Arab spring uprises Tunisia/Egypt/Libya/Syria

Wars are a great way to get the economy going.
Look what happened to America, Germany, Japan after the world war. Very strong economies. But it can go either way I suppose.

Your economics are as good as your physics.

In my opinion, there can be no peace until the people put Gaddafi's head on a stake. How can they negotiate with a leader that ordered planes to bomb the protesters.
 
Your economics are as good as your physics.

In my opinion, there can be no peace until the people put Gaddafi's head on a stake. How can they negotiate with a leader that ordered planes to bomb the protesters.

This.

Any bright future for Libya requires him to go. Away. Forever.

He is the busted light bulb that was never changed out unfortunately.
 
Your economics are as good as your physics.

In my opinion, there can be no peace until the people put Gaddafi's head on a stake. How can they negotiate with a leader that ordered planes to bomb the protesters.
Hang on where have I ever gone wrong on physics? Source please.
If someone put Gaddafis's head on a steak I would be tempted to join a war to fight them, I don't believe in capital punishment. Attack until surrender, then humane punishment. Ooops America believes in capital punishment.
 
Well Gadafi is a wise man Here is some of his Quotes.

-)A Woman has the right to be elected weather she was a Male or a female :odd:

-)If It weren't for electricity We would have been watching T.V in the dark :lol:

And then of course his explaination for democracy in arabic and lots of other stuff ,This Guy is a complete nut cracker :crazy:
 
How come the west only criticize some dictator countries? But not criticize countries like Saudi Arabia, China, and India? Those countries are not democratic accoring to me, and by democracy I mean the type you have in western countries. Ohh I forgot, the US has interests in those countries. The US only wants to get rid of Ghaddafi so they can put another pupet in charge, just like they did in Iraq.

Kudos to blaahs reply. This is par for the course with most countries. Not just Western countries. All the time the U.S. gets attacked over this when nearly every other country does the same or worse. This is by no means a justification for all of Americas actions but I feel it should be said.
 
Well Gadafi is a wise man Here is some of his Quotes.

-)A Woman has the right to be elected weather she was a Male or a female :odd:

-)If It weren't for electricity We would have been watching T.V in the dark :lol:

And then of course his explaination for democracy in arabic and lots of other stuff ,This Guy is a complete nut cracker :crazy:

To put it in complex words, gazzafi has suffered from mental instability:ouch:

His green book doesn't apply to him or his family:dopey:

I believe that capital punishment is the only way for this murderer to go.
 
Wars are a great way to get the economy going.
Look what happened to America, Germany, Japan after the world war. Very strong economies. But it can go either way I suppose.

Invasion and war is coming to an oil-rich country near you, according to this;http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23548

Note, the author, while being a scholarly contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, is also "conspiracy theorist", so take everything with the usual grain of salt.
 
How come the west only criticize some dictator countries? But not criticize countries like Saudi Arabia, China, and India? Those countries are not democratic accoring to me, and by democracy I mean the type you have in western countries. Ohh I forgot, the US has interests in those countries. The US only wants to get rid of Ghaddafi so they can put another pupet in charge, just like they did in Iraq.

India is actually the largest democratically run country in the world in terms of population. You're thinking more of Pakistan than India.
 
With all those protests and revolutions occurring, this is creating a war climate.

Remember after World War I that a few countries had their government overthrown or changed into a different one (Germany, Italy, etc...)? Dictators invaded other countries and thus, World War II started.

This is coming off the heels of the recently ended Iraq War. So far, Tunisia and Egypt have successfully overthrew their government, and very soon, Libya as well. As other countries suffer the same fate (Yemen, Iraq, Jordan, etc...), as others have said, the Middle East will be changed forever.

If all protesting countries get their government overthrown and if even one of those countries wants to take over land in other countries, it is possible that a war similar to what we would call World War III, which will take place not only there, but in Europe, other parts of Asia and Africa, and possibly Oceania and North America.
 
With all those protests and revolutions occurring, this is creating a war climate.

Remember after World War I that a few countries had their government overthrown or changed into a different one (Germany, Italy, etc...)? Dictators invaded other countries and thus, World War II started.

This is coming off the heels of the recently ended Iraq War. So far, Tunisia and Egypt have successfully overthrew their government, and very soon, Libya as well. As other countries suffer the same fate (Yemen, Iraq, Jordan, etc...), as others have said, the Middle East will be changed forever.

If all protesting countries get their government overthrown and if even one of those countries wants to take over land in other countries, it is possible that a war similar to what we would call World War III, which will take place not only there, but in Europe, other parts of Asia and Africa, and possibly Oceania and North America.

