Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I just started another thread on this. PAY ATTENTION!!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I posted it about 20 minutes ago. Not to worry, it needed a thread.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Then this most CERTAINLY qualifies,

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
By the way, this weekend marked the 8th anniversary of our invasion of Iraq.

If you were wondering what to get someone for an eighth anniversary, the answer would be "cruise missiles".

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
By the way, this weekend marked the 8th anniversary of our illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq.

If you were wondering what to get someone for an eighth anniversary, the answer would be "cruise missiles".

---

Corrected that for you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
I had it right the first time.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Would someone like to explain to me why we targeted Al-Tajura and Saladin Hospitals, and a Tripoli medical clinic ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
While still on the fence and nervous about the implications,

Quote:

---

I'm pleased about the intervention, so far.

It's my opinion that the world could not do nothing here - and with Gaddafi's tanks rolling into Benghazi I would say the action has come just in time.

---

Doing nothing would signal to the other dictators having problems in the region that they can slaughter their civilians and the world doesn't care. And hey ho, the "founding fathers" fought the British over tyrannical rule, who are we to sit in judgment against these?

The thing I wonder about is "why France?" Why are they so head-up about getting into this? I'm sure someone here has an idea, I don't, but boy, they were REALLY gung-ho to get in there...

Saying "No ground troops" doesn't mean anything to me; if things drag on, who knows? I hear "we" plan to take a less prominent role once the no-fly zone is accomplished, but only time will tell.

I don't equate this to Iraq OR Afghanistan. Afghanistan, we really were going after the guys who did 9/11; Iraq, we were giving Dumbya what he wanted and it WAS an invasion, whether illegal or not. In this case, yes, they HAVE been begging for help, especially a no-fly zone, for quite some time. They don't want us invading, and I hope nobody does, but cutting off Ghadafi's ability to bomb them? I'm okay with that.

My little hope is that they bomb enough of Ghadafi's mercenaries that those guys figure it's not worth the bucks and go home. Without them, I think it gets close to a fair fight. But then what do I know? It's just my opinion, as valid and omniscient as anyone else's.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I just started another thread on this. PAY ATTENTION!!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
This site needs a 'firsties' pin, or something, to reduce such duplicate topic postings.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
WHISKEY, TANGO, FOXTROT, OVER ?!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
If you were wondering what to get someone for an eighth anniversary, the answer would be "cruise missiles".

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
Afghanistan, we really were going after the guys who did 9/11

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
It was Gadhafi's Secretary General, al-Zawi.

---

Quote:

---

Posted by DT:



Mike, Rap...

In your petty infighting, how could either of you miss that the period goes *inside* of the quotation marks.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:

While on the subject of vocabulary, does anyone know what the accepted spelling of Ghadafi IS? Or maybe I should say "MOST" accepted. I've seen everything from Gaddafi to Gadhafi to Ghadaffi to Q'dafi to Khadafi...it took me a couple of typings to "get" LIbYa, but his name defeats me. It's even different depending on which news station you're watching! I know their alphabet is difficult to translate, but surely they'd try to at least come up with SOME agreed-upon spelling!

---

Quote:

---

“While the action is billed as protecting the civilians of Libya, a no-fly-zone begins with an attack on the air defenses of Libya and Qaddafi forces. It is an act of war. The president made statements which attempt to minimize U.S. action, but U.S. planes may drop U.S. bombs and U.S. missiles may be involved in striking another sovereign nation. War from the air is still war.

“It is also worth noting that the President did not comment upon nor recognize that the Libyan government had declared a ceasefire in response to UNSC Resolution 1973. It was appropriate for the UN to speak about the situation. It was appropriate to establish an arms embargo and freeze Qaddafi’s considerable financial assets. But whether the U.S. takes military action is not for the UN alone to decide. There is a constitutional imperative in the United States with respect to deciding to commit our U.S. armed forces to war.

