Critters2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:17 PM
Original message |
What are the criteria by which we decide to take military action against brutal dictators? |
|
Why some and not others? Anyone know?
|
Name removed
(0 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:18 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
|
rfranklin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
Joe the Revelator
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
5. That is such a cop out response. It's just super lame and tired. |
Critters2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
8. And probably correct. nt |
Hugabear
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
10. so answer the question |
|
Why some and not others? And when DUers were saying Iraq was about oil, were you just as critical?
|
Countdown_3_2_1
(778 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
11. Not really. Darfur had no oil and a genocide went unnoticed for years. |
|
Libya has oil, and the instability drives up prices. YES. Oil is the lifeblood of our world. Oil makes all the difference.
|
Warren Stupidity
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
26. and yet it is the best fit explanation for the last 12 years of war. |
|
So unless you come up with a better reason, I'll stick with the one that works.
|
Aerows
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
50. What about the people in our country dying |
|
from lack of medical care? I realize saving lives isn't as profitable or macho as a war, but if the goal was to save lives, you would think we would start with our own nation.
You know why we don't, and why we didn't interfere in Darfur, the Congo or any of the other places where there are tyrants killing their people?
Profit. Oil.
That isn't a cop out - that's the truth. It's not heroic to let our own people die while we rush off to kill others, and it's not noble, either.
It's for profit and oil.
|
SpartanDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
Davis_X_Machina
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
19. Nickle. And chrome. And pipelines... |
|
Edited on Sat Mar-19-11 04:32 PM by Davis_X_Machina
...the usual people explained it all at the time.
Look, DU would have opposed the League of Nations, and it was toothless.
They'd definitely have opposed the formation of the UN because of the part of the Charter that gave the Security Council very, very circumscribed ability to use force.
I wish people would drop the special pleading, and say what they mean -- no international situation is grave enough to call for the use of force, ever -- except the invasion of US sovereign territory. It's a position, and a principled one -- embrace it.
And vote for Bob Taft.
|
Aerows
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
51. Where are the people complaining about people in the US |
|
dying from lack of medical care? Is that a principled position, too? Or is that not profitable or macho enough to worry about?
|
Marblehead
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:19 PM
Response to Original message |
3. they must be kinda crazy |
Critters2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
9. Brutal dictator= kinda crazy, non? nt |
rosesaylavee
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
27. Using napalm on their people kinda crazy. n/t |
Critters2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #27 |
28. But starving their own people not crazy enough, apparently. |
|
I'm still not clear on the criteria.
|
Aerows
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #28 |
52. Or letting them die... |
|
...from lack of medical care when we are one of the wealthiest nations in the world. Pay no attention to that, though, because it isn't profitable and doesn't allow people to pontificate about how noble this war is.
|
rosesaylavee
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #28 |
|
The oil thing is the only thing that makes sense.
|
msongs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:20 PM
Response to Original message |
4. they must not be republicans nt |
Amonester
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:22 PM
Response to Original message |
6. They must be crazy and have oil. |
|
Unless we all go back living in the woods at once, get ready for more wars for oil, not less.
Reality's a real nightmare, isn't it.
|
Luminous Animal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:22 PM
Response to Original message |
7. When it the action is debated in Congress and war is declared. We've just been dragged |
|
into another war with zero public input.
|
Critters2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
16. That must not be one of the criteria, since it didn't happen. nt |
OmmmSweetOmmm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:26 PM
Response to Original message |
12. Yep, must have oil. It's all about money/natural resources. |
Raksha
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
20. SO WHAT? It's entirely possible to do the right thing for the wrong reasons. |
|
Re "Yep, must have oil. It's all about money/natural resources."
