This is about the no-fly zone Lybia and the backwards responses I'm hearing.
We sat by and the UN said "Oh we''ll have a meeting on Tuesday" Meanwhile Gaddafi bombed the shit out of his people and managed to essentially "make it to the gates" of Benghazi
The people there have made it clear they want to win this war on their own, but they can't do it because they don't have the air defense and offense capabilities that Gaddafi's forces have.
So after weeks of people dieing the UN finally decided to start up a no-fly zone, now in order to do it they needed to have their planes in the air
Now is it just me or does that look like something you would rather not be flying through?
That combined with radar, long range missiles that can hit most of Italy, tanks, SAM launchers etc.. means you cant just be putting multi million dollar aircraft in the line of fire.
Anyways since February I've been hearing callers from Lybia making a general consensus
1. They want to win the revolution on their own. No Ground Forces
2. They need a no-fly zone so they stop getting their asses handed to them with flying chunks of exploding metal.
So after waiting for Gaddafi to gain the upper hand the UN finally got of their asses and agreed on the No-Fly zone, however when it they began taking out key infrastructure people started to complain.
Here's what I've heard so far.
1. THEY'RE DOING IT FOR THE OIL HERP
No, Lybia supplies only 2% of the worlds oil and it is going to cost the same for Americans whether Gadaffi is in charge or if it is someone else, oil will still be oil, it will still belong to the companies processing it for them to sell.
2. MAKE PEACE NOT WAR
Sure peace is great, but when you have a mad man indiscriminately killing, bombing, and humiliating his own people, and he wont listen to requests to show mercy, respect rights etc.
In that case you have to use violence to stop violence. (Ever heard of Tiananmen square? Laying down in front of tanks will only get you run over if you have a murderer at the helm)
So to all the people who don't think blowing up his bombs are they answer then why don't you go see what is more deadly for yourself, inert bomb and tank fragments, or live unexploded ordinances.
3. GONNA COST TOO MUCH
So what they are saying is that 300 million a week (could cost more could cost less) is too much for America to spend. Well guess what, if every American bought one less cheap fast food item a week, that would cover it so quit complaining, you can spare the change to save lives and invoke democracy into the world.
And it's not as though America is even going to be the one in the lead, Sarkozy obviously wants that position to help get freedom fries switched back to french fries
4. TEAM AMERICA: WORLD POLICE
So those people are suggesting that people who make their own country's laws should be above basic human rights?
It's not as though the US is going in there with boatloads of troops and invading. Its like taking away the safecracking equipment from a bank robber, he can try to do the crime anyways but he's got a much lesser chance.
5. DO YOU WANT GADDAFI OUT OR JUST TO HAVE FUN BOMBING
People have been complaining about this because of the so called lack of planning let me reiterate this.
LYBIANS WANT TO TAKE OUT GADDAFI THEMSELVES THEY JUST CANT DO IT WHEN THE BOMBS ARE DROPPING ON THEIR HEADS
There doesn't need to be a plan because that is not the UN's job, that is the job of the Lybian rebels. All the UN no fly zone participants have to do is make sure Gaddafi is not doing bombing runs which means the following
a. Take out his radar
b. Take out his AA guns
c. Take out his SAM sites
d. Take out mobile heavy weaponry
e. Take out command and control centers
f. Take out his aircraft and airports
f. When safe do regular flights over Lybian airspace to ensure he is not flying
Not necessarily in that order but that is it and that is all.
6. WHY NOT JUST TAKE OUT GADDAFI LOL ONLY ONE BULLET
Now imagine you are one of them. You have watched your family get shot, your cities bombed, your friends dieing on the frontlines. You and your friends are doing everything you can to make sure you are free, and free because you freed yourself and your people.
Now imagine after all the hardship and suffering you have gone through to gain your freedom, Uncle Sam comes along, puts a bullet in his head and says here you go freedom.
As easy as that would be it would spark hatred by Gaddafi's followers, it would become a tool for terrorist groups to mobilize people against the western 'meddlers' and most of all it would take away from the Lybian people's right to say "WE stood together, WE brought about change, and WE are free because of it"
We are free to help but it is not our place to finish the job for them.
7. OMG THEY'LL ELECT TERRORISTS
That's their choice, if they elected the Taliban through fair elections then sure go ahead, it is their freedom to choose who leads them and noone can deny them that.
If they elected terrorists and the terrorists were to attack us, then sure we can say something then but like any party they all have the right to at least try to win if that is what their people want.
Now I could go on and on about this if I wanted to but that is more than enough for now.
On a final note, if you don't like that the modern world is assisting with bombs against Gaddafi then you are just as bad as he is, you are just as bad as Saddam Hussein using mustard gas on his own people, you are just as bad as the Khmer Rouge, and you are just as bad as the propagators of the genocides in Rwanda.
If you watch a murder and don't do anything to stop it you get charged with accessory. I'd rather be an accessory to Freedom thanks.