Libyan Civil War Megathread

[grumbler]

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

Berkut is terrified of the idea of doing nothing, so he just wants the US to do something.

He will criticize whatever is done, of course.

[grumbler]

Why can't the Euro handle this no-fly zone bullshit? It's in their backyard.

Europe would be divided as to which side to take.

[Berkut]

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

Berkut is terrified of the idea of doing nothing, so he just wants the US to do something.

He will criticize whatever is done, of course.

grumbler is correct - the idea of doing nothing has me waking in cold sweats at night.

[Caliga]

I assume Germany would wet their pants at the mere thought of dropping a bomb on somebody. Goddamn pussies.

When you face General Patton, you are scarred FOR ALL ETERNITY as a result.

[Legbiter]

Well, if you impose an effective no-fly zone then you'll have to destroy Gadaffi's anti-aircraft missiles and air force. Gadaffi will then cut off oil and gas to the West and take hostage any Westerners stupid enough to remain in Libya. And then the whole thing escalates to the point where you have no choice but to invade, fight your way through to Tripoli and depose Gadaffi. 

[Maximus]

It's been done before.

[grumbler]

Well, if you impose an effective no-fly zone then you'll have to destroy Gadaffi's anti-aircraft missiles and air force. Gadaffi will then cut off oil and gas to the West and take hostage any Westerners stupid enough to remain in Libya. And then the whole thing escalates to the point where you have no choice but to invade, fight your way through to Tripoli and depose Gadaffi. 

That's terrifying!

[derspiess]

Berkut is terrified of the idea of doing nothing, so he just wants the US to do something.

It's his inner McCainiac bubbling through. 

As much as I criticized the administration for how it handled Egypt, I generally approve with how they've handled Libya.  I'd like to see Gadhafi gone, but I don't see how our national interest is served by getting directly involved.

[Caliga]

It's not.  It will just generate more terrorism directed at us IMO.

I felt the same way about Egypt FWIW.  I have a very cynical view of all of these protest movements.

[derspiess]

It's not.  It will just generate more terrorism directed at us IMO.

I felt the same way about Egypt FWIW.  I have a very cynical view of all of these protest movements.

I'm conflicted.  Generally I'd prefer a secular autocrat over most other likely forms of gov't. in that region, but it was time for Mubarak & Gadhafi to go-- their continued rule would only further embolden radical islamist elements.  I say let them get their revolutionary fervor out of their systems, let (or help) a new secular strongman emerge, and then buy him off like we did with Mubarak.

One thing that strikes me about Gadhafi btw is that he turned out to be even crazier than we thought he was in the 80s.

As far as policy is concerned, I don't see many likely immediate scenarios where it would be wise to intervene.  Most likely it will backfire, and bombs cost money.  If we could figure a clean way to get our hands on all that oil, then I might change my mind 

[KRonn]

It's not.  It will just generate more terrorism directed at us IMO.

I felt the same way about Egypt FWIW.  I have a very cynical view of all of these protest movements.

What could possibly go wrong?   

[Cecil]

As far as policy is concerned, I don't see many likely immediate scenarios where it would be wise to intervene.  Most likely it will backfire, and bombs cost money.  If we could figure a clean way to get our hands on all that oil, then I might change my mind 

Bombs cost money. Use up the arabs. The dead cost nothing.

[JonasSalk]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/09/us-libya-idUSTRE7270JP20110309

Forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi regained control of the center of Zawiyah on Wednesday, after using tanks and snipers to drive rebels out of their stronghold in the western city's main square, residents said.

Is Gaddafi bi-winning?

[Darth Wagtaros]

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.

Meh, I live in America and we are burdened with responsibility whether we act or don't act. Hardly a compelling reason to do nothing.

Indeed.  We'll be blamed for it somehow.

If Gaddaffi wins we'll be blamed for not taking him down. If we take him down we'll be bashed for being evil imperialists. If we're going to be bashed either way I'd rather do something that has the possibility of a positive outcome. Therefore, I'm in favor of a no-fly zone and perhaps some airstrikes.

On who?  The rebels, as have been pointed out, are a mob.  Will you be in favor of airstrikes on them if a bunch of crazies take over and nuke DC?

I haven't seen the news story about Gadhafi dispersing crowds with nuclear weapons.

You are obviously a slave to the Lamestream media then.

[The Brain]

How the fuck do you disperse a crowd that has scored nukes?