It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Possible US Military Intervention in Libya

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 07:14 AM
link   





White House on Libya: 'No options taken off the table'

The White House on Thursday said US President Barack Obama planned to call British Prime Minister David Cameron and French President Nicholas Sarkozy to discuss possible actions by the international community to compel the Libyan government of Col. Muammar Gaddafi to end violence against anti-government protesters.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said no options have been taken off the table, including the possibility of military action. International discussions, however, have centered on a possible no-fly zone or other sanctions that would strike Gaddafi economically. The calls to Cameron and Sarkozy come as the UN Security Council agreed to consider further options against Gaddafi's regime, including sanctions.



I wonder if the real motivation is concern for oil pricing volatility.



edit on 25-2-2011 by loam because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 07:23 AM
link   
Hehehe...I know one-liners are frowned upon, so I'll flesh it out a bit, but I just can't help myself from saying this...


Ya think?



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 07:33 AM
link   
well if the US go in.
Then China can go in to!
and that would be a good balance.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by loam
 


They're most likely already on the ground in some way or another already.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 07:37 AM
link   
So Obarma comes crawling back to ask the UK for help after saying France was a better allie the Uk should tell him to shovel it we're to short on cash to help at the moment with the Conservative penny pinching + Cameron has scraped our harriers and some ships Send in the empty air craft carriers that will scare them NOT



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 07:59 AM
link   
I was just listening to Aljezeeras Live Stream and a leader of the opposition is saying that they do not want International Intervention.

We need to stay out of it and let the people handle it. If we went there we would end up becoming an occupier and the people would end up hating us even more than they do already. America needs to stay out of the ME problems for once!



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 08:05 AM
link   
They will move slowly on any action in case the peoples revolt falls apart there hasnt been enough killing yet for the international community to do much need a few 100k murdered before they do anything thats just the way the world works its pretty sad. i feel sorry for the Libyan people but many more must die if they want freedom this is not Egypt
there is oil in this country.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Lets not create drama for no reason. Why not let the title of the thread be possible International intervention, or UK, or French. Why does the US President even need to call? Why doesn't someone else offer to do something.? We still have Iraqi mud on our faces, we should be the last to go in anywhere in the Middle East.

MSM doesnt help every five seconds you got some idiot saying US needs to send a stronger message. Like what? Can we not learn from past transgressions like Iraq? This time we need to sit back and let the atrocities happen. But in the end people will still complain saying, Where were you? Your supposed to help spread democracy. I thought you were the world police etc..

This is where UN, Nato and all these other alliances need to do something, and show the international community why they exist. the U.S.A need to stay out of it unless it under thsoe banners



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 08:35 AM
link   
Call me cynical, but considering the United States' past record, something tells me the real reason for them going into Libya would not be because of concern about human rights and democracy.

If it truly was then the United States would have been gearing up to go into various other countries a long time ago. It seems before this started the good ol' U.S of A wasn't too overly concerned with Libya and Gadaffi was just carrying on as if it was business as usual.

If the U.S goes in the first thing they'll secure is the oil. Just like in Iraq....the place was going to hell, museums full of ancient and cultural artifacts were destroyed or looted and the U.S forces stood by, yet the oil ministry was heavily guarded and protected.

It's a farcical situation, with the West's hypocritical rhetoric not helping one bit.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrStyx

This is where UN, Nato and all these other alliances need to do something, and show the international community why they exist. the U.S.A need to stay out of it unless it under those banners

Most international organizations are Us dominated as the receive huge funding from it.
So basically the whole situation depends on the action taken by US.If they involve military,China will definitely(may be Russia too) will want a bite at the oil, causing international unrest.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by dec23

Originally posted by MrStyx

This is where UN, Nato and all these other alliances need to do something, and show the international community why they exist. the U.S.A need to stay out of it unless it under those banners

Most international organizations are Us dominated as the receive huge funding from it.
So basically the whole situation depends on the action taken by US.If they involve military,China will definitely(may be Russia too) will want a bite at the oil, causing international unrest.


Not true We have Veto power as a few other members of the boards but the UN is far from a U.S. puppet. They did not support the Iraq war. They also moved to sanction Isarel, which we vetoed, wrongly. The US doesnt even mess with Libyan oil like that. Thats goes mostly to Europe



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:38 AM
link   
Hate to sound anti american but......
Sanctioning the war would mean direct UN support to the states and so it would lose the support of the other member. The UN would definitely not want this to happen .So the 'act' of backing Isarel was staged.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by dec23
Hate to sound anti american but......
Sanctioning the war would mean direct UN support to the states and so it would lose the support of the other member. The UN would definitely not want this to happen .So the 'act' of backing Isarel was staged.




