Libyan Civil War

[SpellAndShield]

Hell, I do hope we invade; our military has no firm footing in Africa yet and we really need one. Besides, it will be a nice distraction to keep the American people's eyes off the economic woes at home.

[crimsonedge11]

Hell, I do hope we invade; our military has no firm footing in Africa yet and we really need one. Besides, it will be a nice distraction to keep the American people's eyes off the economic woes at home.

 

You sound like you would make a good politician.

[crimsonedge11]

I think this is an example to use of the kind of hill a people who wish to revolt have to climb to overthrow a determined dictator who will use any means necessary to keep power. Gaddafi has attack helicopters and fighter jets, no amount of ground forces can defeat that without air support. The international community is more or less just pissing around about this situation. There is plenty grounds here to intervene and put a no fly zone over Libya. Obama was awful quick to throw Mubarak under the bus at the first sign of revolt, but is hesitating to get involved with Libya, which has an even more horrible dictator to deal with than Egypt did with Mubarak. I think for one reason or another the governments of the West wish Gaddafi to keep power, otherwise they would have already intervened. I think the governments of the West care more about Libya's oil supply than they do the Libyan people, and would rather stick with the devil they know, who will go back to supplying them with oil after the dust settles. Gaddafi could easily use oil as a hostage, and say, if you get involved directly I will destroy all of the oil infrastructure in the country, or etc.

This argument is applicable to any nation which has significant economic and or political influence throughout the world. If they stop to think for a few moments most people in the west would agree that the Chinese sytem of governance and the conditions of the Chinese workers are appalling, so why aren't we intervening there? Apart from war and a complete collapse of the current economic system in the world what do we have to loose? Throughout the world there are many states whom we find objectionable, should we act on our consciences and destroy our economic sytem for those consciences? In the seventies we had vast increases in the costs of petroleum derived products in part due to American 'interference' in the middle east, we still live with the results even now. To those who argue that maybe the quick ending of our dependence of oil would be worth the dislocation I would ask how in the time between such chaos and viable non internal combution transport and electrical production would we transport our food and heat and light our hospitals? Just as the oil hikes of the seventies promoted a temporary and token attempt to move toward other energy sources so would our pious attempts at regulating the affairs of other nations produce platitudes and small budget increases for R&D departments. We would still be dependent on the unsavoury successors to the unsavoury people we removed and would have also caused catastrophic reduction in our own nations' economic viability and political standing in the world communtity, that is unless we were to do away with the equal rights of poorer and third world nations in world discourse. So would could end up a few decades down the line with the very neocolonialist system so many argue exists today :sad:

 

The problem of having to appeal to dictators could be solved by making efforts to use alternative fuel sources. I believe with current technology, it is more than feasible to develop cars that run off very, very cheap sources of energy, but we are at the mercy of the people with the money, and the people with the money would rather us be slaves to an energy supply that they control and profit from. This is what is hindering technological innovation, not the lack of smart people to develop the technology. If all the sudden cars could run on lets say, water, it would create a vacuum in the market where a once multi-billion dollar industry used to be, that hired 10s of thousands of people. As long as there is a supply of oil to sell, it will be used as a fuel source for cars, and we will be at the whim of the people who control the supply and those who speculate the market.

 

It is feasible to use water as a fuel source, if an efficient process was created to turn water into hydrogen, which is highly combustible:

 

http://www.ehow.com/how_7181609_turn-water-hydrogen.html

 

This technology applied to automobiles would put the dictators out of business, but it would also put service stations out of business, and also a multi-billion dollar industry out of business, and millions of people around the world out of work.

Edited March 11, 2011 by crimsonedge11

[HappyHerring]

I think this is an example to use of the kind of hill a people who wish to revolt have to climb to overthrow a determined dictator who will use any means necessary to keep power. Gaddafi has attack helicopters and fighter jets, no amount of ground forces can defeat that without air support. The international community is more or less just pissing around about this situation. There is plenty grounds here to intervene and put a no fly zone over Libya. Obama was awful quick to throw Mubarak under the bus at the first sign of revolt, but is hesitating to get involved with Libya, which has an even more horrible dictator to deal with than Egypt did with Mubarak. I think for one reason or another the governments of the West wish Gaddafi to keep power, otherwise they would have already intervened. I think the governments of the West care more about Libya's oil supply than they do the Libyan people, and would rather stick with the devil they know, who will go back to supplying them with oil after the dust settles. Gaddafi could easily use oil as a hostage, and say, if you get involved directly I will destroy all of the oil infrastructure in the country, or etc.