Does motivation make it somehow NOT the right thing? And just because we only intervene in SOME cases where a brutal dictator is murdering his own people, does the fact that it isn't in ALL of them mean we should NEVER intervene in ANY of them? I just don't get the all-or-nothing reasoning that seems to have gone viral around here the past few days.
|
OmmmSweetOmmm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
36. There are brutal dictatorships all over the globe. We get involved with ones that have oil. |
|
Bet you bought into Iraq war lies.
|
freshwest
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #36 |
48. Got it in one. The media owned by oil. |
KG
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:28 PM
Response to Original message |
LiberalAndProud
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:29 PM
Response to Original message |
15. The UN declaration depended heavily on the statement by the Arab nations |
|
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-19/clinton-says-arab-nation-made-pivotal-statement-on-libya-1-.htmlClinton Says Arab Nation Made Pivotal Statement on Libya By Roxana Tiron - Mar 19, 2011 3:37 PM CT Arab nation leadership in efforts to stop violence in Libya has played a key role in mobilizing the international coalition, Clinton said. Clinton said that the Arab League with its “pivotal statement” changed the “diplomatic landscape” with regard to the approach toward the United Nations Security Council resolution this week authorizing “all necessary measures,” including a no-fly zone to end violence and protect civilians in that country. I don't understand why Yemen can be left to languish in tyranny and Libya today after years of Qaddafi has finally met the invisible criteria. Yet here we are. Secretary Clinton knows that this appears to be a war for oil. They wanted at all costs to avoid that perception. Yet here we are.
|
joshcryer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
38. Yemen, 55 people dead in a month, Libya over 3 thousand dead in a month. |
|
Please don't be ignorant.
|
LiberalAndProud
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:20 PM
Response to Reply #38 |
40. Oh it's a body count thing. |
|
Please don't call me ignorant.
|
joshcryer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #40 |
46. Do you think the UN is going to get involved over one or two deaths a day? |
|
That isn't the UN's job. The UN could invade the fucking US, our cops kill that many a day likely.
|
LiberalAndProud
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #46 |
49. I think the Arab nations were personally pissed of at Qaddafi. |
|
I think the 'news' has been manipulated for weeks to prepare the US citizenry for this outcome. Do I think they give a tin nickel for the people? No I don't. Do I think that we can come to the aid of all oppressed people in the world? No I don't. Maybe we should, but I'm getting tired of funding the endless wars and listening to the endless justifications for them.
They weave motivations for us to make us happy for trading our butter for bombs and I find that utterly despicable.
|
joshcryer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #49 |
53. You think that Al Jazeera manipulated us? |
LiberalAndProud
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #53 |
59. What have you read much about Mugabe lately? |
daleo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:29 PM
Response to Original message |
17. Does it coincide with strategic interests? |
|
Control of oil, important trade routes, blocking a strategic competitor, that sort of thing.
Occasionally U.S. local politics plays a role - e.g. voting blocks sympathetic to one side or another of some struggle going on back in their ancestral homeland.
|
Critters2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
18. So all that "freeing the Libyan people" stuff really is bullshit. |
daleo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
23. Well, that's not the reason for the intervention |
|
Though some people in Libya will be better off for the intervention and some worse off. Some parts of the population support Gaddaffi and some don't. I have no idea of the true proportions of either and I don't see how anyone else can really know either.
I don't think the western powers-that-be care much about the average Libyan. I see little evidence that they care much about the average American, judging from current events. Social security funding seems to be taking a back seat to cruise missile funding, for example.
|
kenny blankenship
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:40 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Edited on Sat Mar-19-11 04:49 PM by kenny blankenship
1) Is it in our national interest? 2) Is it in our national interest? 3) Is it in our national interest? 4) Can they strike back and inflict intolerable damage or embarrassment to us or our allies? 5) Did they provide a sufficiently egregious justifying cause that no other country, whose opinion we have to care about, will question? 6) Is it in our national interest? 7) Is it in our national interest? 8) Is it in our national interest? 9) Is it in our national interest? 10) Is it in our national interest?
