Yes, yes, I know! I am just making sure you guys don´t forget that our governments (yeah Europe, your included you better-than-US) are two faced. They start wars in the name of human rights but let worse violence run blatantly without a care because it doesn´t concern them.
Understand, I don´t want war to start with Syria but I never wanted war to start in Libya or any other country ever.
It was revealed a long time ago by General Clark that Syria was on the list to be attacked and overthrown; next to Iraq, Libya, and Iran (among others).
It was also leaked that the US State Department was funding opposition groups to start protests in Syria (the ones we are seeing now). What you don´t hear about are the protests in Syria to get the US out of Syrian affairs.
As you can see by the link you gave; They´re already starting the anti-Syria Propaganda.
IMO you only need to kill others when you admit you do not have intelligence enough to talk and reason with them.
"Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding." - Albert Einstein
We are a country run by comparative morons who are unable to think their way through problems. Diplomacy seriously isn´t all that hard people. Imagine if we settled all our disputes here by killing each other. Fortunately we are all much too smart for that.
"The man who strikes first admits that his ideas have given out."
- Chinese Proverb
....so does the man who strikes in return.
never forget either of these countries mentioned. Palestine was the first country I became aware of, where the human rights of the people have never a consideration; well, not since I arrived to this planet.
Yeah, that whole mess... I just don´t even know how to comment on Palestine. They´re in my prayers but that´s the best I can offer. Recently, Syria and Israel clashed on the border killing 20 people. I don´t understand it. And, I will never be able to help anyone in those situations.
The sad thing is, Libya and Syria are barely making any news at all today. Just like Palestine (cept when Israel doesn´t play nice according to the human rights activists that forget about Libya, Syria and Yemen), and now Iraq and Afghanistan.
"The escalating Nato action – which critics say has gone beyond the military alliance’s UN mandate to protect civilians – comes amid other signs of a weakening in Col Gaddafi’s resistance to an almost three-month rebel uprising against his 41-year rule."
Critics? of NATO? Ha! Dream on! They are perfect in every manner, so therefore it is incorrect to claim that anyone could ever criticize that peace bringing organization.
Funny thing is, UN is calling for a cease fire (actually, they´re not brave enough for even that!) against civilians. So far reports state 1,100 people have died in this conflict. I am reading a book about Blackwater where it has been reported Blackwater has mercilessly killed hundreds of Iraqis without any sort of threat. But its cool, let Blackwater do what they want cuz they protects you bitches, but bitch and whine about Syria (and do nothing).
Libya: Democrat Dennis Kucinich credits Bush for asking to continue war in Iraq/Afghanistan.
"Kucinich said U.S. drone attacks in foreign lands are akin to war. Citing the attack on Pearl Harbor, Kucinich said that if a bomb dropped on the U.S., it would be labeled a war. He added the U.S. needs to significantly change its foreign policy, saying, "We can´t be global cop.""
Boehner (the guy I never liked... HA!) warns Obama that the House could vote to withdrawl funding for the war in Libya. If it was anyone else, I would be like "yeah right" but this is Boehner...
"Actually forcing the president’s hand could be difficult, however, because any House-passed funding restriction would have to pass the Democratic-controlled Senate and be signed by Obama himself. And any Libya-related amendment would likely be attached to an appropriations bill that may not move through the Senate for months."
Everything I ain´t saying myself is from the source (for copyright stuff)
So Obama rejects top administration lawyers (his lawyers) views on Libya
Lets see who those people are: "top administration lawyers -- Attorney General Eric Holder, OLC Chief Caroline Krass, and DoD General Counsel Jeh Johnson"
Here is a great excerpt: "-- all told Obama that his latest, widely panned excuse for waging war without Congressional approval (that it does not rise to the level of "hostilities" under the War Powers Resolution (WPR)) was invalid and that such authorization was legally required after 60 days: itself a generous intepretation of the President´s war powers. But Obama rejected those views and (with the support of administration lawyers in lesser positions: his White House counsel and long-time political operative Robert Bauer and State Department "legal adviser" Harold Koh) publicly claimed that the WPR does not apply to Libya."
Also, BTW... they are attempting to sue the president. You know, its a grey area. But I almost don´t want this lawsuit or whatever it is to come about because it WILL end in Obama´s favor and that may set future laws into his (any president) favor. You know what I mean? Like if they saved this for another better time, then yeah... go ahead. But this one might screw us in the end?
Just my thoughts, still pondering it. But I still find it really funny that his top officials ARE WRONG!
I am familiar with the compulsions of industry sectors towards war. That aside, my moral imperative to end state sanctioned mass-murder is more heavily weighted than the considerable evils of mere state-sanctioned petty theft.
I´ve said it before, and cannot take any other stand - could I end only the warfare state or the welfare state tomorrow, it would be warfare hands down.
How could they not loose? For one thing, the president will do what he wants, and for another, he is Obama. Hell, the people who bitched about Bush going into both Afghanistan and Iraq WITH Congress approval, they haven´t said one thing about Obama bombing Libya, or even Yemen without Congress approval.
