Reply With Quote
No need to be all that personal. Let the man have his say.
Invading a country with oil, versus protecting unarmed civilians.
The difference boiled down to protecting vital US interests.
I would argue that, in the long run, our values *are* our interests. Something, I think Obama seems to get.
Going after Ghadaffi has done some good for us on the Arab street, from what I have seen.
I don't think going after Al Assad militarily will help us though. Our hands are tied there.
No need to be all that personal. Let the man have his say.
i did. then i had mine.
To be fair, they may be different lines depending on which line you choose from the iraq invasion. If you chose the "pre-emptive strike due to WMD" line then yes it is different. However, if you chose the "liberating the people from a murderous dictator" line, then it is the same line. (you could also chose the following line "this country was heavily involved in planning 911", among others)
Do you not recall the reasons why I supported the war in Iraq? Only one of several items are similar.I'm not buying it either. Either you are being lazy or evasive. My bet is the former.
It doesn't piss me off, it is just another turd in the pile of sloppy reasoning on your part. Your business as to how high that pile is.
Feel free to flesh out your position with, you know, an actual position at anytime.
Just tell us what you think the difference is.
No.
It's too fun to watch your idiocy.
what happened to your "capabilities" lol
Trust me, it's more fun watching your cowardice.
If that's what you think, I don't care. I just don't feel like feeding the trolls today.
you must be sick. can't wait to pay for that.
Eh, you're afraid. No shame in that.
Well, actually there is shame in that, but whatever. We're comfortable in the knowledge that you didn't really think this one through and couldn't give us a difference anyway.
While I am flattered by your faith in my memory, I must confess to not recalling.
Sorry. I am fairly sure that my participation in this board was well after the initial invasion. I discussed the run-up in other places, but did little here but about the handling of the post invasion occupation.
If you are going to give up on your own thread, at least let us know in the OP.
As I said, another turd in a sadly large pile.
I already gave hints. Here's more. Look at the similarities and differences during the last 25 years.While I am flattered by your faith in my memory, I must confess to not recalling.
Sorry. I am fairly sure that my participation in this board was well after the initial invasion. I discussed the run-up in other places, but did little here but about the handling of the post invasion occupation.
If you are going to give up on your own thread, at least let us know in the OP.
How many nations have Libya and Iraq invaded?
How many times have they used chemical weapons (WMD) on their own people?
How many UN resolutions have either violated?
How certain was the worlds best intelligence agencies of either having WMD, right or wrong?
Who did our president of the time have congressional approval to fight against?
When we debated the Iraq war in the past, I mentioned the UN resolutions, the killing of his own people, the fear of WMD, and other factors. Most of which have no similarity to the situation with Libya.
Besides the leader of a sovereign nation, recognized by the world as a sovereign nation, being brutal to some of his own people, how does it compare to Saddam and Iraq?
Thank you.
Unfortunately, between the allergies and the anti-histimine, it is time to hit the hay.
This is a conversation worth having, so I will get back to it in the next day or two.
Between this and Syria, as mentioned in the OP, we should figure out something about the use of force.
There is no comparison between Libya and most other nations with bad dictators. Libya has the highest HDI of all African nations and rates #53 world wide. Mexico rates #56, Brazil #73, China #89. ElNono's home of Argentina rates a little better at #46. I wonder how Libya's ratings will be after the ratings are compiled next time.
Saudi Arabia #55, Egypt #101, Iran #70, and Syria is #111.
#53 of 169 rated nations isn't shabby. He may be a bad dictator, but the people weren't as bad off as many other places. I find it unconscionable that our nation had a hand in this. Obama has brought shame upon us.
We have made possible a civil war. A war that would have never gone this far if we didn't take out the forces to keep the nation at peace. Obama and the UN potentially has the blood of 100's of thousands on his hands.
It's not surprising you're trying to change subjects and that your memory is 'fuzzy'.The US didn't invade Iraq during Desert Storm when Iraq invaded Kuwait. That was a different campaign by Bush SR and ended in a no fly zone and UN sanctions.
The US/UK (and two other token countries) unilaterally invaded Iraq during Bush JR's administration after failing to obtain a vote to do so through the UN security council (who can forget Powell's dog and pony show) under the guise that Saddam had WMD. Once the WMD were not found, the new argument was that the US were greeted as liberators, that they wanted to install democracy there and get rid of the evil dictator that was killing his own people.
Which really is no different than all this . Iraq was a sovereign country at that point, and ultimately the invasion was directly attributed to remove Saddam from power.
I gather you never lived in a dictatorship?
There's no such thing as 'benevolent' dictators that kill less of their own people than other dictators...
So how many dictatorships are we going to take out? Afterall, there are so many worse dictators than Qaddafi.
Remember what I said about the line we drew?
So you are supporting us making possible, a long civil war, killing countless people?
Your 'ranking' of dictators reeks of ignorance. But I'm not surprised you think authoritarians can have a benevolent side, especially those that kill their own people.
I'm not necessarily in support of invading sovereign nations or being the world police, but you need to stop trying to make believe this hasn't been standard foreign policy, and that somehow a new line has been drawn.
Another example would be the invasion of Panama and the removal of Noriega. That's another one just off the top of my head. I'm sure you can go back further and find more cases.
What does that has to do with your 'dictator rankings'? Don't move the goalposts.
Did you have any problems with the US 'making possible, a long civil war, killing countless people' in Iraq?
Where was the line when Operation Nifty Package happened?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
