Would you sacrifice your life for the Libyan revolution?

[fittosurvive]

Is it a cause that you believe to be worthy of the lives of your children? To be clear, those who support this effort are calling on others to do just that.

What exactly is it that we are trying to accomplish? One of the stated objectives is to depose Ghaddafi; at the same time, the objective is not to kill him. I'm sorry, but that is the kind of logic that makes my head spin.

Indeed, it has been determined that this thug's homicidal attack on civilians justifies the bombing of radar installations, anti-aircraft batteries, missile sites and airfields. All of which will result in casualties, but must avoid making the thug one of them. Clearly, we should not subject our troops to this sort of mindless strategy.

Then, there is the question of "the opposition." Who are they? Are they advocates of a Thomas Jefferson style of political philosophy, or are their views more in line with those of Al-Qaida? If anything, the one common belief they are likely to hold is the hatred of Israel. In truth, we don't know much more about them.

So, is what we presently know about the objectives and consequences of this action really enough to justify it? Or should we know a whole lot more before we risk the lives and resources of the American People? I'm with Kucinich on this one. This is something that should be debated and decided by our elected representatives. It should not be decided by some unknown, appointed council that cannot be held accountable for its decisions.

[Demeter]

1. If I were a Libyan, yes

But I am saving myself for the American Revolution, Part 3--The war of the corporate clones....fighting for my children's futures.

[slay]

11. Exactly

why does it always have to be OUR fight - and why only when there is oil involved. Darfur anyone?

But no, I would never go fight in Libya, or Afghanistan, or Iraq. No. No. No.

[OhioChick]

12. +1000 n/t

[fittosurvive]

17. If a Libyan dies fighting for his freedom, it is not a sacrifice.

In truth, he will have given is life in an effort to acquire the inalienable rights that most people believe are worth dying for.

[tekisui]

36. I disagree. Dead is dead. Dead have no rights.

It would be a sacrifice for the others.

[fittosurvive]

40. That is only true if you have an undefined hierarchy of values.

If I give my life to save my wife or my children, it is not a sacrifice because I value their lives more than my own. On the other hand, if I give my life to save a worthless stranger, I have sacrificed a higher value to a lesser one.

[howaboutme]

2. Well said

That is the issue at the root of all of our outrageous foreign interventions that have killed many Americans and many innocents in countries that we attacked. Would you sacrifice your child, brother, husband or wife for the Libyan rebels and Odyssey Dawn?

This is NOT about defending the USA, and that could be said about every war that we have fought over the last 60 years.

[fittosurvive]

18. Indeed, there is no vital U.S. interest in the outcome of this conflict;

therefore, it is not rational for us to become involved.

When Bush initiated the war on Iraq, polls indicated nationwide support @ 85%. Obviously, many Democrats initially supported that mindless act of war as well.

The question I have is will they still support this effort when the pictures of dead women and children start appearing on Al Jazeera? Or will the call for war morph into accusations of war crimes?

[howaboutme]

22. War always has collateral damage and many innocents die

The first requirement for intervention and war should be that every member of Congress and the White House, Cabinet and high level bureaucrats have a son, daughter, brother, sister or other close relative directly serving in combat and danger and leading the effort. That would soon separate the need for war from the hypocrisy of it all.

[anarch]

3. I'm not sure. What's in it for me?

[Waiting For Everyman]

4. Cut the schmaltz already. Everybody who joins the military puts their life on the line.

DU has jumped the shark on Libya.

[KurtNYC]

13. There are plenty of military careers which do NOT involve putting

one's "life on the line" -- operations, logistics, procurement, training, support, cyber warfare, strategist, wire tapping, etc. They used to call it "in the rear with the gear."

But that wasn't really the OP's question. The question was about passionately advocating for one action or another in this war and how that matches up, or doesn't, with the actions that the advocate is willing to undertake.

[JonLP24]

14. Yes

but careful consideration should always be in place because they are human after all. Even if they make it back from wherever they were alive, they could suffer from a lifetime of problems. That shouldn't be taken so lightly, even if it is something they signed up for.

[fittosurvive]

21. That is true; but they are not your pawns to sacrifice on the altar of what you,

the United Nations, or any other country believes to be more valuable than their lives.

They have entrusted that decision to their elected representatives and they are the only ones authorized to make that decision.

