User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 53

  1. #11
    Freaking Ratchet Rail Tracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,041

    Default

    Nope, not exactly justified. I would of surely let the Libyan people fight for themselves. It is their war for their own rights, not ours.

    I believe that was what Obama initially did until he started being criticized for doing nothing about Libya from the warmongers. Still, he did have a set amount of time to avoid this mess even if he wanted to give a slight helping hand to the Libyan people.

    I'm not sure about the UN/NATO part as I haven't been keeping up lately, but there has been a resolution of some sorts from the UN.

    S/RES/1973 (2011) The situation in Libya

    Quote Originally Posted by http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/71679.htm
    NATO and Libya - Operation Unified Protector

    On March 27, NATO Allies decided to take on the whole military operation in Libya under United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973. The purpose of Operation Unified Protector is to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas under threat of attack. NATO is implementing all military aspects of the UN Resolution.
    Justifiable? Possibly.

    I'm quite sure people are aware that even if UN/NATO creates a resolution, the U.S. still needs to "officially" go to war. It is the same old UN/NATO conflict with the whole U.S. law conflict. And from this standpoint, the house is looking at it from the U.S. point-of-view (which can sometimes be seen as outdated.) The fact of the matter is, the U.S. is part of the UN/NATO. The only people who were "truly" behind us in the Iraq War was England/Great Britain.

  2. #12
    Senior Member Beargryllz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    2,739

    Default

    I justify it like this

    America pretty much does whatever it wants, wherever it wants, and Libya is just the most recent example of this

    Conflict is arbitrary and expected for a military superpower

    I would almost feel disturbed if the pattern suddenly ceased without explanation

  3. #13
    Senior Member captain curmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    BIRD
    Enneagram
    631 sp
    Posts
    3,264

    Default

    ^ you're not justifying it at all. You're merely stating how you've come to terms with it.

  4. #14
    Senior Member Beargryllz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    2,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wheelchairdoug View Post
    ^ you're not justifying it at all. You're merely stating how you've come to terms with it.
    Oh, okay, so we want to see if this is right, and not just expected

    Okay

    People (lots of people) are in danger, this is a consequence of violent revolution. There is a group which could intervene to stem the very real threat of violence that Libyan civilians face. Are we not morally obligated to do so? If intervention is calculated to stem the potential magnitude of this catastrophic upheaval, how then could anyone NOT justify the action?

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    470

    Default

    They have a moral obligation to their own country.
    Obama did not consult with congress or the senate, he is violating the laws of his country...basicly declaring I do not care what the rest of the country thinks, I'll just have a talk with nato(or was it UN)

    How many civillians are killed, in the supposed pre-emptive attack to prevent civillians getting killed?

  6. #16
    Senior Member Beargryllz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    2,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tantive View Post
    They have a moral obligation to their own country.
    Obama did not consult with congress or the senate, he is violating the laws of his country...basicly declaring I do not care what the rest of the country thinks, I'll just have a talk with nato(or was it UN)

    How many civillians are killed, in the supposed pre-emptive attack to prevent civillians getting killed?
    I cannot become upset that a person would ignore protocol to save lives. I would certainly break the law under certain situations.

  7. #17
    Freaking Ratchet Rail Tracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,041

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tantive View Post
    They have a moral obligation to their own country.
    Obama did not consult with congress or the senate, he is violating the laws of his country...basicly declaring I do not care what the rest of the country thinks, I'll just have a talk with nato(or was it UN)

    How many civillians are killed, in the supposed pre-emptive attack to prevent civillians getting killed?
    Much like Nazi Germany had a moral obligation towards its country. Much like how people should blindly follow rules, even if they are detrimental. Much like how soldiers become part of heinous crimes just because it was the rules.

    The fact is that we are part of both the UN and NATO, and we need to act like we are. And as such, we also have a moral obligation towards it.

    We went towards the Iraq war with no evidence of "WoMD." In fact, the UN itself went to check on it before we even went to war. And really, who was the only country truly standing behind us during that war? Ummm.... England/Great Britain.

    This time, the UN itself has created a resolution to protect the Libyan civilians as such a war is so evident.

    Now, what moral obligation?

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    I'm not a fervent supporter, but I see no hypocrisy here. Military action alone does not automatically mean that Obama contradicted his own principles. Intervention can be easily be justified if done for the "right" reason. The Iraq war was supposedly done to preempt a future attack with WMD. The evidence for that turned out to be questionable. The Libyan intervention was done to prevent the imminent massacre of anti government civilians. That clearly would have happened.

    The two events are so different that either side can criticize the other and not be guilty of hypocrisy.

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    470

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beargryllz View Post
    I cannot become upset that a person would ignore protocol to save lives. I would certainly break the law under certain situations.
    This is no mere protocol, it's the restraint so a president can't do everything he damn well pleases. A President is not a King.

    You cannot, it sets precedent and/or legislation for all future military operations. They will justify any war actions(under UN rule), and congress will be powerless to stop it. These actions already overburden an economy of the US, which means it will destroy the lives and/or futures of its own citizens, not to mention the blowback effect.
    It's a dillusion to think that this is a humanitarian effort, there are other interests involved.....oil and the military industrial complex.

    You could just as well have Libya rally behind Gadaffi, if civillian casualties continiu.


    Intervention will always have false reasons given. The US cannot afford to go on its present course. It will mean the destruction of the dollar.

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    470

    Default

    [YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RgyZHaHNrI"]Libya: Legal or Illegal[/YOUTUBE]
    you will want to watch this

Similar Threads

  1. [INFJ] How do you stop overthinking/over analyzing in relationships?
    By Sagacious in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 12-22-2016, 02:41 PM
  2. [INTP] How do you know an INTP is in love? INTP's please Help!
    By ana in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 05-05-2016, 03:53 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-13-2010, 08:05 AM
  4. [MBTItm] Rationals over there, how do you behave when you fall in love?
    By kathara in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 08-05-2008, 11:12 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO