UN authorises military action against Gaddafi

[Chris]

On people defecting back to Gaddafi, if you mean the claim that was made today about the former Minister of the Interior, it turned out to be a fraud based on old news footage - which became apparent when the man in question was interviewed by Al-Jazeera in Benghazi shortly afterwards.

As for the rest of it, I don't understand why you drag in comparisons with Iraq or even Egypt for that matter. All these situations are different, and each has to be considered on its own merits.

What your attitude seems to boil down to is that even if the consequences of our inaction are going to be horrific, it doesn't matter because "it's not our fight." I'm sorry, but I couldn't disagree more.

[Natalie Severn]

On people defecting back to Gaddafi, if you mean the claim that was made today about the former Minister of the Interior, it turned out to be a fraud based on old news footage - which became apparent when the man in question was interviewed by Al-Jazeera in Benghazi shortly afterwards.

As for the rest of it, I don't understand why you drag in comparisons with Iraq or even Egypt for that matter. All these situations are different, and each has to be considered on its own merits.

What your attitude seems to boil down to is that even if the consequences of our inaction are going to be horrific, it doesn't matter because "it's not our fight." I'm sorry, but I couldn't disagree more.

Various reports are filtering through about Gadaffi"s men crossing sides and my point is ,"who exactly are these people, what is their composition,how many of them are there etc ?" because there seem not to be so very many of them or not the majority at any rate.[Don"t get me wrong-I would love to know more about this movement which I believe , as in the case of the others in the pattern of movement now sweeping the Middle East ,undoubtedly seems to have right on its side].
Each of these situations are part and parcel of an Arab revolution that is now sweeping the Middle East that began in Tunisia and went to Egypt,then Yemen ,Syria, Bahrain, Morrocco, parts of Saudi Arabia,even big demonstrations in Jordan, there is a common pattern throughout but in each case the calls are for democracy and freedom from dictators.A common cry is about the dreadful tortures that take place under these regimes and other violations of human rights.
The question that has to be asked is what good will come of our involvement in a military intervention because if Afghanistan and Iraq are anything to go by , the answer is very little.
Need to listen to the news now,
Best
Norma

[Chris]

The question that has to be asked is what good will come of our involvement in a military intervention because if Afghanistan and Iraq are anything to go by , the answer is very little.

I think it's a more question of whether the consequences of doing nothing will be worse. But perhaps both our minds are already made up about this.

[jason_c]

The question that has to be asked is what good will come of our involvement in a military intervention because if Afghanistan and Iraq are anything to go by , the Iraqi w answer is very little.
Need to listen to the news now,
Best
Norma

These democratic movements have nothing to do with Iraqi elections?

Fifty year old totalitarian regimes crumbling 5 years after free Iraqi elections suggest very much was accomplished.

[Natalie Severn]

Tonight ,together with Saudi Arabia we grab the sword of freedom to liberate the people of Libya............

[Chris]

Tonight ,together with Saudi Arabia we grab the sword of freedom to liberate the people of Libya............

Except that - as far as I've heard - Saudi Arabia isn't actually involved in any way in the military operation.

If I understand correctly your idea is to stay out of it and essentially let Gaddafi line up his enemies against the wall and shoot them (if he's in a merciful mood that day). Sorry, but I don't think that entitles you to any kind of "moral high ground" argument.

[Natalie Severn]

I understand the Suadi"s were in the lead in the Arab League that gave permission to attack Libya.More than 100 Tomahawk missiles were launched today which are not "precision guided" despite their claims as they well know from past experience but are weapons of mass destruction that will create many civilian casualties.The next thing will be regime change and no doubt occupation.I am not interested in moral high grounds---I am just not content with the half truths you get from the media nor am I happy about the role of say Saudi Arabia in sending in troops to crush the Bahrain people"s fight for democracy and freedom---something about people getting their own house in order etc.....it certainly seems a rather anomalous position for them to be in to say the least.

[Limehouse]

Chris,

Okay. I'll give you Hitler. We really need to sort out Palestine. That is one of the biggest keys to peace in the Middle East. It might be that no one really wants peace there, however, and if so, then there is no solution.

Mike

Spot on Mike. It seems to me we only intervene when there's something in it for us - like oil.

[Chris]

I understand the Suadi"s were in the lead in the Arab League that gave permission to attack Libya.

Well, of course Saudi Arabia is a member of the Arab League, and the Arab League called for a no-fly zone, but as far as I know the Saudis aren't participating. The "permission" comes from the UN of course, not the Arab League.

[jason_c]

Spot on Mike. It seems to me we only intervene when there's something in it for us - like oil.

It doesnt matter who is in charge in Libya as both sides need to sell us oil.

[jason_c]

Tonight ,together with Saudi Arabia we grab the sword of freedom to liberate the people of Libya............

Just as we did with the Stalinist Russia during WW2.

[The Good Michael]

I would prefer to join forces with Ghadaffi and take over Saudia Arabia, turning Mecca into a theme park. Maybe that's just the entrepreneur in me.


Mike

[Bob Hinton]

Confused.com

I'm a little confused about the UN resolution to act to stop the Mad Mahdi killing civilians. Surely all those who have taken up arms against him are civilians? I don't recall them being conscripted into any official army.

[babybird67]

I'm another idealist I'm afraid

what is it about geographical boundaries that seem to blur our human empathies?

Surely our loyalty and duty to protect another human being comes before where the sea and the land mass starts and ends. We all share the commonalities of deserving to live safe lives. Geogrpahical boundaries are arbitrary boundaries when it comes to human rights.

I was totally against the war in Iraq because it was not supported by the international community, and I believe you need that consensus to take positive moral action. This one does have international consensus, and I believe international relations should proceed more on this basis...where there is brutalitiy and murder within a state, that brutal murderer should be removed, for the sake of the people.

[Bob Hinton]

Not Really

what is it about geographical boundaries that seem to blur our human empathies?

Surely our loyalty and duty to protect another human being comes before where the sea and the land mass starts and ends. We all share the commonalities of deserving to live safe lives. Geogrpahical boundaries are arbitrary boundaries when it comes to human rights.

I was totally against the war in Iraq because it was not supported by the international community, and I believe you need that consensus to take positive moral action. This one does have international consensus, and I believe international relations should proceed more on this basis...where there is brutalitiy and murder within a state, that brutal murderer should be removed, for the sake of the people.

But does it? Have a dozen of the largest countries in the world say it’s ok. But what about all the small countries? If you added them all up I guarantee you that there are more countries who did not give the OK than did.

Personally I don’t give a damn about international consensus. If something is right it’s right no matter how many or how few people say it is.

If you look back to WWII there was no International consensus then to stop Hitler, in fact for quite a while we were alone, so according to your reasoning we shouldn’t have done anything.

The only thing wrong with the Iraq war, second version, is that we let Hussein get away with it for so long. The first war ended in a ceasefire not a cessation, the first time an Iraqi said no to our inspection teams they should have been blasted into sand. Instead we let him mess us about for years while all the time he was smuggling his weapons technology out of the country. Where to? Well guess whose nuclear programme has come on by leaps and bounds since the end of the first Iraq war?

I find your comment about the Iraq war very strange. You say you are against it because it was not supported by the International community. But you should support action because it is right. What you are saying is that if a few more countries sidled up to you and say “Well ok we support you” you would change your mind and go to war. So in other words you would be committing yourself to war on what others think or say.