A long running civil war in Libya, with a resistance group, partly defined by tribal identity and location, attacking the economic assets of the Gaddafi regime will be very bad for the price of oil and thus bad for the interests of the United States and its current leadership. The US economy can't sustain rising oil prices as a general thing, and especially not now that it's weak and fragile. The current leadership can't get reelected if the economy loses oil pressure and conks out. If Gaddafi retakes Benghazi and the Rebels lose, that is probably not the end of it. It may be the end of the rebellion but not of resistance. That resistance would likely take the form of "terroristic" attacks against petroleum installations. There may be a period of prolonged anarchy inside Libya - a fertile ground for Al-You-Know-Whoda. Gaddafi is an old fart and the Libyan people know he is going to die sooner or later like the Egyptian people sensed about Mubarak. Attacking the dictator in his senility represents their best chance at freedom, rather than waiting for his sons to take over. So, even if Gaddafi is militarily successful, his "stability" credentials like Mubarak's are of no more value to the West. There will be no peace in Libya with him or his spawn around. Now it should be clear that Gaddafi is a vile monster and has to go! I hope they are successful in getting rid of him, because he is a vile monster, and the Libyan people ought to be able to chart a new and less autocratic direction like their neighbors in Egypt and Tunisia.
|
NoTimeToulouse
(204 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #21 |
Davis_X_Machina
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #25 |
30. It's simpler to jump up and down.. |
|
..and shout "No Blood For Oil", though, isn't it?
|
NoTimeToulouse
(204 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #30 |
34. I'm no big supporter of US hegemony in the mid east, but do we let Quadaffi (sp?) |
|
crush a democratic uprising? I understand the reservations of DUers here, but I also don't like to see brutal suppression of a people for the likes of a dictator.
|
Davis_X_Machina
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #34 |
42. Yes. See poll results... |
|
.... here. It's a small sample -- let's hope it's unrepresentative.
|
NoTimeToulouse
(204 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #42 |
45. 6 votes isn't that representative. |
Davis_X_Machina
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #45 |
Critters2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #34 |
43. And again, see Zimbabwe. nt |
Igel
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #21 |
61. I don't think there'd be much resistance. |
|
"National interest" isn't just oil and money.
Look at the emphasis on being liked, on "winning hearts and minds." Nobody much cared about Libya--until action against Gaddafi could be couched as supporting the hopes and wishes of the Arab "people." The US came under fire for not supporting the anti-Mubarak protesters quickly and forcefully. Libya matters, it seems, in official Arab public opinion. Therefore "we" suddenly got religion. We couldn't do it before the "important" bit of merely supporting, aiding, encouraging the public aspirations of the Arab people (whatever such blather actually means--we'll see in a decade or so) because it would have been seen as merely mercenary. We couldn't actually do it on our own because, well, the right thing without UN cover can't be the right thing. Leadership is all about following the right people (and squashing the others).
Nobody cares about Bahrain. It's Shi'ite versus Sunni. The Arabs we care about are Sunni. The Sunni rulers can kill all the Shi'ites they want. Iraq's not going to say much; they have their own internal problems. Iran's going to scream--and be absolutely right about the hypocrisy, and how simply mirroring the UN stance on Libya would be taken as hopeless aggression on th part of the Iranians. Except that people assume that if Iran says X, "not X" must be true.
Nobody cares about Yemen. Some the protests in Yemen is Shi'ite versus Sunni; some of that is traditionalist vs modernist. (Note: In Libya most of the "rebels" are modernist. Most of the Egyptian and Tunisian protesters, at least the front men, were modernists. Educated, not always Western but "modern" and not traditional tribal.)
Syria might be a bit of a problem; we don't like Syria, so you wouldn't think that's much of a problem. The problem would be that opposing the chinless wonder would be taking Israel's side and siding against Hezbollah. So nobody's going to much care about Syria.
Sa'udi Arabia isn't a problem, or at least I don't see it becoming any more of a problem than Oman's been.
