|
Holy hell that speech. Did Obama just throw a bunch of George W. Bush speech transcripts and Paul Wolfowitz musings into a blender and recite whatever came out? I bet y'all can't get better than 50% in figuring out which of these stupid statements were made by Stupid rear end in a top hat #42 or Stupid rear end in a top hat #43.  "America is a Nation with a mission - and that mission... comes from our most basic beliefs." "In this effort, the United States has not acted alone. Instead, we have been joined by a strong and growing coalition. This includes our closest allies – nations like the United Kingdom, France, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Italy, Spain, Greece, and Turkey – all of whom have fought by our side for decades." "The momentum of freedom in our world is unmistakable - and it is not carried forward by our power alone. " "Born, as we are, out of a revolution by those who longed to be free, we welcome the fact that history is on the move in the Middle East" "He has denied his people freedom, exploited their wealth, murdered opponents at home and abroad, and terrorized innocent people around the world" "Of course, there is no question that those people – and the world – will be better off with him out of power." "Getting rid of this dictator is the right thing to do and the world is a better place without him." "The democratic impulses that are dawning across the region would be eclipsed by the darkest form of dictatorship, as repressive leaders concluded that violence is the best strategy to cling to power. " "We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace." OwlBot 2000 fucked around with this message at 07:45 on Mar 29, 2011 |
#
¿
Mar 29, 2011 07:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 22:45 |
|
|
Competition posted:What? Oh come on, he got it backwards but the point remains, that violent Balkans-style ethno-religious conflict frequently occurs in artificially delimited former colonies when strongman dictators are removed. OwlBot 2000 fucked around with this message at 07:47 on Mar 29, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2011 07:45
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Clearly the solution is to leave Gaddafi alone to eat people, then. Yeah, preventing murders is a good thing, but this whole aspect of it makes me a little concerned.. Is Libya the only place we're willing to do this? If so, why? This seems disingenuous and fishy given the various Central Asian dictators we directly or tacitly support, and all the other countries experiencing worse humanitarian crises than Libya. Forgive me for questioning the real reasons here, because the USA doesn't exactly have the best track record when it comes to intervention without shady ulterior motives.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2011 14:59
|
|
|
Farraday: Fair point. In that case, forgive me for being suspicious of the Security Council's motives in the same way and for the same reasons. I don't support most multilaterally declares conflicts, including this, so I definitely don't support unilaterally declared wars either. Also, I wasn't suggesting that we SHOULD be involved in the other crises; I was merely questioning the consistency and coherence of our policy on intervention.
OwlBot 2000 fucked around with this message at 15:14 on Mar 29, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2011 15:12
|
|
|
Spiky Ooze posted:Except we're not talking about Bush and Cheney here with disturbing ties to the oil industry or helpful "construction" firms that rebuild everything in Iraq. Obama has no stake in the Middle East besides trying to do better than decades of bad policy, and considering the mess he's left to deal with, he's actually doing decent. Hey buddy, what's it like in 2008? Still excited about Obama's plan to shut down Guantanamo and implement a first-world healthcare system? He's reeeaaallly a break from his predecessors, huh? 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2011 20:18
|
|
|
"Has capably handled"? You're talking in the past tense, as though this Libya situation is over. "Obama's record is that of either a liar or a weak and timid leader, and this may very well be a predictor of his future performance" is a better way to paraphrase my point.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2011 20:42
|
|
|
Obama Tries, Without Success, to Explain an Undeclared WarJohn Nichols posted:The speech was, to no one’s surprise, ably delivered. The president spoke with emotional and rhetorical power of how he felt there had been a need to intervene in order to prevent “a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world.” He explained how there are times “when our safety is not directly threatened, but our interests and values are.” He decried the temptation “to turn away from the world” and promised that “wherever people long to be free, they will find a friend in the United States.” Those are noble sentiments, well expressed. Heh, crazy liberals 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2011 04:37
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Maybe in a small agrarian republic with no standing army the President is not supposed to start wars. That horse left the barn long ago though. True, but it seems kinda dumb to even have a constitution if you can just dismiss it as old-timey and irrelevant one day but use it as a sacred text the next, and at the very least makes 99% of American politicians liars and hypocrites. I guess we're all cool with the President deciding when and where the law should be followed?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2011 04:44
|
|
|
The precedent for unauthorized suspension of Habeas Corpus also goes back a long way (at least to Lincoln), as do First Amendment violations (Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 and Sedition Act of 1918) and Fourth Amendment violations. Are these and other violations made completely moral and legal simply because it's all been done before?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2011 05:56
|
|
|
Vague? I think its placement in Article 1, Sec. 9 makes it anything but, so I don't believe I'm question-begging here.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2011 08:02
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I guess since Article 1 is all about congressional powers that means it must be a prohibition on congressional suspension of habeas corpus except under certain circumstances. That's my take on it at least, but I'll admit that I'm no scholar either and I could very well be wrong. A little humility never hurt anyone  Any people with constitutional law degrees want to chime in?