[Waiting For Everyman]

26. I didn't send them anywhere bucko, and my opinion isn't up to your criterion.

[JVS]

5. No.

[Upton]

6. NO.

[Countdown_3_2_1]

7. NO. I would NOT sacrifice my Life for this foolish adventure.

My opinion of the president has declined considerably since this started.

I simply do not believe that this will end in a few days. We will be forced to put boots on the ground before this is over.

[emilyg]

20. ....

[krabigirl]

30. Me neither.

Although my opinion of obama soured when he broke his promise re: guantanamo and etc.

[JonLP24]

8. Yes

but for entirely different reasons than you probably think. FTR, I'm leaning against this latest conflict.

[FormerDittoHead]

9. Speaking as a Republican, I'd be GLAD to sacrifice your kid's life for cheap oil and my stocks.

:sarcasm:

[former9thward]

10. No and nobody else should be put in danger.

[Historic NY]

15. Apparently enough UN countries do.

[kelly1mm]

16. All 10 that voted for it? nt

[joshcryer]

33. Effectively. Russia and China vetoed Burma in 2007. They could've done it here.

The pressure to get Russia and China to act is, imho, overwhelming. I am shocked Russia agreed. Benghazi would've been razed and that'd be the end of that, Russia would've got its arm deals.

[fittosurvive]

23. That is their choice.

We have a Constitution which calls for the American People's representatives to decide the matter as a legislative body.

[kenny blankenship]

29. You're right about that. But here's the thing: anytime they decide to insist on it

as their Constitutional prerogative, and theirs alone, they CAN. The Constitution gives them the tools to insist. When was the last time you saw them do that?

They CHOOSE not to. And that is a choice too.

[fittosurvive]

41. Excellent point! The Congress has hidden behind the War Powers Resolution for nearly 40 years.

It has allowed them to put one foot in the water and if things get too hot, they are able elude the blame and leave the President standing alone.

Regrettably, their acts of moral cowardice and empty strategies have resulted in one stalemate after another. However, We the People have not held them accountable; accordingly, the same assertion you made regarding the Congress, applies to us.

Is it any wonder they view us as fools?

[Kaleva]

19. Would one risk prison time protesting the war?

Most, I would guess, would prefer others get jail time.

[Nye Bevan]

24. If you had been around in 1776, would you have supported the American Revolution?

Or would you have been content for everyone to remain British subjects, as fewer lives would be sacrificed?

[Countdown_3_2_1]

35. Not a good comparison. Very different!!

As an American, I would have been intimately involved in my own freedom.
Americans did not invade France for the French Revolution.

Revolutions are from the people, not imposed from the outside. Libya must free itself. The most we should do is arm the rebels.

[fittosurvive]

42. Yes, I would have suported the American Revolution.

For my hierarchy of values is well-defined.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

53. Not if I were an American slave.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_United_States#American_War_of_Independence

Tens of thousands of slaves did so, especially in the South, finding freedom behind British lines and disrupting plantation agriculture by their escapes. For instance, in South Carolina, nearly 25,000 slaves (30% of the total enslaved population) fled, migrated or died during the disruption of the war.<29> In the closing months of the war, the British evacuated 20,000 freedmen, transporting them for resettlement in Nova Scotia, the Caribbean islands, and some to England.

[Amonester]

25. Give Me Liberty

Or Give Me Death


I feel free (for now...). It feels good enough (but that may change).

I hope the (civilized) Libyan people will be succesful in their struggle to get rid of that despicable creep.

[kenny blankenship]

27. I wouldn't ask service members to risk their lives for a stalemate, I can tell you that.

I don't think the President would have a hard time telling men and women in uniform, face to face, that their job is to take down the Gaddafy regime and help the Libyan people fight for their own freedom. That would be greeted immediately as a worthy goal. Most of them will already know something -enough- about why Gaddafy is regarded as an enemy of the USA and the US military.:

The Berlin discotheque bombing of April 5, 1986 was a terrorist attack on the La Belle discotheque, West Berlin, Germany, that was frequented by U.S. soldiers. A bomb placed under a table near the DJ booth exploded at the club, killing a Turkish woman and two U.S. sergeants and injuring 230 people, including more than 50 American servicemen. Nermin Hannay and Kenneth T. Ford were killed instantly, and James E. Goins died two months later. Some of the injured victims were permanently disabled.<1>

Libya was blamed for the bombing after telex messages had been intercepted from Libya to the Libyan East Berlin embassy congratulating them on a job well done.<2> Then U.S. President Ronald Reagan retaliated by ordering airstrikes against the Libyan capital of Tripoli and city of Benghazi (see Operation El Dorado Canyon).

