arab League [URL="http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/03/ghosts-of-iraq-why-the-war-against-libya-remains-leaderless/72916/"]withdrew[/URL] its support for the no Fly-Zone within hours of granting it.[/quote]

I think they've since clarified their position and they're still on board.

I'm kind of surprised, though, that SlinginSammy isn't endorsing a unilatteral (sp) intervention and calling for Obama's head like Romney, Pawlenty, and Gingrich. I guess I appreciate you seeing beyond the politics of all this.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=12thMan;790436]I think they've since clarified their position and they're still on board.

[B]I'm kind of surprised, though, that SlinginSammy isn't endorsing a unilatteral (sp) intervention and calling for Obama's head like Romney, Pawlenty, and Gingrich. I guess I appreciate you seeing beyond the politics of all this.[/B][/quote]

Agreed. Sammy is ruling the discussion in a good way.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=saden1;790422]What is your point? Sectarian conflict is more problematic than clan-centric conflict (see Somalia)? That one is more acceptable than the other? That Saudis who are battling their own unrest are more open to killing Shia population on behalf of the Royal Family of Bahrain and willing to defend Sunni population against Gaddafi?

When people are oppressed there are no apples and oranges to compare...just body count numbers. Simply don't trust an oppressor like Saudi Arabia to do the right thing...OKay?[/quote]

I agree that the Saudis cannot be trusted to do the right thing. I wasn't even arguing that they are doing the right thing. I simply indicated that Bahrain and Libya are different realities in their eyes, especially when it comes to the respective ruling regimes.

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=12thMan;790436]I'm kind of surprised, though, that SlinginSammy isn't endorsing a unilatteral (sp) intervention and calling for Obama's head like Romney, Pawlenty, and Gingrich. I guess I appreciate you seeing beyond the politics of all this.[/quote]LOL. Some of us conservatives can keep you guessing. :food-smil

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=BuckSkin;790404]Must have been a typo Angry, but were you referring to Desert Fox in December of 1998 instead of OIF in 2008?[/quote]

Yes, it was a typo, I was referring to Intrinsic Action 98-03, "Operation Desert Fox".

Thanks TOP!

Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011
 

[quote=Angry;790467]Yes, it was a typo, I was referring to Intrinsic Action 98-03, "Operation Desert Fox".

Thanks TOP![/quote]

I just needed to ensure that the dossier that I am putting together on you contains the correct information.