This argument is applicable to any nation which has significant economic and or political influence throughout the world. If they stop to think for a few moments most people in the west would agree that the Chinese sytem of governance and the conditions of the Chinese workers are appalling, so why aren't we intervening there? Apart from war and a complete collapse of the current economic system in the world what do we have to loose? Throughout the world there are many states whom we find objectionable, should we act on our consciences and destroy our economic sytem for those consciences? In the seventies we had vast increases in the costs of petroleum derived products in part due to American 'interference' in the middle east, we still live with the results even now. To those who argue that maybe the quick ending of our dependence of oil would be worth the dislocation I would ask how in the time between such chaos and viable non internal combution transport and electrical production would we transport our food and heat and light our hospitals? Just as the oil hikes of the seventies promoted a temporary and token attempt to move toward other energy sources so would our pious attempts at regulating the affairs of other nations produce platitudes and small budget increases for R&D departments. We would still be dependent on the unsavoury successors to the unsavoury people we removed and would have also caused catastrophic reduction in our own nations' economic viability and political standing in the world communtity, that is unless we were to do away with the equal rights of poorer and third world nations in world discourse. So would could end up a few decades down the line with the very neocolonialist system so many argue exists today :sad:

 

The problem of having to appeal to dictators could be solved by making efforts to use alternative fuel sources. I believe with current technology, it is more than feasible to develop cars that run off very, very cheap sources of energy, but we are at the mercy of the people with the money, and the people with the money would rather us be slaves to an energy supply that they control and profit from. This is what is hindering technological innovation, not the lack of smart people to develop the technology. If all the sudden cars could run on lets say, water, it would create a vacuum in the market where a once multi-billion dollar industry used to be, that hired 10s of thousands of people. As long as there is a supply of oil to sell, it will be used as a fuel source for cars, and we will be at the whim of the people who control the supply and those who speculate the market.

 

It is feasible to use water as a fuel source, if an efficient process was created to turn water into hydrogen, which is highly combustible:

 

http://www.ehow.com/...r-hydrogen.html

 

This technology applied to automobiles would put the dictators out of business, but it would also put service stations out of business, and also a multi-billion dollar industry out of business, and millions of people around the world out of work.

If we find a cheap way to crack water to liberate the hydrogen (where would the electricity come from?) and develop the vehicles and generators to run on it then who would be in the best place to profit from the process? Yes the massive companies which control so many production and distribution processes are very conservative but I think that if someone else came up with a means and they could rely on government tax incentives then they would jump for it. By the way cheap is relative, how long before the differential on taxes for hydrogen matched and surpassed petroleum, not long is my guess. Multi nationals and governments both want our cash and each would benefit from the investment to embrace the new technology.

Unfortunately I suspect that by the time such technology were widespread the oil producing countries would be well past the production available today and so the net result for them would be increasing, relative, poverty and impotence which would feed into the continuance of the misery of today.

[WizardOfAtlantis]

Gaddafi could easily use oil as a hostage, and say, if you get involved directly I will destroy all of the oil infrastructure in the country, or etc.

Which is precisely what he is doing in these days, isn't it? Bombing oil fields?

 

The rebels will have to take the airports/airstrips Gheddafi's using.

 

Hell, I do hope we invade; our military has no firm footing in Africa yet and we really need one. Besides, it will be a nice distraction to keep the American people's eyes off the economic woes at home.

hahaha, well, that is one refreshingly frank reply http://www.thenexusforums.com/public/style_emoticons/dark/laugh.gif

 

 

[DariusMoranda]

Libya Wars 2:The Empire Strikes Back

 

Gaddafi's forces took over major strategic points today, and took over some of the previous lost positions from the rebels.

 

Also, around 100 mercenaries landed in Ras Lanuf via fishing boats, smashing the rebels, even being outnumbered. News aren't giving right information about rebel repel, there is non at the moment, tanks weren't present for rebels to seize them nor enough menpower on their opposite side to make such a huge arrest. Government forces took over Zawiya near Tripoli and unloaded a couple of air attacks on rebel positions nearby. Currently, rebels are begging for help from the others, even an air attack to slow down Gaddafi's fighters. With all due respect for both sides, I think asking for help is not an honorable thing to do, they got help from the deserters from police and army and they are filled with weaponry of all kinds, they should put up a fight till the end. This thing should be disputed between the two sides and no one else, rebels asked for war , they have one now, and war is not a game where you can say 'I don't want it anymore'. They are in advance in many fields , the biggest ace in the sleeve is the number of menpower, but it seems that they can't use their advances properly.

 

Colonel Muammar 'Darth Vader' Gaddafi is not giving up, that's the spirit. Thumbs up!