[Jack Rabbit]

28. Yes, I would

I am opposed to US intervention, as this country's recent history has led me to be suspicious of the government's motives.

[joshcryer]

31. I'm not a militarist. If I were Libyan yes, I would fight for my freedom...

...but as an American I see that my country is involved in far too many conflicts overseas, and just because one of them is mandated by the UNSC and has international support, invoking the responsibility to protect, that doesn't absolve the US for its other unjust and poorly minded wars. If I were to "join up" I'd wind up in either Afghanistan or Iraq.

[PhillySane]

32. WAR IS OVER

if you want it, Barrack.

[lonestarnot]

34. Ugh no. I am not a Libyan.

[BzaDem]

37. Would you sacrifice your life for there to be no intervention? To be clear, those who oppose this

effort are calling on the people of Benghazi to do just that.

[Ramulux]

46. This is such an absurd statement

This makes no sense. Why should one sacrifice ones life for the belief that we shouldn't intervene in this war? No one in this country dies from believing we shouldn't start wars.

Are you also saying that unless someone supports a US military invasion into a country to save its oppressed people, they are responsible for their deaths? So by that logic, every American citizen who doesn't want to invade North Korea is responsible for the millions of deaths that have occurred over the years in North Korea.

[IndyJones]

52. Right. And everyone who doesn't want to invade Mexico to stop

the drug cartel and corrupt politicians must support drugs and the slaughter of over 36,000 Mexicans over the last 4-5 years.

Absurd logic.

[BzaDem]

60. "No one in this country dies"

So that's all that matters to you? That no one dies in the country you were lucky enough to have been born in? Deaths in other countries don't matter? Because they didn't with the birth-country-roulette game, as you did, they don't matter?

There may be valid reasons to oppose intervention -- maybe the costs (in many uses of the term) are too high, maybe we would make things worse, etc. But such an argument should be accompanied by why, in this fact-specific situation, that would be the case. General arguments against all intervention are bullshit. It only takes a few steps from saying "well it doesn't affect MY country, so why should I be responsible?" to "well it doesn't affect ME, so why should I be responsible?"

[johnroshan]

38. I wish I would be brave enough.

National borders mean nothing more than lines on a piece of paper. If you aren't brave enough, that is fine, but to say that this isn't your fight... thats despicable IMO.

[fittosurvive]

43. It has nothing to do with bravery, my opposition is based on the undefined

nature of what it is we are supporting and potential consequences of the engagement.

Perhaps I could be persuaded that this merits the sacrifice of lives and resources. However, that would require a rational contemplation and debate of issue by my elected representatives. I will never be convinced by an anonymous and unaccountable council of unknown morals and principles.

[johnroshan]

49. Thats fine... but many replies ahead

said that they are not Libyans so they wouldn't fight with them even if the are capable of doing so.

Maybe they'd prefer this course of action better.

[pampango]

48. Well said. "'We' will fight for "us", but not for "them" (worthless strangers)" is not liberal.

"They" were born on and live on the "wrong" side of the line on the map. None of us have any say on where in the world we are born, yet many want to determine whether you are worth fighting for, based on an accident of birth.

Repubs (especially those on the far-right) want us out of the UN so we don't get drawn into these multilateral obligations. Many here seem to value the UN more than repubs do, but want to opt out of commitments. Either we support the UN and act accordingly (while trying to change the rules if necessary) or we withdraw from the international body and go it alone.

[fittosurvive]

56. Are you suggesting that Americans are "obligated"to sacrifice

their sons and daughters to the blind desires and random whims of the UN? I'm sorry, but America's self-interests must determined by rational debate and adherence to our founding principles.

We are not obligated to liberate other nations at the price of self-sacrifice.

[treestar]

39. Yes

And would have done so to stop the holocaust, if that were possible, too.

I would have joined up for WWII.

You wouldn't?

[fittosurvive]

44. There was a rational contemplation of the grievances prior to declaring war

on our enemies in WWII.

Furthermore, our strategy was to vanquish our enemies to the point where they no longer had the will to fight. When the war was over, it was over.

Our military should not engage the enemy with any other strategy.

