Who gives a shit? That's not our problem. If our friends and allies decide to decimate their populations it doesn't give us a a good enough reason to ruin relations and undo a lot of good progress on our end.menzo wrote:
bombing and killing civilians, who were totally peacefulMacbeth wrote:
Crossed what line?
I'm serious.
Why does it matter to you? Is it your country? Why is this UN resolution ok but toppling Saddam means lolol us is empire building?Bertster7 wrote:
Have you seen anything from Libyans saying they support Gaddafi? Check twitter feeds and suchlike - they all hate him. Huge sections of his government are abandoning him, his military peronnel have been defecting and he is relying on foreign mercenaries.Shahter wrote:
and you asked every single one of those 90%+, right?Bertster7 wrote:
It's not a factor for the rebels, since all the civilian population are on their side....
edit: k, i edited mine too.
Does he sound popular to you?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
because we are not toppling the regime, only protecting the civiliansJay wrote:
Why does it matter to you? Is it your country? Why is this UN resolution ok but toppling Saddam means lolol us is empire building?Bertster7 wrote:
Have you seen anything from Libyans saying they support Gaddafi? Check twitter feeds and suchlike - they all hate him. Huge sections of his government are abandoning him, his military peronnel have been defecting and he is relying on foreign mercenaries.Shahter wrote:
and you asked every single one of those 90%+, right?
edit: k, i edited mine too.
Does he sound popular to you?
lol U.N.
Hey Shahter do people in your country give a shit about the U.N.? Ours really don't.
Hey Shahter do people in your country give a shit about the U.N.? Ours really don't.
How naive are you?menzo wrote:
because we are not toppling the regime, only protecting the civiliansJay wrote:
Why does it matter to you? Is it your country? Why is this UN resolution ok but toppling Saddam means lolol us is empire building?Bertster7 wrote:
Have you seen anything from Libyans saying they support Gaddafi? Check twitter feeds and suchlike - they all hate him. Huge sections of his government are abandoning him, his military peronnel have been defecting and he is relying on foreign mercenaries.
Does he sound popular to you?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Which is why Bahrain are getting away with it.Macbeth wrote:
Who gives a shit? That's not our problem. If our friends and allies decide to decimate their populations it doesn't give us a a good enough reason to ruin relations and undo a lot of good progress on our end.menzo wrote:
bombing and killing civilians, who were totally peacefulMacbeth wrote:
Crossed what line?
I'm serious.
As I said, it's because Gaddafi is a cunt and no one likes him, therefore everyone is happy to back resolutions against him for breaking international law by targeting civilians in this way.
Do you really think of Gaddafi as a friend and ally?
i will agree that we are toppling the regime when we have forces on the ground, you can t topple a regime with airpower only. sure we are helping the repels do it. be we aren't the ones doing it.Jay wrote:
How naive are you?menzo wrote:
because we are not toppling the regime, only protecting the civiliansJay wrote:
Why does it matter to you? Is it your country? Why is this UN resolution ok but toppling Saddam means lolol us is empire building?
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
show me where he did that please. actual proof would be nice. and rebels are not civilians.menzo wrote:
bombing and killing civilians, who were totally peacefulMacbeth wrote:
Crossed what line?
I'm serious.
Toppling Saddam under these circumstances would've been fine.Jay wrote:
Why does it matter to you? Is it your country? Why is this UN resolution ok but toppling Saddam means lolol us is empire building?Bertster7 wrote:
Have you seen anything from Libyans saying they support Gaddafi? Check twitter feeds and suchlike - they all hate him. Huge sections of his government are abandoning him, his military peronnel have been defecting and he is relying on foreign mercenaries.Shahter wrote:
and you asked every single one of those 90%+, right?
edit: k, i edited mine too.
Does he sound popular to you?
This is the way it's supposed to be done. Supporting a popular revolt on the ground against a tyrant with unanimous support from the UN would've gone down fine in Iraq - but the cirumstances there were very different.
Your mental gymnastics are quite astounding. So it's ok to use force as long as no one is on the ground.menzo wrote:
i will agree that we are toppling the regime when we have forces on the ground, you can t topple a regime with airpower only. sure we are helping the repels do it. be we aren't the ones doing it.Jay wrote:
How naive are you?menzo wrote:
because we are not toppling the regime, only protecting the civilians
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Your mental gymnastics are almost equal to menzos.Bertster7 wrote:
Toppling Saddam under these circumstances would've been fine.Jay wrote:
Why does it matter to you? Is it your country? Why is this UN resolution ok but toppling Saddam means lolol us is empire building?Bertster7 wrote:
Have you seen anything from Libyans saying they support Gaddafi? Check twitter feeds and suchlike - they all hate him. Huge sections of his government are abandoning him, his military peronnel have been defecting and he is relying on foreign mercenaries.
Does he sound popular to you?
This is the way it's supposed to be done. Supporting a popular revolt on the ground against a tyrant with unanimous support from the UN would've gone down fine in Iraq - but the cirumstances there were very different.
