Right, we should keep ourselves out of all this. The first thing you do in imposing a "no fly zone" is attack the country with bombs.
I don't know what Obama is wanting to do, but y'all are right, let the Arabs deal with this family dispute. If Obama attacks Libya, I will turn on him.
quote:
Originally posted by seeweed:
Right, we should keep ourselves out of all this. The first thing you do in imposing a "no fly zone" is attack the country with bombs.
I don't know what Obama is wanting to do, but y'all are right, let the Arabs deal with this family dispute. If Obama attacks Libya, I will turn on him.


Just wanted to get a record of this. I understand the military is moving men and equipment in that direction. It could just be saber rattling. A few more days of inaction by someone and the rebels will all be dead anyway.
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
OPEC will agree to increases in output if the US handles the Libya problem.

Who cares ? there is plenty of crude sitting around. I have heard the stockpiles in Ok City are full. More crude won't make any difference, and even if it did, we do not need to open another war front up .
It is interesting to note that the Rebels that were participating in the rebellion rejected anything from the US, NATO, or a request for a No Fly Zone. They could do it themselves. Now that they are about obliterated and things aren't going the way they hoped they, and other usual enemies, of the west, are all but crying for help, assistance and a No Fly Zone.

Our politicians, as usual, jump into the fray late in the game and place ourselves in a position of no-win politics. I'm no fan of Libya or it's rulers and we have been at odds with them for a long time but Kadafi says the opposition is supposed to be led by radical muslims and al qaeda and aren't we also at odds with these folks also trying to kill them and their leadership?

Is this another case of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" scenario? If so then who is now our friend or who considers US their friend for this season?
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
We have no friends or allies in the middles east. The USA is just a endless source of revenue for the oil they allow us to pump out of their ground at our own expense. If the oil market tightens up any more, we will be flying over Libya 24-7.


There are no carriers on their way to the area.
Well.

It seems the brainiacs at the UN have declared a No-Fly Zone over Libya.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...Gu_s&feature=feedlik

Will we see fighter jets from The Netherlands, South Africa, Japan, Brazil, Chile, Australia, Germany, Saudi Arabia, India, the UAE, Mexico, Russia, and Indonesia enforcing the UN mandate?

Hell, no.

Is the UN about as worthless as the Pope's male member? OK, scratch that, he's in with *that* crowd. Worthless as tires on a penguin?


nsns
quote:
Originally posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:
Well.

It seems the brainiacs at the UN have declared a No-Fly Zone over Libya.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...Gu_s&feature=feedlik

Will we see fighter jets from The Netherlands, South Africa, Japan, Brazil, Chile, Australia, Germany, Saudi Arabia, India, the UAE, Mexico, Russia, and Indonesia enforcing the UN mandate?

Hell, no.

Is the UN about as worthless as the Pope's male member? OK, scratch that, he's in with *that* crowd. Worthless as tires on a penguin?


nsns


If, the Brits sent their super carrier and France her two carriers, they could do it.

Except for a few exceptions, UN troops I've encountered were useless and ill equipped; if not not completely corrupt. That's why I get a laugh when conspiratorial minded idiots mention UN troops occupying the UN. The Alabama NG would send them home in body bags. Hell, the Florence PD would be a good match.
It is about time the Arab League and the EU step up to the plate. No matter what we do we will be ****ed for it. Let them take the heat for the inevitable collateral damage. Let them put their people in harm's way. Let them spend their money for once. We need to mind our own business. In any event our plate is full at the moment.
quote:
Originally posted by ferrellj:
quote:
Originally posted by seeweed:
Right, we should keep ourselves out of all this. The first thing you do in imposing a "no fly zone" is attack the country with bombs.
I don't know what Obama is wanting to do, but y'all are right, let the Arabs deal with this family dispute. If Obama attacks Libya, I will turn on him.


Just wanted to get a record of this. I understand the military is moving men and equipment in that direction. It could just be saber rattling. A few more days of inaction by someone and the rebels will all be dead anyway.


What say you juan, are you turning on Obama?
quote:
Originally posted by seeweed:
Right, we should keep ourselves out of all this. The first thing you do in imposing a "no fly zone" is attack the country with bombs.
I don't know what Obama is wanting to do, but y'all are right, let the Arabs deal with this family dispute. If Obama attacks Libya, I will turn on him.


SEEWEED, where are you????????????
quote:
Originally posted by seeweed:
If Obama attacks Libya, I will turn on him.


Obama played right into the European Union and the Arab League's hands. This is a no win situation for us. The Arab Leagues is already complaining that we have overstepped our plans, and the EU is sitting back watching us do the dirty work as usual. We waited to late in the game to have any real effect, so the rebels will be mad when all is said and done, and the mad man will still be in power in Libya.
quote:
Originally posted by seeweed:
Right, we should keep ourselves out of all this. The first thing you do in imposing a "no fly zone" is attack the country with bombs.
I don't know what Obama is wanting to do, but y'all are right, let the Arabs deal with this family dispute. If Obama attacks Libya, I will turn on him.


Word is that seeweed was arrested in Washington over the weekend protesting the fighting.
quote:
Obama played right into the European Union and the Arab League's hands. This is a no win situation for us. The Arab Leagues is already complaining that we have overstepped our plans, and the EU is sitting back watching us do the dirty work as usual. We waited to late in the game to have any real effect, so the rebels will be mad when all is said and done, and the mad man will still be in power in Libya.


The rebels will remember the country and leader who pushed for this intervention and not the country who will foot the bill:

quote:
“1,2,3, thank you Sarkozy!” the crowd chanted, with many waving French flags. “We have stopped his plans,” they chanted. “We will triumph.”
French President Nicolas Sarkozy has been strongly urging his partners at the UN Security Council to back a resolution on a no-fly zone over Libya and was the first to recognise the rebel Libyan National Council.
http://theindependentbd.com/in...r-un-resolution.html

These are strange times with countries and US agencies normally associated with the word "surrender" pushing this intervention, the French and the State Department.
Yes, it is the picture of irony. When the US led the assault on Iraq and the persecution of the Iraqi people by Saddam was the reason given for that intervention, the French blasted us and called George Bush a warmonger.
Now, the Libyan oil is of a type that is almost exclusively used in France, which is where they get most of their oil. Now that Sakozy is backing the rebels, it is for humanitarain reasons, when it is more obvious than the nose on your face that real reason is oil. i hope George Bush has a big smile on his face right now relishing in the fact that hippocrites andliberals are now in the same position that he was in not so many years ago.
quote:
In 2009, France's exports to Libya were worth about $1 billion (615 million pounds) and imports from Libya about $3.1 billion, mostly oil and oil products, making it Libya's No. 3 export market after Italy and Germany, the foreign ministry said.



Italy, Germany, France and Spain have all been doing business with Libya during the US economic embargo of the country which ended in 2005.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/...dUKTRE71M1NW20110223
quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Dittohead:
At least this will be a cheap war. The cruise missiles are only about $1.2million each, so we only spent about $150million the first day. Ongoing cost wont be more than $40million a day. Compare that to $2billion a week in Iraq/Astan.


The original Tomahawks cost about $1.1 million and were made to carry nuclear warheads. They were converted to conventional warheads after the START treaties. New replacements are about $575,000.
The total program cost for the Tomahawk is about $12billion and has produced about 4200 missiles. Plus, not included in the cost of the missile is the cost to operate a Navy ship to launch the missiles. I bet the total cost to the taxpayer is closer to $2.5million per launch.

Add Reply

Likes (0)
Post

×
×
×
×