[Catherina]

45. No. An uprising without a socio-economic or human rights agenda

isn't a revolution. If I believed it was a real revolution that would benefit the working masses, I'd risk it in a heartbeat. But this, no.

[fittosurvive]

47. Exactly, It is beyond my realm of comprehension to observe as one narrative

after another is presented in an effort to rationalize going to war with Libya without demanding that our elected representatives specifically define what we are supporting and potential consequences of the engagement.

They should be asking themselves if we are supporting something like this:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

or something like this:

[defendandprotect]

50. Think that those of us who followed the Revolution threads -- Egypt/Lybia ...

may have a different and more hopeful view --

Libyans called for a "No Fly Zone" -- no troops on the ground. Hope it works!!

Yes -- I've wondered if Americans might join the Libyans to help --

but unrealistic -- Gaddafi brought in 50,000 mercenaries to fight to keep

him in power and Gaddifi has been so heavily weaponized by UK, France, Russia --

and US also had a shiny new contract for weapons -- that think there was a moral

responsibility to help!!

[fittosurvive]

54. I'm not sure I understand the meaning of your post.

Do you believe the matter of war is something that should be debated and decided by our elected representatives?

Or do you believe that it should be decided by an appointed council that is not accountable to the American People?

[defendandprotect]

57. You think we're at "war" with Libya?

And since when is Congress actually meaningfully debating and discussing any issue --

including war, or Patriot Act, or Social Security or anything else? It's all taken

into back rooms now -- given over to panels and commissions!

Where was the immense discussion of Obama making back room deals with Big Pharma and

the health care industry which trampled MEDICARE FOR ALL?

And wasn't that Obama making deals with GOP on continuing tax cuts for wealthy?

IF we continue with no troops on the ground and simply knock out the weapons which

other nations have supplied Gaddifi with -- then I have no problem with this.

The Gaddafi jets, I think are from Russia --

Certainly UK and France have weaponized Gaddafi -- US also peddled arms to Gaddafi --

they have a shiny new contract --

We may have the same problems with our MIC should one day Americans rise up against

fascism here!

[fittosurvive]

66. If someone launched a couple hundred cruise missiles into the United States

what would you call it?

[Modern_Matthew]

51. I wouldn't sacrifice my life for anyone or anything. You only get one of them. nt

[defendandprotect]

58. Not even for your children? Also consider ....

Reincarnation -- something that all the world's major religions used to teach!

[JoePhilly]

55. Deposing Ghaddafi is NOT one of the stated objectives of the NFZ.

That is simply false.

And Ghaddafi is not a specific target of the air strikes. Those resources that can be used directly to kill civilians are the targets. If he happens to get killed, because he is in one of those locations, so be it. They are not trying to avoid killing him.

"Deposing Ghaddifi" is not one of the stated objectives of the mission. The administration has said that repeatedly.

I also find your conclusion that all we really know about the opposition is that they "hate Israel". Really? How do you know that, you work at the US state department? Do you really think our government has no idea who is in the "opposition"?

As for no one being accountable, wrong too. We have elections every few years.

[fittosurvive]

62. Objectives…? You use that term loosely.

For the objectives of this policy are nothing more than a bevy of ever-changing random whims. Clearly, one of the initial objectives, as articulated by Obama, was to depose Ghaddafi. And while his removal no doubt remains an objective, it is no longer stated as such.

Furthermore, my speculation regarding the opposition's views is based on past observations of the way people of that region have behaved towards Israel. And if past performance is indicative of future deeds, the basis of my conjecture is sound.

Finally, I don't believe the State Dept. has a clue with regard to the principles and beliefs that the opposition advocates. Because if they knew that, they would use it to support this irrational policy.

[Godhumor]

59. Better question would be, would you tell the Libyans under attack that you were not willing to help

That the possibility of losing 1 American life, even with UN support for the action, outweighed the thousands who have already been killed.

[fittosurvive]

63. I am not obligated to tell the Libyans anything.

Nor am I obligated to sacrifice myself to support an undefined objective.

[howaboutme]

61. If I was a USA elitist and politician and had influence over the MSM I'd say

of course I would say yes. If I was a potential politician I'd say double yes. War works on a political resume. Real elitists never face harm or reality and the MSM will cover for them. If I was an average American that had enlisted in the military as a job I'd go with the flow.

[Shagbark Hickory]

64. :kick:

:kick:

[Synicus Maximus]

65. No