Do you support air strikes and a no fly zone in Libya?

[Tiggeroshii]

[The Wielding Truth]

1. The generals say that you can't have one without the other.

[Warren Stupidity]

2. No.

[SharonAnn]

59. Right. No! No! And HELL NO! We don'tneed another war and another quagmire.

[opiate69]

3. Tough call actually..

To protect the people of Libya, I'd say both, but since we have no money, and really don't need to be engaged in yet another military quagmire in the Middle East, my gut says neither.... but letting the Libyan people get slaughtered wholesale is not acceptable...

[Ozymanithrax]

4. At the beginning of a no fly zone...

they must go in and take oiut surface to air radar.

But I do support both. This isn't Egypt and the people there want to be free and are asking for help.

[MikeW]

5. we dont have another 400-800 million / week ... were broke remember?

No money for education, middle class nothing but

HELL LETS ENGAGE IN ANOTHER NO FLY ZONE

Cant be too bad right ? The last one only lasted from 91-03 ... How bad can that be?

[joshcryer]

8. Let's assume you're right and the US would spend that amount. Money is more important than lives?

[Aerows]

10. At some point, you have to say "no"

Charity begins at home. If our country goes broke, lives will be lost here. They already are being lost, honestly, if you consider the state of our health care. Why is there no hue and cry to save those lives?

[gateley]

15. Do you think any money that might be spent on this action would instead be

spent here on the people? Do you remember who's the majority in the House?

And are we footing the bill for this?

[joshcryer]

17. We should leave Iraq and Afganistan and that'd solve a lot of our problems.

Libya is not the same as Iraq and Afghanistan. The revolutionaries have been fighting this battle for almost a month.

[gateley]

34. Boy, I don't think you'll get any disagreement on that statement! For the first

time I'm feeling good about military action.

And I agree - the differences are great. We're not invading, we're not occupying, we're not trying to impose democracy. We're helping those who are asking for it.

[Aerows]

9. My thoughts exactly

Why is it that we can never find money to educate children or for medical care, but we can always find money to wage war?

[MikeW]

11. that came from the DOD on tehhill.com .. and no we cant be the world police anymore

The Libyans need to stand and fight ... every country thats had a revolution does.

People die, thats a fact, no doubt about it in war.

Time for someone else to step up to the plate.

[gateley]

18. You guys are making it sound as though we're footing the bill - are we? nt

[joshcryer]

23. Yep, there are a lot of threads implying that, but we're not leading it, and that was made clear...

...time and time again.

[gateley]

30. That's my sense of it as well. But those who have made up their minds won't

even listen. Kind of like talking to Teabaggers or something. :eyes:

[joshcryer]

32. A new topic will come up every 5 minutes bitching about a "new war" etc now.

By tomorrow everyone will go back to forgetting that the Libyan people have been fighting against Gaddafi for just under a month.

[MikeW]

37. go get educated and read the link from thehill

Its an estimate BY THE DOD!!!

[gateley]

39. Provide the link and I will. Really. nt

[MikeW]

40. here ya go

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/149095-defense-think-tank-libyan-no-fly-zone-could-cost-up-to-300-million-a-week

[gateley]

44. Thanks, I'll either come back educated to your liking, or even more convinced of

my opinion.

[joshcryer]

42. Here's the ACTUAL REPORT, The Hill is citing the highest number (no way a "full" NFZ is implemented)

http://www.csbaonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/2011.03.09-Libya-No-Fly-Zone.pdf

The vast majority of everything is in Northern Libya, it will not require a NFZ over the entire country.

[MikeW]

33. who the hell else will pay for it the UN .. Ive got news for you

WE FUND THE UN with big $$$$

[gateley]

16. Ask the Republicans. I'm sure if we don't engage in this they'd love to instead

use it for education and medical care. Why didn't Obama think of that?

[joshcryer]

21. I dispute that we're going to spend that much on the enforcement of this.

The United States is not leading the inaction of the NFZ, it is France, the UK, the people who sold the modern weapons to Gaddafi.

[MikeW]

36. dispute it all you want , Its the DOD's figures .. see the link

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/149095-defense-think-tank-libyan-no-fly-zone-could-cost-up-to-300-million-a-week

[joshcryer]

41. Here is the actual report:

http://www.csbaonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/2011.03.09-Libya-No-Fly-Zone.pdf

The report says between $15 million and $300 million a week depending on your options. The United States has not committed to enforcing the NFZ, and Canada and the Dutch and French have all come out saying that they'll support it.

I assure you that it is not going to cost The United States as much as you say.

[gateley]

46. So, from joshcryer I get educated, from you I get spin. Your piece presents

figures (and you glomped on to the highest figures) with no mention of other countries' involvement. Now that's not the case, is it? We will not be footing the entire bill. So perhaps you'd better do a little more self-educating before assuming you know all the answers.

[joshcryer]

47. My updated Libyan Revolution thread will probably have a cost breakdown.

The US might pay for fuel and aircraft carrier support, and probably AWACs.

[gateley]

55. I know this sounds so Pollyannaish, but I don't mind my taxes going to military

operations for purposes such as this. I've never once supported a military action that I can recall (other than maybe Jimmy Carter trying to free the hostages in Iran.)

Any humanitarian actions are okay by me. Not that anybody asked. :7 :hi:

[gateley]

13. This isn't Iraq. We're not invading or occupying. And these people are asking for

help. Have you considered having some compassion and empathy?

And do you know that we're going to be footing the bill?

[Ozymanithrax]

26. If the people want help, then this is the right thing to do...

Sometimes you have to do the right thing, even if it costs.