“Congress should be called back into session immediately to decide whether or not to authorize the United States’ participation in a military strike. If it does not, the action of the President is contrary to U.S. Constitution. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution clearly states that the United States Congress has the power to declare war. The President does not. That was the Founders’ intent.

“I have sent a letter to Congressional leadership indicating that the national interest requires that Congress be called back quickly to Washington to exercise its Constitutional authority to determine whether our armed forces should participate in the UN mission. Both houses of Congress must weigh in. This is not for the President alone, or for a few high ranking Members of Congress to decide.

“It is hard to imagine that Congress, during the current contentious debate over deficits and budget cutting, would agree to plunge America into still another war, especially since America will spend trillions in total for the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and incursions into Pakistan.

“The last thing we need is to be embroiled in yet another intervention in another Muslim country. The American people have had enough. First it was Afghanistan, then Iraq. Then bombs began to fall in Pakistan, then Yemen, and soon it seems bombs could be falling in Libya. Our nation simply cannot afford another war, economically, diplomatically or spiritually,” said Kucinich.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pizmobeach:
Yeah, I have a lot more to say on it but for now, Go Kucinich.
And... Didn't we *help* some rebels in Afghanistan when they were having issues with some Ruskies? How that end up working?
While I'm here... Do we have zero memory? It's not really even memory if it's happening now, is it?
This is the equivalent to Obama saying, "Yes, let's do Afghanistan again."
Oil? How much Alternative Energy R&D F*ck Oil Forever would 120 Tomahawks buy us?
Do we have any successes in the Middle East, as like even a modestly successful track record to point to? Usually, if you are going to hire someone for a job you want to see a positive resume: We have US Military: Vietnam:Fail, Iraq:Fail, and Afghanistan:Fail.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Khadafi's a bad man, sure. He's a liar, and he's got blood on his hands. That makes him different from an American President... HOW, exactly?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

What will Qaddafi do? I'm guessing it won't bring him to the table, yet. Might take a direct hit, like Reagan tried, to finally do this guy in.

Does Qaddafi pull a crazy Ivan, and really do some thing stupid ? I mean, he's already shelled and bombed his own people... civilians, not just rebel forces.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:

Pizmo, I disagree. I think he's stayed in power because he's crazy like a fox about staying in power, and has kept his population so under control, they weren't able to see there was any other way, and nobody ever organized to fight back.

I think it's pretty obvious the man is totally whacko, and has been for a long time. To me he's just a madman who won't give up no matter what unless someone takes him out, the U.S. doesn't come into it except as a good propaganda point, which he uses against ALL Western countries.

---

Quote:

---

Mike, Rap...

In your petty infighting, how could either of you miss that the period goes *inside* of the quotation marks.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Mike, Rap...

In your petty infighting, how could either of you miss that the period goes *inside* of the quotation marks.

---

Because being overly anal and petty about such things is Kwickie's dept., not mine.

I'm more of a big picture, substance sort, while I leave mind numbing details like grammar to others. This is a message board, after all.

U no wat I meen ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by RionaEire:
Well, if the Libyan rebels wanted us to come in and help then I'm okay with it, as long as we don't get too involved, we're tied up in two countries as it is, maybe we should impose a two country limit, say "I'm sorry we are already very busy, come back when we aren't in two other wars". Thoughts?

But seriously I'm okay with it as long as we don't get very involved and the rebels actually want us to help, I don't want us getting stuck there. I'm still into the idea of having a covert secret organization of super killer sniper people that goes and assassinates Qadaffi types when their people have had enough. It would be secret enough that they officially don't exist, then if someone came to the Americans and asked if we did it we could deny deny deny. The thing is that we signed something at some point that says we won't kill foreign leaders, why did we sign this? This would have been easier if we sent our secret guys in there, did the job and then let the rebels figure out what they're going to do now. I think I'm going to call said clandestine outfit the SSSS, oh wait, they can't be that now because I told you guys, back to the drawing board. You get the point.

And I think Raptor's spelling with a Q is close, that's how I saw it spelled on the news, for all the good that does, could still be totally wrong.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

---