OwlBot 2000 fucked around with this message at 08:58 on Mar 30, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2011 08:52
|
|
|
By North African/Middle Eastern standards, weren't things pretty cushy under Gaddhafi? Sure, no freedom of speech or elections or whatever, but in terms of education and economics and stability.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2011 16:38
|
|
|
Slantedfloors posted:They were okay, not great in any real way. And Ghadaffi specifically kept the East underdeveloped and poorer than the West, as a punishment for earlier disloyalty. Ah, okay. So there are some strong economic reasons to get rid of him, and it's not just a "me too!" result of their neighbors' revolutions.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2011 16:42
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Maybe he hadn't heard what happened to Rudolf Hess. So you're saying Koussa will be murdered in his jail cell? 
OwlBot 2000 fucked around with this message at 08:29 on Jul 3, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2011 11:03
|
|
|
So not only did we cause additional destruction, but we ensured an even higher number of rebels who'll be tortured and killed once America and NATO get tired of dealing with a situation they once again underestimated and abandon their new North African toys. Western intervention makes things worse in the long run, and the level of arrogance required not to see that is nothing short of astounding.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2011 06:10
|
|
|
Slantedfloors posted:drat, I wish I could write off thousands of lives as an unfortunate inevitability. That callousness is a handy skill man, I hope you treasure it. Name an example of an intervention that didn't end to poverty, repression and exploitation, and I can name ten more that did. Amused to Death posted:He'd also be pretty hard pressed to find many people in Benghazi, Tobruk and other eastern Libyan cities that share that sentiment also.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2011 07:53
|
|
|
It's dumb to assume that I'm an isolationist or would always be opposed to every declared war no matter the circumstances just because I'm opposed to hasty and cavalier invasions that strongly resemble previous predatory invasions disguised as humanitarian efforts.
OwlBot 2000 fucked around with this message at 21:32 on Aug 6, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2011 08:08
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:In that case Germany would have remained an empire and Hitler would never have risen to fame, and while there would probably have been a revenge war, it would have been started by the losing side of the first war and would have been very different in nature.  Given the circumstances, at the time I would have supported the American entry into WWII. Having said that, I would never really be certain I made the right choice once I realized that I had thereby lent support to the largest mass rape in history, hundreds of thousands of women and children in Tokyo and Dresden burned alive, the detonation of nuclear bombs in civilian centers, the Soviet occupation of Europe, the Great Leap Forward, the Vietnam War and Korean War, and so many other side-effects that it's stupid to glibly state that you can predict exactly how things would turn out. OwlBot 2000 fucked around with this message at 08:20 on Apr 1, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2011 08:18
|
|
|
Colonel Qaddafhi owns so hard, he's got these sniveling amateurs scattering and panicked like roaches when the lights turn on.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2011 19:21
|
|
|
Someone remind me why people were revolting in Libya to begin with? Sure, it was undemocratic, but I think the lack of a near-universal base of support like that in Egypt is testament to the fact that people were generally OK as far as food and money goes. Gaddafi is scum, to be sure, but I'm not sure how anybody thought this would end well.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2011 16:45
|
|
|
The point is, I think, that we're giving anti-aircraft weapons to Al-Qaeda. Now I love Al-Qaeda just as much as the next guy, but I think that's something Western powers should think about.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2011 08:30
|
|
|
Step 1: Oh noes, Gadaffhi has a couple of airplanes and is using them against rebels. Better stop that, but we'll make sure it's not an "intervention" or "regime change" and just let things take their course. Step 2: Wow, these rebels really are incompetent idiots. Without our help, they'll never be able to Step 3: ???? OwlBot 2000 fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Apr 21, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2011 23:50
|
|
|
Pedrophile posted:Step 4: Stop over simplifying the situation to suit your own agenda. Step 5 stop being naive and take a look at the history of "benevolent" Western intervention. Also what, exactly, is my agenda? Just curious.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2011 23:54
|
|
|
