USA and the Libya response



User avatar

Posts: 32

Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 1:47 pm

Location: Jamaica, NY

Post Wed Mar 23, 2011 2:58 pm

USA and the Libya response

What is your view of the UN response to the the "libya affair"?
I just attached an editorial that I think represents a good starting point for an argument. Pro/against?

Another fine mess we’ve gotten ourselves into
Our relationship with the region that supplies much of the world’s oil became much more complicated when U.S. fighter jets and cruise missiles struck Libya. This is not the first time American forces have attacked that African country. Just shy of a month, 25 years ago, we bombed a number of sites in Libya, including the presidential palace of Col. Moammar Ghadafi, who, by the way, has been in power since President Richard Nixon.

At the time of the attack he was known to be one of the top supporters of terrorism in the world, but as of late, Ghadafi, has taken a back seat and renounced terrorism, admitting his country’s role in the Dec. 1988 downing of Pan Am flight 103 that killed 243 passengers, 16 crew members and 11 people on the ground in Lockerbie, Scotland. He also gave up his nuclear ambitions.
Click here to find out more!

But Ghadafi couldn’t avoid the wave of freedom that started in Tunisia as his countrymen rebelled, too. His response to the rebels was harsh, and just when almost all of the gains made by the rebels were about to collapse, in rides the calvary made up of France, Britain and the United States. We arrived, as British Prime Minister David Cameron said, in a “nick of time.”

There are several questions that we will have to answer sooner rather than later. There is no speculation that NATO forces are superior and can win the air war, but there is much more at stake. The UN resolution doesn’t give NATO authority to kill Ghadafi or to actively seek to destroy his regime. Our mission is simply to protect the citizens of Ghadafi’s country from him.

It is too soon to tell if our interference in Libya will come to a good end. It does put the Western world in a precarious position. The Libyan leader isn’t the only one in the region attacking their people. Bahrain, Yemen, Syria and Iran are just a few. So, why Libya and why now?

As an Editorial Board we are conflicted. We believe the words in our Declaration of Independence “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Notice the founders didn’t include any caveats or disclaimers, such as, these words don’t apply if you live in Libya. But can we afford to be the world’s policeman? And can we inject our will without being hypocritical when we don’t come to the rescue?

-- Charles E. Richardson, for the Editorial Board
WIth FORCE or By FORCE. May the FORCE be with you!


Posts: 60

Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 2:37 pm

Post Tue Apr 26, 2011 6:46 pm

Re: USA and the Libya response

American has no business in Libya just like the war in Iraq could also be avoided.... America economy is too bad enough, so they shouldn't be using citizen and resident tax funds to support war activities.

Return to Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.