[ginnyfizz]

Of course he won't give up easily, as there is no way that he is going to be allowed to slip quietly away and retire if the rebels triumph. Much as Darius seems to think of Ghadaffi as a hero, the rest of the world would not exactly shed a tear at the thought of him having a close encounter with "three yards of cord and a sliding board" as Oscar Wilde put it. Being up to your ears in the blowing up of airliners in mid air and gun running to every subversive and his dog doesn't tend to win friends and influence people.

[Nintii]

Well now this is a topic that has myself and my brother locked in some serious arguements ... because I side with Gaddaffi ... yes you read it correctly.

 

Now why on earth would I want to do such a thing ... isn't Gaddaffi a violent aggressor against his own people, a dictator, a former terrorist supporter, the devil in disguise ?

Whoa, just a sec, my mom always used to say "better the devil you know than the one you don't" ... clever lady.

Because whatever Gaddaffi was or is - hopefully he has reformed from his terrorist past, well it seems that the EU and the US did kind of warm to him a bit now didn't they -

well as I was saying whatever he was or is HAS NO BEARING on those who would TAKE HIS PLACE.

 

What do you know about these "freedom fighters", who are they and what are their politcal philosophies as far as the West is concerned, because that's what's important to me.

As far as I know, they could be in cahoots with old Ah-give-a-meanie-jab or whatever that lunatics name is from Iran ...

That is NOT GOOD NEWS, and that bothers me.

So, as far as I'm concerned, I'll support Gaddaffi with his eccentricities thank you very much.

 

Hey, how's the petrol\gas price lately ?

Annoyed aren't you, well you're gonna be a whole lot more annoyed if the "freedom fighters" turn out to be fanatics and hold you to ransom by jacking up the price of oil.

 

Besides, the lunacy of the entire "uprising" had to be stopped somewhere ... end note.

[ginnyfizz]

Oh don't get me wrong, I have said all along both in respect of the Egyptian uprising and now the Libyan Civil War that we should be careful what we wish for. I agree, those rebels could well be Islamic extremists who are best buddies with I'm A Dinner Jacket. However, that does not mean that I support Ghadaffi who has certainly done his very best to subvert and undermine my country, whose gun running no doubt assisted terrorists to murder numerous folks over here including a cousin of mine, and the people in my country who took the decision to release that minion of his who plotted the Lockerbie bombing should face trial themselves.

 

It is very tempting to say that Mad Mo and the rebels quite possibly deserve each other, and I do wish our Prime Minister would stop drivelling on about a no fly zone without any apparent realisation that you would need to bomb out the anti aircraft installations first. As a former RAF navigator was saying, in respect of the Balkan conflict, the no-fly zone was a disaster because you needed so many permissions before you could shoot down an opposition plane, that they frequently had time to attack whatever it was they were heading for before you could fire on them. No wonder the US military have told Cameron not to be such a silly boy.

 

Nonetheless, the point about the effect on oil supplies is a very serious one - I can remember the days when the OPEC cartel regularly used to hold certainly Europe to ransom over oil supplies. True, the USA has some untapped reserves to go at, but is His Holiness Obama going to let them be drilled for? Or will he play to the environmental activists?

[DariusMoranda]

Gaddafi financed half of the world with oil and riches, one of the most famous is Great Britain, more then half of universities in Britain was financed by Gaddafi and it is very well known.

 

Today, France is raising their voices against their former oil vein Libya, as their oil contract expired last year. It's the same with everyone else, they want a piece of this cake, but, bad news, they will not achieve it.

 

I saw great results of Colonel in his own country, and rebels are not in a big number compares with the government supporters, actually, there is more those who support Gaddafi in there, then the insurgents. That is because people there know what he did for their country. The rest who tried to take over are bunch of radical animals, traitors and deserters.

 

They even took a victiorious picture near a crashed airplane with the pilot's body still inside. And guess what? He didn't have head on his shoulders on the picture.

 

Truly a 'democratic' ways to gain 'freedom' from a 'dictator and a madman'. The ways of democracy amaises me more and more , day by day.

 

When this picture unfolds completely and Khamis brigade have their hands on the leaders of this blatant and uneccessary 'uprising', they are, hopefully, beat out the confession out of them, about who financed all this mess for real. For what it is financed, we all know very well, it's for more money, power and oil.

 

And the best thing is, that Misrata is falling from te rebel hands today. Next station- Beghazi! http://www.thenexusforums.com/public/style_emoticons/dark/thumbsup.gif And that would be the end of mighty and glorious rebel movement of Libya. I say, flee , better then to wait for an upcoming ridiculous punishment for the crimes against the state. For their own sake , if they worry about their lives. If not, then die like men, not like cowards, calling for help of the world powers.

 

'If the opposition disarms, all is well and good. If not.. we shall disarm it ourselves.'

 

Moranda