#1
We are fighting in Lybia , yet terrible things are happening in the Ivory coast , Yemmen , Barhain etc ,Why do we say nothing about theese countries ?
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#2
ivory coast is a french problem mainly, yemen has little oil and if we got involved in bahrain we would upset the saudis that have
oil dripping from them.
plus the saudis buy a lot of arms and other things from us
#3
Surely from a humanitarian point of veiw tho Howard we should talk about it .
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#4
Mark its just that we are simply unable to police everywhere. The places you name are equally as bad as Libya but its just not possible for us to do anything about every situation. Our forces are smaller than previous times as we know, we have no aircraft carrier currently operating, nor do we have the budget, so its just not possible to do everything but we do what we can.
We can also detect a change in attitude too from the Americans. Very reluctant they were this time round to do anything about Libya. They are involved but in a support role with Britain and France taking the lead...now NATO has taken over.
So there is a greater reluctance now for this thankless policing. As we saw, there wasnt much gung ho- ing over Libya.
Im not really sure that its about oil, our oil supply was guaranteed under Gaddafi, all was functioning normally. We could have put down the rebels, that would have secured the oil, but clearly our concern for the humanitarian situation outweighed our need for oil, in this instance anyway.
So well done the western allies. However what happens now..air strikes are delivering a stalemate there in Libya.
Alas I wouldnt know what to suggest re the African nations who seem to live in eternal conflict. Very hard to fix anything there, poverty reigns and desperation lurks.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#5
paul
the intelligence services would have surmised that gaddafi would fall, we all did.
if we hadn't helped the rebels then any new government would not have looked kindly on us.
they can sell the oil to whoever they like.
#6
That is true Paul we carnt police everybody , i would still like a goverment minister to explain the way theese decisions are reached . There are so many goverments all over the world treating there people so badly , i guess the UN trys to deal with it .
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#7
Mark, what probably happened is that someone had a great time using the Web to start an upheaval in Tunisa; then it was the turm of Egypt.
So then a campaign was made on the Web to launch an uproar in Libya.
It didn't go the same way! It turned into a civil war.
Incidentally, someone tried a few weeks back to launch an Intifada N. 3 in the
West Bank, but the Web operators closed down the page: it had already received thousands of subscriptiuons in favour of an intifada.
Many Libyans in the East probably regretted having takien part in the upheaval against their own government, especially the 10.000 or so soldiers who defected (if that many ever defected). The vast majority of Libyan soldiers did not defect, and throngs of Libyans support Col. Gedaffi, as can be seen now especially.
Many rioters who became rebels probably imagined, back in February, that it would be a two day upheaval and that they would then have 198 squabbling parties bickering for power and prancing in front of the TV cameras.
It didn't work! But then any strategy based on a Web-preached upheaval in another country is destined sooner or later to fail!
I asume that sooner or later the Briitish Government will pull out of the bombing raids on Libya, and today's speach by Rear Admiral Hardy that the UN mandate means that the rebels could be bombed if trying to enter a civilian area with armopured vehicles, should be (should be, not necessarily will be) a cold shower for these rebels who don't know themselves what they want and foolishly race up and down the Libyan coast in vehicles mounted with machine guns!
The rebels wrongly assumed that the UN mandate means that they will be bombed to power. Rear Admiral Harding taught them otherwise!
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#8
mind blowing stuff alex, most went over my head.
however you make a point about us all thinking it would be another short lived thing, will be interesting to see how the western powers will slime their way out of this.
it is clearly a lose/lose situation.
#9
They must have thought Gaddaffi would have run for the hills as soon as the air strikes began , may be he is more clever than we thought , there is a good chance he will be in power longer than the forces atacking him will be .