A process has been set in motion that has been brewing for decades. So how can it be stopped or managed without making it worse? The US is currently frozen between support for dictators and stability on one hand, and democracy and chaos on the other. We'll eventually find the fight path, but only by attempting the others first.
 
If all protesting countries get their government overthrown and if even one of those countries wants to take over land in other countries, it is possible that a war similar to what we would call World War III, which will take place not only there, but in Europe, other parts of Asia and Africa, and possibly Oceania and North America.

There won't be/unlikely any wars in Europe or America because of Nuclear armed Nato. There are some countries old soviet ones in Europe that could have wars, but they would be self contained.
The same applies to other nuclear armed countries like, China, India, Pakistan, Japan (which you can call nuclear armed as it's protected by USA).
 
Kaddhafi seems to be realising a complete comeback.
Using the support of the well organised army and the diminishing enthusiasm of the rebels the faith seems to have turned.
 
Interesting development, not least because the Saudis enjoy a 'special relationship' with, erm, everybody who buys oil - that is, everyone in the world. This, I suspect, is where the line gets drawn between support for the causes of freedom and democracy, and the expediency of having people you can trust to do business with us in power... in other words, it's not really in anybody's interests that the Saudi regime is overthrown (except for the Saudi people of course, but nevermind!)

As for Gaddafi, the UN have snapped into action and are now discussing urgently plans to have regular discussions about what to do. I have every confidence that by 2014, they will pass a resolution to actually do something, by which time the rebellion will have been crushed, buried, dug up and relocated (a war crime that may already have happened in some places) and Gaddafi will be wondering what he has to do to get thrown out of a country these days.
 
I have heard a disturbing report which might account for some of the Western hesitation to jump in and help the rebels. It seems that eastern Libyans accounted for the highest percentage of foreign insurgents in the most violent phases Iraq war, and are fervent Islamists. So it may be better for the Western powers to deal with the corrupt materialist devil we know rather than the devout ones we don't.

It may be recalled that eastern Libyans and western Libyans are essentially two separate cultures, artificially smushed together by Mussolini back in the '30's into the modern state of Libya, and co-existing uneasily ever since.

It may be that a stalemate debilitating to both sides is the realpolitik solution.
 
There won't be/unlikely any wars in Europe or America because of Nuclear armed Nato. There are some countries old soviet ones in Europe that could have wars, but they would be self contained.
The same applies to other nuclear armed countries like, China, India, Pakistan, Japan (which you can call nuclear armed as it's protected by USA).

India has it's own nuclear stockpile. Needs no American protection. Same with China. Pakistan needs nuclear protection because we can't trust their government to keep good eyes on their stockpile.
 
There is a whole lot of historical precedent for not actively arming the insurgents... Afghanistan... Iraq... just because these insurgents are going up against the Big Bad doesn't actually mean that the next Big Bad isn't counted amongst their number.

But it seems like the current Western leaders are more inclined to help them than otherwise... but thanks to said historical precedent... they're understandably quite hesitant and undecided about how much help they are going to give.
 
India has it's own nuclear stockpile. Needs no American protection. Same with China. Pakistan needs nuclear protection because we can't trust their government to keep good eyes on their stockpile.
I meant just Japan in my sentence.
 
United Nations security council voting on action, if the vote is passed (results due in next hour) then UK forces could be in action as early as tommorow, they will have the power to protect civilians using any force nessesary.
 
It looks like the vote for no fly zones and airstrikes on Libyan targets to "protect civilians" passed the UN Security Council.

Source
 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2011/mar/18/libya-military-action-live-updates

Libya has declared an immediate ceasefire in response to the UN resolution authorising military intervention/enforcement of a no-fly zone...

It remains to be seen if this will translate into reality on the ground (and presumably a reprieve for rebel forces facing imminent attack from Gaddafi's forces) or whether it is a ploy to buy more time so that Gaddafi's forces can escape the threat of attack from UN forces...
 
Crap! If you would have asked me earlier why they were there, I would have said just to police the no fly zone.

I wasn't expecting moves like that either!

Apparently the agreement allows "all necessary measures" to protect civilians from Colonel Muammar Gaddafi's forces. I can only assume, the vehicle were engaging in some sort of attack.
 
It's getting bad now, 110 tomahawk missiles launched against Libyan sites. Some are from Navy submarines and "Reuters quotes a senior US military official saying US, British, French, Italian and Canadian forces are to launch a strike along the Libyan coast."

Keep up to date here:

Live Libya Crisis
 
Back