My entire problem is that the reasons given aren't the real reasons. They're convenient. Unlike the reasons given for the 2003 Iraq invasion, I don't even think the reasons of convenience are even believed by those making them publicly. (I do think they're believed by some of the administration's staffers that argued them.) But if you're going to kill bystanders and not-so-bystanders, I think that one should be honest about the reasons. Killing for the sake of PR, for the sake of image is base. Altering one's stance for the sake of PR shows a character lacking any kind of decent content--and I think we should be judged on the content of our character.
|
NashVegas
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:41 PM
Response to Original message |
22. If They Play Ball With Us, They Get to Stay |
|
Also, if we can cover up their misdeeds and make the media look the other way.
|
Lydia Leftcoast
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:45 PM
Response to Original message |
24. Only the ones that have oil |
|
Myanmar, no oil.
North Korea, no oil.
|
Critters2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #24 |
31. That's what I figured. nt |
joe_sixpack
(655 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #24 |
56. North Korea can hit back too hard |
|
that's probably just as important as their lack of oil.
|
jacquelope
(364 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-20-11 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #56 |
62. No they can't. We'd squash them like a bug. |
|
One cruise missile = byebye any DPRK nuclear potential. Problem is, as you said, there's no resources there to take. We'd be stuck holding their hands through reconstruction like Iraq.
And no, I am NOT AT ALL interested in doing anything to DPRK. They're just not a threat.
|
RandiFan1290
(721 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 04:52 PM
Response to Original message |
29. They must have a weak military |
|
Wouldn't want them to fight back too hard
|
Nye Bevan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:09 PM
Response to Original message |
32. How about when the UN considers all of the factors and decides that it is appropriate? |
|
Isn't that what the UN is there for?
|
Critters2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #32 |
33. To invade Iraq, we had to insist the UN inspectors leave. |
|
So, apparently, the UN isn't really all that important.
Got another guess?
|
joshcryer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #33 |
37. EXACTLY. BUSH DID IT ILLEGALLY! HE NEEDS TO GO TO THE ICC FOR THAT SHIT! |
|
The original UN resolution was to "return inspectors" Bush decided to return them, pretend that they weren't "getting it done" and invade on the idea that Saddam was hiding his WMDs!
|
Nye Bevan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:20 PM
Response to Reply #33 |
39. That's the difference between Bush and Obama. |
|
Edited on Sat Mar-19-11 05:21 PM by Nye Bevan
The Libya operation has been approved by the UN, with no dissenting votes, and welcomed by the Libyan people that Gaddafi wants to slaughter.
The Iraq war was a UN-be-damned, stupid, ill-advised misadventure in search of non-existent WMDs. And the WMD pretext was only possible because Bush chose to ignore the UN inspectors, as you point out.
I am surprised at how many DUers are equating Libya with Iraq. Libya was done in the right way; Iraq was about the most horrible screw-up imaginable.
|
Davis_X_Machina
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #39 |
|
Edited on Sat Mar-19-11 05:34 PM by Davis_X_Machina
...'Spitfire Summer' of DU -- we few, we happy few, outnumbered by the fascists....
It'll always be about Iraq. It'll always be about Bush, so long as there's a England DU.
|
joshcryer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:17 PM
Response to Original message |
rug
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:22 PM
Response to Original message |
Tierra_y_Libertad
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:56 PM
Response to Original message |
54. Whenever the coffers of the MIC need replenishing. |
Rex
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:57 PM
Response to Original message |
55. It all depends on if they are our friends, enemies or our frenemies |
|
at that moment in time. You would think there is more to it, oh yeah there is...if they have a huge scary eastern country willing to support them. That too.
|
yellowwood
(550 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 05:58 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Which one of my children am I willing to sacrifice to get rid of them.
|
louslobbs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-11 07:40 PM
Response to Original message |
60. To help the peopoil of course, I'm sorry, I meant to say people |
Union Scribe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Mar-20-11 12:16 AM
Response to Original message |
63. We can't be personally asked to make any effort or sacrifice |
|
So we can cheer it on on the TV like it was a friggin sports game.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed May 08th 2024, 01:33 AM
Response to Original message |