Air Strike on Libya

The west just can't seem to help itself. Every decade or so they feel overwhelmed by a need to fly over Libya and bomb something. After a couple of years of feeling guilty will start to try to make ammends and bring Ghadaffi into the family. Or it could be an incremental step toward a series of events that future generations of historians will refer to as World War III. UPDATE: I think it's becoming clear that we're just trying to level the playing field - for tanks.

Not the smoothest move.

It is definitely a significant event. No wonder about that... Another question, how reasonable it is. I have no single good word about Libyan ruler and his family. He is a terrorist and a cold-blood killer. He was able to spoil relationship with most of the countries in the World. That is why it was so easy to get the UN resolution, allowing to perform these air strikes. But, do we really now, what is the alternative? Are we really sure, that but helping the opposite party, we are not paving a way to the worse than we can imagine? Can we be really positive, that we are not helping Al Quida to get power? More questions, than answers... More war zones... Americans fostured Taliban in Afghanistan, Americans allowed radical Islam to capture power in Iran, Americas deep in troubles in Iraq. Isn't that enough to undestand, that mere fighting "against" may bring much worse alternative, if you do not understand well, who you are going to support.

Four stars. . .could grow to five. . . I rank this news story below the actual uprisings that have swept North Africa and parts of the Middle East. . .it's both a devastating and fascinating story. The rebels are all-in with chips in the center of the table. There's no going back. That nutbag won't take prisoners. . .

It took him over a week, but, in an ego stroking exercise, President Obama finally addressed the nation this past Monday over our objectives in Libya. He made great effort to establish two things: that this was a limited military action and that it was done under humanitarian cover with allied support. The operations are also going to be handed off to NATO next week, even though we will continue to provide the bulk of the strategic support for the operations, especially since other NATO countries like Italy and Germany have restricted our use of military bases on their territories for this purpose. A lot of the talk about this being a humanitarian operation seeks to obfuscate the fact that this is completely in essence a civil war between different tribes in Libya. You have the tribes in the West and in the South of the country, the Fezzan, Qaddafa, and Margahira peoples, pitted against the Eastern tribes, the Haradi and Obediat peoples. The Eastern tribes themselves have ex... Read more

UPDATED MARCH 28, 2011: If it were not for the fact of people being blown apart by bombs and rockets in attacks, not for American national interests, but for humanitarian reasons, this latest explanation from the government in justification would be high comedy. I have a Shakespeare suggestion for our affirmative action prince, Barack Hussein, to read from his teleprompter in his speech on March 28, 2011: "Cry havoc and let slip the muzzled canines of kinetic military activity!"ORIGINAL COMMENT MARCH 21, 2011: The USA intervention here is by executive order and without ANY congressional authorization. Does a UN resolution trump the U. S. Constitution? If so, that is a matter for concern. If not, then we have an impeachable offense by our esteemed chief executive.I can't believe it. We fired off 130 or so cruise missiles, at one million a pop, to blow up some camel sheds.Remember dear readers, the Libyans were conquered by the ITALIAN ARMY in the 1920's and 1930's. Qaddafi had ... Read more

Hear that? They're trampling on the UN charter AND the US Constitution now...

I completely disagree w/the air strikes on Libya. What have they done to us? Obama claims it's a human rights issue, then why don't we go after Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe. I don't like this idea of picking and choosing who to fuck with when nobody fucks w/you....kind of like Bush's Iraq authorization, which was also horribly wrong. Hillary Clinton wants to prosecute Gaddafi, then why the fuck are you taking photo-ops w/his son. It's like Rumsfeld and that Hussein photo-op. Why did we praise the guy for nuclear disarmament, only to let off missiles....and what makes the opposition so great. I do think Gaddafi is an idiot, but honestly they're all over. Jesus Christ....this whole thing is just fucking stupid.

This attack against Libya is NOT in the vital interest of the U.S, it’s in the vital (economic) interest of France and Britain. The same France that wanted nothing to do with Iraq because of its vital economic arrangements with Saddam. The U.S committed an act of war at a time when we can least afford it. This is pure insanity.

As earlier as the United Nation Security Council convened to the decision of no-fly zone with a short term resolution 1973 served as the De-Facto documented signature for the interim period, there were Britain and France sitting in with their wolverine inner images twirling inside them. The then sitting members of the main hub of the UNSC that passes the resolution pact as not far from these two powers, notably still the U.K and France unlawfully arrested the opportune moment to intrigue the character of their will to invade the oil rich country and tried hard to advance beyond the frontiers of the mass African nation for future benefits. This is bad when the rabbit ears are showing up, and this could invite the unmerited result thus disabling the images of the two countries. Cameron and Sarkozy have gone too far beyond what one would expect. The exploitation of the UN laws is the most audible event we harked, but invading Libya unilaterally will yield some severe consequences next. An... Read more