Libyan Civil War Megathread

[Berkut]

Obama doesn't want his Nobel Peace Prize to be revoked.

But... will he have more chance of having it revoked if he intervenes, or stays out??   

Well, he did nothing to get it to begin with, so I figure he is thinking doing nothing is the best way to hang onto it...

[Darth Wagtaros]

Yeah... how much you want to bet that if Gadhafi is overthrown, the rebels will immediately start fighting each other to determine who succeeds him?  This could be another Somalia in the making.

Somalia doesn't have oil.  Lot's of oil. And economic connections with Europe.

[Caliga]

I thought of the whole oil thing after I posted Wags.

[Valmy]

I know we are going to get blasted no matter what we do, or don't do. So we might as well get blasted for doing the right thing, rather than do nothing in a vain attempt to not piss someone off.

Participating in wars that are not our own is the morally right thing to do?  Why?  Just because it is there?

[Berkut]

I know we are going to get blasted no matter what we do, or don't do. So we might as well get blasted for doing the right thing, rather than do nothing in a vain attempt to not piss someone off.

Participating in wars that are not our own is the morally right thing to do?  Why?  Just because it is there?

Who said anything about participating?

But participating in a war that is not our own *can* certainly be the right thing to do - whether this is an example of that or not is certainly open to debate.

That being said, the terms under which participating in a war that is not our own COULD BE the right thing to do would generally include some clear moral distinction in getting involved (as opposed to economic or political reasons), some reason to suspect that favoring one side over the other would result in the betterment of the people involved on some moral scale (in this case, is not advancing freedom and democracy a moral goal?), etc., etc.

Of course, there are all kinds of practical realities involved as well. But I find the basic dismissal of the very concept of getting involved in others fights for freedom as being a priori immoral rather curious. Surely getting involved in any war, our own or others, can be moral. Or it can be not moral.

[Camerus]

Why get involved and invite another possible Iraq/Afghanistan-type situation?

A far bigger priority for America should be reducing its deficit, and not spending billions on costly adventures.

[Valmy]

Of course, there are all kinds of practical realities involved as well. But I find the basic dismissal of the very concept of getting involved in others fights for freedom as being a priori immoral rather curious. Surely getting involved in any war, our own or others, can be moral. Or it can be not moral.

I question if we can really tell if it is a fight for freedom.  Certainly one of the sides will WANT us to think they are fighting for freedom (see Iraqi Shiites prior to the Iraq invasion) just like Ghadafi is pitifully trying to get us to think he is fighting the war on terror.

I am not even saying it is immoral to get involved...I am merely questoning the moral imperative to do so.  In my opinion our only moral responsibility to the international community is to ensure that the conflict stays within Libya's borders and to provide humanitarian aid if needed and necessary.

But I am hoping the US can work to limit its international commitments especially ones like Libya that could turn into long term involvements.

Finally, I believe the rebels will almost certainly win.

[Berkut]

Of course, there are all kinds of practical realities involved as well. But I find the basic dismissal of the very concept of getting involved in others fights for freedom as being a priori immoral rather curious. Surely getting involved in any war, our own or others, can be moral. Or it can be not moral.

I question if we can really tell if it is a fight for freedom.  Certainly one of the sides will WANT us to think they are fighting for freedom (see Iraqi Shiites prior to the Iraq invasion) just like Ghadafi is pitifully trying to get us to think he is fighting the war on terror.

I am not even saying it is immoral to get involved...I am merely questoning the moral imperative to do so.  In my opinion our only moral responsibility to the international community is to ensure that the conflict stays within Libya's borders and to provide humanitarian aid if needed and necessary.

But I am hoping the US can work to limit its international commitments especially ones like Libya that could turn into long term involvements.

These are all good reason to move with care and caution.

[Admiral Yi]

A no-fly zone sounds all noble and clean until you ask yourself what we're supposed to do if the rebels don't win quickly.

[The Minsky Moment]

I'll leave the specifics about WHAT to do to others

But that is the stickiest part.  I think to be fair, you have to suggest what is that you want to be done that isn't being done beyond "something"

[Ed Anger]

Mummar's forces seemed to have drunk some Tigerblood and seem to be kicking some rebel ass.

[Camerus]

The moment we get involved, even with a no fly zone, we take on some responsibility for events as they unfold, and thus risk getting drawn into things further.  Fuck that.

The morality of getting involved is in any event so murky that it behooves us to examine it solely from a realpolitik perspective - to which the only answer right now can be, again, fuck no.

[Tonitrus]

Probably the biggest problem with not getting involved, is Gadhafi winning.

With all the Western denouncements, once back in complete control, he'd be absolutely insufferable after that.

[Josquius]

Probably the biggest problem with not getting involved, is Gadhafi winning.

With all the Western denouncements, once back in complete control, he'd be absolutely insufferable after that.

Yeah, I've been thinking the same. After a lot of work at getting him onside over the past decades we've really undone a lot of that in the past month.
That and we're never going to get a better chance to be rid of him.

However, I have read elsewhere that Gadaffi was planning a Francoesque retirement- return of the monarchy, creation of a democracy, etc... which would be nice. But thats assuming it was true to begin with let alone now...

[Ed Anger]

Probably the biggest problem with not getting involved, is Gadhafi winning.

With all the Western denouncements, once back in complete control, he'd be absolutely insufferable after that.

But he will be totally entertaining.