Fucking hypocrites.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Worked well in Kosovo....Jay wrote:
Your mental gymnastics are quite astounding. So it's ok to use force as long as no one is on the ground.menzo wrote:
i will agree that we are toppling the regime when we have forces on the ground, you can t topple a regime with airpower only. sure we are helping the repels do it. be we aren't the ones doing it.Jay wrote:
How naive are you?
why libya? why not the ivory coast? burma? sudan? etcmenzo wrote:
because we are not toppling the regime, only protecting the civilians
first thing i could find. we can assume that they were not the only ones that got those orders11 Bravo wrote:
show me where he did that please. actual proof would be nice. and rebels are not civilians.menzo wrote:
bombing and killing civilians, who were totally peacefulMacbeth wrote:
Crossed what line?
I'm serious.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/ … 2R20110221
he said she saidmenzo wrote:
first thing i could find. we can assume that they were not the only ones that got those orders11 Bravo wrote:
show me where he did that please. actual proof would be nice. and rebels are not civilians.menzo wrote:
bombing and killing civilians, who were totally peaceful
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/ … 2R20110221
next
Yeah? Except the US had thousands of troops on the ground.Bertster7 wrote:
Worked well in Kosovo....Jay wrote:
Your mental gymnastics are quite astounding. So it's ok to use force as long as no one is on the ground.menzo wrote:
i will agree that we are toppling the regime when we have forces on the ground, you can t topple a regime with airpower only. sure we are helping the repels do it. be we aren't the ones doing it.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Not a single American on this forum cares about international law or the U.N. Reminding us they are violating international law isn't going to get you anywhere. As much as I've seen that argument come up and get ignored it's amazing anyone bothers trying it...Bertster7 wrote:
Which is why Bahrain are getting away with it.Macbeth wrote:
Who gives a shit? That's not our problem. If our friends and allies decide to decimate their populations it doesn't give us a a good enough reason to ruin relations and undo a lot of good progress on our end.menzo wrote:
bombing and killing civilians, who were totally peaceful
As I said, it's because Gaddafi is a cunt and no one likes him, therefore everyone is happy to back resolutions against him for breaking international law by targeting civilians in this way.
Do you really think of Gaddafi as a friend and ally?
I don't think he's worth the money or men and I don't think removing him will have any benefit to us.
you know at the beginning of this i was watching cnn and they were interviewing some woman in her apartment. she held up a bullet that she claimed was fired at her apartment. however when you look at the bullet...that was never fired. maybe it was tossed on her balcony but not fired. such a scam cnn actually ran with that story.
Was it still in the jacket?11 Bravo wrote:
you know at the beginning of this i was watching cnn and they were interviewing some woman in her apartment. she held up a bullet that she claimed was fired at her apartment. however when you look at the bullet...that was never fired. maybe it was tossed on her balcony but not fired. such a scam cnn actually ran with that story.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Not until several months in and they were only doing peacekeeping, not combat operations. I wouldn't be surprised if the same happens here.Jay wrote:
Yeah? Except the US had thousands of troops on the ground.Bertster7 wrote:
Worked well in Kosovo....Jay wrote:
Your mental gymnastics are quite astounding. So it's ok to use force as long as no one is on the ground.
noJay wrote:
Was it still in the jacket?11 Bravo wrote:
you know at the beginning of this i was watching cnn and they were interviewing some woman in her apartment. she held up a bullet that she claimed was fired at her apartment. however when you look at the bullet...that was never fired. maybe it was tossed on her balcony but not fired. such a scam cnn actually ran with that story.
There was a thread on bf2s long ago of a picture from Yahoo.com that showed an Iraqi lady holding up a 7.62 bullet still in the jacket and claiming U.S. soldiers shot it at her house. lolJay wrote:
Was it still in the jacket?11 Bravo wrote:
you know at the beginning of this i was watching cnn and they were interviewing some woman in her apartment. she held up a bullet that she claimed was fired at her apartment. however when you look at the bullet...that was never fired. maybe it was tossed on her balcony but not fired. such a scam cnn actually ran with that story.
found the picture
Last edited by Macbeth (2011-03-19 12:16:25)
What money and men?Macbeth wrote:
Not a single American on this forum cares about international law or the U.N. Reminding us they are violating international law isn't going to get you anywhere. As much as I've seen that argument come up and get ignored it's amazing anyone bothers trying it...Bertster7 wrote:
Which is why Bahrain are getting away with it.Macbeth wrote:
Who gives a shit? That's not our problem. If our friends and allies decide to decimate their populations it doesn't give us a a good enough reason to ruin relations and undo a lot of good progress on our end.
As I said, it's because Gaddafi is a cunt and no one likes him, therefore everyone is happy to back resolutions against him for breaking international law by targeting civilians in this way.
Do you really think of Gaddafi as a friend and ally?
I don't think he's worth the money or men and I don't think removing him will have any benefit to us.
From what I hear the US aren't providing anything other than AWACs and communications support. European and Arab forces are the ones dealing with this.
for now...