Good ol Boehner was in support of Libya (in fact he made some legislation that attempts to thwart those trying to end our campaign), now he is turning his back on it. Why?
So either way, we´re screwed, and I think that is juts what they are looking for.
"It was the first time in three months of airstrikes that the Qaddafi government has presented credible evidence of what appeared to be direct civilian casualties of NATO attacks. Although the government has often claimed large numbers of civilian deaths, it has never previously presented bodies or consistent facts about the dead. "
"Ten years ago US defence investment represented almost half of all defence expenditure in the whole alliance. Today it is 75%,"Rasmussen said. "This increasing economic gap may also lead to an increasing technology gap which will almost hamper the inter-operability between our forces. The Americans provide & still more advanced military assets and equipment; the Europeans are lagging behind. And eventually it will be difficult to co-operate even if you had the political will to co-operate because of the technological gap."
That reminds me of when Stewie on Family Guy was at the fair and did the whole "This is rifle and this is my gun" or whatever routine.
More on Robert Gates (I am starting to like this guy for some reason) calling NATO pussies:
"Last week we got a glimpse of an answer and it was not nice. The outgoing US defence secretary, Robert Gates, berated Europe?s "failure of political will" in not maintaining defence spending. He said Nato had declined into a "two-tier alliance" between those willing to wage war and those "who specialise in ?soft? humanitarian, development, peacekeeping and talking tasks". Peace, he implied, is for wimps. Real men buy bombs, and drop them."
You know, I am starting to feel bad for NATO...
"Libya has cost Britain ?100m so far"
WTF, that?s it? One of the countries with the most bitching about how we weren?t willing to fight and they haven?t even spent a third of what we have spent? Correct me if I am wrong, guys!
So Robert Gates is berating the europeans because they are not spending 9/10th of their GDP on military garbage like his country is doing? Instead of berating his own country for spending 9/10th of their GDP on garbage? And still not winning a single war to show for it? Total and utter mismanagement of resources for years and years and abject disregad for the death caused by war mismanagement?
I´m not saying you should prefer one over the other. That´s up to you and I have no say in that.
What I´m saying is that I believe they go hand in hand. AKA the welfare state has led to the warfare state.
When people demand too many resources from government, it can become ´feasible´ for that government to engage in war to secure those resources.
If you´ll remember, that´s how Nazi Germany arose out of the disaster of the Wiemar Republic. They quickly went from some of the worst poverty in history to great prosperity and technology.
To keep their prosperity/technology bubble going, they invaded nearby nations to the point of starting a worldwide war. This led to disastrous consequences for them, of course.
The Germans relied too much on their government to give them prosperity, just as we rely too much on our government to give us prosperity.
Until we start relying upon ourselves for our own prosperity and not government, war will continue to rule the realm...that is until we collapse into a powerless 3rd world nation just like the Germans did.
Yeah, that is right! I am making fun of the fact that we were demanded by the European countries to get involved and yet they aren´t doing shit on their part. How I feel towards whether or not we should be involved is what this thread is about.
I agree with you too, it is absurd. But, to be honest, Europe should have never started this shit in the first place, now they are scrambling to figure out how to fix it. They bitch us out for getting into matters that don´t concern us (...directly), but we´re supposed to be there at their every beck and call. So yeah, I agree with Robert Gates. If we are stuck in this war that they created, then fuck them, they need to step it up.
A small snippit that is sad: "S foreign assistance to Afghanistan currently constitutes an astounding 97 per cent of that country´s gross domestic product; when it declines, as it inevitably will, an economic depression is likely to result."
NATO says it was justified in the recent attack that killed 15 innocent people. The attack was against a legitimate command-and-control node and that they are sad that 15 innocent people were killed in the strike.
Plus, blames us for Libya: "Never mind the fact that Obama escalated the war in Afghanistan. Forget also the fact that he ramped up the air-wars in Pakistan and Yemen - starting one in Libya - or presided over the killing of Osama bin Laden."
But it really is a good read!
Also, someone pointed out (http://answers.yahoo.com/... that the European countries wanted a reason to attack Gaddafi because of the Pan Am Flight 103 that hit Scotland.
@cj: yeah, I feel really bad for people in Palestine. I saw that headline the other day and I was like "sigh"... It is sad when you have to FORCE a confession out of someone.
@jenkie: I think I will definitely vote for Ron Paul this go around. Obama is worthless... I can´t believe he is such a dick and then he hides behind "I am for you guys, the small peoples" bullshit. At least Bush was outright pro-business and war. He may have lied, but we knew where he stood. He never surprised us. Obama lied his ass off, and continues to and continues to keep his support through it.
Basically, Ron Paul seems to be the only politician that hasn´t really changed gears on anything he has said (imo). For once, I would love to see a president that doesn´t lie every time he gets up on the podium to address ME, the small peoples.