Wow, I'm amazed at how confident everyone is in the motivations of England, France and good ol' Unlce Sam. After all, why would things turn out the way they have in roughly 99% of previous interventions? Of course I don't have "proof" of how things will turn out in the future, just a lot of experience watching the ways these things unfold, and I know counts for literally nothing. That's fine. Since you all have to seem a much better grip on history than me, I guess I'll sit back and watch as it turns into a giant clusterfuck and you all go from denial to backpedaling and eventually claim you never supported any part of the Libyan intervention. Maybe we'll even get a 51st state. I look forward to touring East Carolina soon. Edit: what was I thinking, making wild allegations that something shady and untoward was afoot? In fact, John McCain is meeting with the rebels right now, and such a trustworthy and honorable personage would never get involved in anything that wasn't a purely humanitarian exercise. Carry on. OwlBot 2000 fucked around with this message at 07:41 on Apr 22, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2011 07:35
|
|
|
Aaah, that famous Polish Engineering can't be beat. Their watches are also incredible.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2011 17:15
|
|
|
It's not HOW I SEE IT, it's HOW IT IS.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2011 17:27
|
|
|
Jut posted:The MONSTERS!!!! The Monster® Cables!!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2011 18:48
|
|
|
globe posted:Combat video from the rebels in Misurata: Somebody send a few vids to the rebels, like these: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3XCMNYMHFM&NR#t=0m20s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sB96LfLE-sA&feature=related ..and maybe they'll get something done and not look like frightened children OwlBot 2000 fucked around with this message at 02:31 on Apr 25, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2011 02:28
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:Also, I surprised, even after a month of nonstop fighting, how every thing looks bright and clean, not dirty or grungy. That's a testament to Colonel Qaddafi's guiding leadership through dark times.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2011 04:20
|
|
|
His name has been thrown around a lot in this thread, but who is Nato, anyway?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2011 22:34
|
|
|
quote:COPENHAGEN, Denmark — Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin sharply criticized the Western coalition attacking Libya on Tuesday, saying it had neither a right nor a mandate to kill Moammar Gadhafi.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2011 23:42
|
|
|
ChaosSamusX posted:Wait, isn't this the guy that launched a unilateral invasion of Georgia that was heavily criticised by the international community? Exactly, he's really not in any position to talk smack and act smug right now. However, the Georgia situation was very much Saakashvili's fault. He did the equivalent of going up to the biggest guy in the bar and throwing a beer in his face, then acting all shocked when he got slapped.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2011 02:58
|
|
|
Rosscifer posted:How far do you want to take that? Would you legalize extreme-right-wing parties in Germany? Why not? Communism is allowed. This is just an American-imposed rule against some long-defeated enemy. Outlawing political parties shows a really deep insecurity and is antithetical to a free society. Rosscifer posted:Democracy needs to be infringed a little sometimes for the common good. Is this from Mein Kampf or something? OwlBot 2000 fucked around with this message at 09:58 on Apr 29, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2011 09:56
|
|
|
So what does everyone think of the Egyptian promise to open the Rafah crossing "in seven to ten days"? Is there any way Israel or America could stop them if they wanted to?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2011 21:19
|
|
|
quote:Sources at the hospital confirmed that pro regime troops were wearing gas masks. An independent source said there were reports that thousands of gas masks had been distributed to troops yesterday. Shouldn't have killed his son I guess. Good work NATO
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2011 16:52
|
|
|
Woah Qaddafi has nukes?
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2011 17:05
|
|
|
quote:The UN is withdrawing all its international staff from the Libyan capital Tripoli following a mob attack on its offices, the BBC understands. I wonder if there's really a mob of random Libyans or if it was a group of soldiers dressed as civilians...
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2011 17:18
|
|
|
TheOmegaWalrus posted:There are rumors going around that the attack on Karachi was foreign lead, and maybe in response the the sweet new jets China gave Pakistan. One hopes it would take more than ten men to overtake a military base, even in a country like Pakistan. I mean, that kind of thing should take at least 200 people, right, and some inside help?
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2011 23:35
|
|
|
Well it's only fair that France and the U.K. get to keep Libya, seeing as how they did all the hard work. Finders keepers, etc. Firing a gun, well, anyone can do that. But providing air support, weapons, tactical advice, intelligence, and special forces operatives? That's the kind of work that ought to earn you a shiny new Libya.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2011 19:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 22:45 |
|
|
Arkane posted:The comment section on this is pretty funny: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zd6T7XtqiTc Those guys sure think Allah is pretty Akbar. I'm glad they cleared that up.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2011 19:48
|
|