[Iterate]

61. If it's money you're worried about,

I don't think that propping up our pet dictators for the past two generations has exactly been cheap. But right now we have a chance, just a chance, that a democratic and peaceful North Africa can be created by the nations of that region, with the slightest bit of help. And that certainly has to be better, and cheaper, for all.

On the other hand, you could leave the Gadaffi and Sons franchise in power for another generation, and that one is a neocon and MIC wetdream.

[KeepItReal]

6. Better question, what difference will it make?

Will the freedom fighters be able to regain those cities they lost under no-fly zones? Have they lost the initiative? Can they stop the "loyal" Libyan ground forces?

[Tiggeroshii]

14. The most imporant thing it will do is stop the advancement of Kadafi's forces.

And in that case, will likely save thousands of lives in the cities that Kadafi is unable to recapture.

[Aerows]

7. Neither

We've cut funding on everything under the sun, and now we can afford a third war? I don't think so.

[gateley]

20. A third war? Really? nt

[BobbyBoring]

12. I'm afraid we're past that point

Obama sat on the fence for too long on this one. Had he acted when a NFZ was first requested, it might have made a difference. Now Quadaffys thugs have taken back all the the 3 eastern most cities.

Any action we could take now would result in even more lives lost and another long commitment. I'm not down with that

[Tiggeroshii]

19. He hasn't taken Benghazi, and there are still several cities he will need to recapture even after

...I think that if a no fly zone and air strikes are installed immediately, even Benghazi (maybe even Ajdabiya) could be saved.

[gateley]

24. it wasn't up to Obama to do this - it's not a US action. I wish it would have

been done before, but I'm grateful it'll be done now.

More lives are going to be lost whether this happens or not, I'd like to be on the side of helping these people out rather than standing by and ignoring their pleas for help.

I disagree that it will be a long commitment, but only time will really tell either way.

[Modern_Matthew]

22. Bunch of warmongers here at DU. Wow. nt

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tiggeroshii]

28. +`1

[Tiggeroshii]

27. Warmongers would be wanting to engage in war,

this is to stop a continuing and escalating massacre. In this case, the choice we have besides intervention is allowing thousands to die. It is not an invasion, but the best alternative to allowing a full fledged massacre.

[ReggieVeggie]

43. there are plenty of places in the world where this is happening

are we planning to bomb them?

[joshcryer]

48. Are they using modern machinery, jets, arty, etc?

If so I agree wholeheartedly that they must be disarmed.

[ReggieVeggie]

56. maybe you do

The UN doesn't seem to think so. And you haven't proven your case that there's a difference between clubs and jets.

[Shagbark Hickory]

29. We can sit this one out. Surely the scandinavian countries can handle this one.

[gateley]

31. Both - can't have one without the other, and these people have asked for help.

It seems -- to my admittedly non-military understanding -- that this is the best and quickest option available. I would NOT be willing to send in troops, nor do I think it will come to that. Again, my opinion only.

This seems like the RIGHT thing to do.

[readmoreoften]

51. How come the leader of the Libyan Rebels, a human rights lawyer, says NO INTERVENTION?

All I've read are condemnations of intervention by Libyans. The calls for intervention are being made by the CIA-backed National Front

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/02/28/f-libya-kozma-ruken.html

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PurityOfEssence]

35. Neither. Skunk though Qadaffi is, it's an internal revolt

He didn't just go on a killing spree in some Uday Hussein kind of way, a rebellion started with people declaring themselves a new government, and he's trying to put it down.

If we declare ourselves the arbiters of who deserves power here, it sets a precedent for the future that leaves me a bit queasy.

[gateley]

38. See, I don't view it that way at all. They have asked for our help, we're responding.

I would be ashamed if we just ignored their pleas. It's about time we did something with our military that could possibly help these people have a fighting chance.

Mubarak didn't retaliate like this when his people revolted - not for long, anyway, and not to this extent.

It's also my sense that it wasn't easy for these people and the Arab League to ask for help, they probably wouldn't have if there was any other solution. Libyans have been taught to hate the West, and I believe we're viewed by many Arab nations as Pro Israel Period.

[ButterflyBlood]

57. Um actually he did

He had the military and air force specifically act to kill non-violence protesters. The rebellion is those in the army that refused to take part. I'd say crushing that part of the army sets a far worse precedent than anything here.

[onethatcares]

45. no, I'm tired of all the war, what I support is

chopping the hands off all of the arms dealers.

I saw a commercial a few minutes ago about Outback steakhouse supporting our troops for the past 20 years. After a little thought, I realized that meant we've been at continual war for the past 20 fucking years. Might have been good for the arms merchants but for us little people, not so much. eh?

[Alamuti Lotus]

49. I support air-strikes on Bank of America, and a no-fly zone over Afghanistan

[readmoreoften]

58. [phone]

Best post ever.

[Warren Stupidity]

64. me too.

[Chris_Texas]

50. We need to end the wars we are in now, not start new ones

[Upton]

52. Neither..

are we ever going to mind our own business? We sure didn't want the UN involved when the IDF was murdering civilians in Gaza.

[geek tragedy]

54. Both, but absolutely no ground troops. nt

[lib2DaBone]

60. How can we afford another war?

[bertman]

62. I support both but only if they're done by someone other than the U.S.

There are lots of UN members who have excellent air capability who could handle this assignment. Hell, Saudi Arabia has a bunch of top-of-the-line U.S. aircraft they could use.

[oberliner]

63. Wow - it's all tied up!

One of those (not so?) rare issues that has DU split down the middle.

[old mark]

65. Both. UN troops and US special forces, too, although I believe they are already there...nt

[SpartanDem]

66. Both