That´s music to my ears! Unfortunately, you may not get a chance unless you´re a registered Republican...I know, I know, the irony is Shakespearean.
I remember when I had to register, had a bad taste in my mouth all day leading up to it. But finally I confronted the inner turmoil, by admitting that I wasn´t supporting the body politic as a whole; rather, I was acting on a most noble intent. If my pathetic little misgivings and momentary discomfort could contribute to saving tens of thousands of lives across the world, I would be a fool to hesitate.
Paul needs all the help he can get simply moving past the primaries. If you can give him one vote, it´s worthy; if you can help others realize the predicament we´re in, it becomes damn significant.
In the end, it´s not the man I vote for, but the ideas; chiefly, that free individuals can improve peace and prosperity by example, as can a country. No force required.
"Since the mid-March outbreak of disturbances in Syria, "not a single European leader has come to Syria to discuss what is going on," Muallim said. Instead, "they have begun imposing a series of sanctions that today are hitting the livelihood of Syrians, which is equivalent to war.""
I thought that no foreign ...person was allowed in Syria?
"Despite being constantly tempted by the seductive power of having an apocalyptic arsenal at his fingertips, President Barack Obama somehow made it through another day Tuesday without unlocking the box on his desk that houses "the button" and launching all 5,113 U.S. nuclear warheads."
Funny thing is, if Obama asks for permission for an extension, I am sure Congress would be all good with that. But, since he is (and illegally, though we can´t say that) continuing without support of Congress, Congress is not liking it. So of course Congress doesn´t care about the citizens of Libya!
In other news, Gaddafi is pleading with NATO to stop attacking, and mentions the killing of 15 innocent people.
It is understood that the casualty rate in the Afghanistan ....thing.... has increased significantly since Obama became president (though, I never hear of that on the news... hence the reason for this thread!).
During Bush´s 87 months: 570 casualties. During Obama´s 29 months: 970 casualties.
I hope you guys understand that I am not pro or anti Obama or Bush or anyone else. I am anti-war. If I say things that make me seem like I hate Obama, it is because I distrust him and dislike some of the situations he has put us in. But I am not blind to the things he has done for (good) us either.
The media has all but forgotten Iraq and Afghanistan. The only reason they play anything about Afghanistan now is because Obama is making a big and important announcement. This thread is my attempt to share links so you guys won´t have to go searching. I am not going out of my way, usually, to find these, but when I do I like to add them here. Anyone is welcome to contribute to this thread!
Obama apparently can´t make up his mind in supporting the Libyan rebel troops in that ...thing... they are doing right now.
"So what´s the hold up? The TNC´s prime minister, Mahmoud Jibril, came to Washington last month and held extensive discussions with the White House, the State Department, the Treasury Department, and several lawmakers. He pleaded for the administration to recognize the TNC as the official government of Libya, which would give them access to the billions in frozen assets.
But the Obama administration refuses to do that because, despite launching an air campaign targeting Qaddafi´s military and command infrastructure, it hasn´t actually abandoned recognition of his regime. "
"More than 150 Syrian intellectuals and activists including prominent opposition figures will meet in Damascus on Monday to discuss the current crisis and propose a way out of the violence." http://www.independent.ie/... But some don´t want to go?
"The Iranian president addressed the Arab leaders at the two-day summit, saying both the Holocaust and the 2001 terror attacks were pretexts by the U.S. to put down Muslims and at the same time make huge economic benefits by spreading panic in the region. Ahmadinejad has often questioned what he called accepted truths. " http://www.haaretz.com/... Can someone explain that to me?
I understand this. What I don´t understand is why we feel that it is necessary to bomb Libya under the guise of Human Rights, while Syria is set loose on their citizens. Why is it OK for China and Russia to have control over Syria and we have to listen to them? Why aren´t we supporting the ´rebels´ in Syria?
And what do we call the thing that is happening in Libya? Ben never specified, but it totally isn´t war (I think?).
Because Syrians are not worth other countries going to ww3 over. You have to acknowledge the colonial map, it exists, it is much more loose than colonial maps from times bygone but the map still exists. I also would be surprised if the Syrian army shooting civilians does not already contain iranian republican guards.
wow, thanx a lot you made my day. Finally England woke up and is going around arresting those murder mongers. For decades Egypt was asking for the arrest of zawahiri, the egyptian personal doctor of bin laden and today is the leader of qaeda. We wanted his ass for couple decades before 911 for the murders and civilians murders he caused in Egypt, yet England ´protected´ him because he is a ´religious´ figure, exercising his ´free speech´. Screw him and screw this murderous killer england just extradited.
is still the same, we just had business talks with China even though their human rights abuses are a major talking point, but our politicians wont bring it up. Free speech comes at a price and some of that cost comes in keeping quiet. We chose to ignore the Libya problem for years, we created the Palestine problem then turned our backs. England along with others need to prioritise, fix the mess we have made and advise others and not interfere too much, but be on hand to help.