I dont think its anti-american at all but it is flawed. I like the first part of your sentence thats very plausible but the second part is incorrect. You can't use the first part to justify the second part as the Iraq War and the latest Israel sanctions have nothing to do with each other. In addition the UN didnt back them at all they sanctioned them. The United States backed Israel by veto and that is not staged backing either.

Maybe your saying the UN only sanctioned Israel because they knew the US would veto it anyway. But even then its speculation



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 10:00 AM
link   
It is true that if US or western powers (TPTB) go into Libya, it will only be for the oil.

But unfortunately, in today's low manufacturing output and oil requirements, it does not warrant that urgency anymore. Furthermore, mankind already know that oil is often being speculated at, will drop once peace reigns, as it eventually will, and no mother is gonna risk their son blown to bits fighting in another's citizen's war or for corporations oil profits.

Libyan men alone are enough to handle the troops. They are not pushovers when it come to violences, espacially when their own fellow men had been murdered before their eyes. They are probably half crazed with the brutuality by the armed forces and will even use their bare hands to tear them apart, come tanks or missiles.

They are the many, and the armed forces few. Courage is already in them. All it takes is a bit more cunning and ingenuity, and that's something no Arab is born without, considering the fact that they had been great traders since civilisation began.

Success is assured, because total annihilation awaits if the revolution fails. Gaddafi will hang all of them the way Burma's despot Junta murdered thousands of innocent sleeping monks in the middle of night after their recent uprising

Self determination and freedom must come from Libyans alone. It is their own glory to savour in for generations, and to always honour the fallen to remember that freedom did not come free, but at a price, paid by the founding fathers, a debt of honour every Libyan is forsworn to acknowledge. The hour of victory is at hand, and may they not falter.




edit on 25-2-2011 by SeekerofTruth101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2011 @ 03:57 PM
link   
The US will act if they can reasonably believe they can take out Qaddafi or use some special forces operation to remove him possibly even voluntary and or a bombing run if his location can be verified. I am fairly sure they have people in route to take many different optional military options.

I personally do not believe Obama would use any type invasion type force. It would be quick decisive actions. Another option would be to drop in arms to the rebels so they can fight the mercenaries.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 02:41 PM
link   
Some updated information:
14 Reasons For Potential Action From US

#1 “We Can’t Stand Aside And Watch Gaddafi Kill His Own People”
#2 “It Would Just Be A Humanitarian Mission”
#3 “Libya Is Torturing Prisoners“
#4 “The Libyan Rebels Will Not Be Able To Take Down Gaddhafi With Our Help”
#5 “U.S. Interests Are Being Threatened”
#6 “Gaddafi Is Crazy”
#7 “Gaddafi Has Weapons Of Mass Destruction“
#8 “Gaddafi Will Use Chemical Weapons If We Don’t Stop Him”
#9 “Gaddafi Has “1,000 Metric Tons Of Uranium Yellowcake“
#10 “European Energy Companies Are Deeply Invested In Libyan Oil And Gas Fields”
#11 “Millions of Dollars Worth Of Infrastructure Will Be Destroyed If We Don’t Intervene”
#12 “The Crisis In Libya Is Bad For The Global Economy”
#13 “Someone Has To Protect The Oil”
#14 “We Have Got To Go Into Libya To Keep Al-Qaeda From Getting A Foothold”

Haven't we heard this song before? Is this on a card or something, to be applied to any Middle East situation?

Fortunately, so far it appears that the mainstream media propaganda is not working.  A recent Rasmussen poll found that a whopping 67 percent of Americans do not want the U.S. to get more involved in the unrest going on in Arab countries and only 17 percent of Americans do want the U.S. to get more directly involved.
But that doesn’t mean that top politicians in the U.S. and in Europe are not going to continue to try to change our minds.
British Prime Minister David Cameron sure sounds like he is ready to go to war….
“If Col Gaddafi uses military force against his own people, the world cannot stand by.”
On Monday, Hillary Clinton made it clear that the U.S. government considers military action to be very much “on the table”….
“Nothing is off the table so long as the Libyan Government continues to threaten and kill Libyans.”
It is almost as if they want us to believe that their hands are being forced.
Of course nobody in the mainstream media seems to be bringing up the fact that the United States has stood idly by and watched millions and millions of Africans be slaughtered in bloody civil wars and genocides over the past couple of decades.
For decades the U.S. has looked upon the suffering of millions of Africans with indifference but now they are trying to convince us that it is a “moral imperative” that we intervene in the civil war in Libya.
It is funny how things can change when oil is at stake.  Libya is the biggest producer of oil in Africa and that makes it a very important nation to the global elite.

Source

From Another Article:

Also Tuesday, the U.S. ordered two warships and 1200 Marines to the waters off of Libya, but a top Obama administration official stopped short of saying the forces would intervene in the clashes that have consumed the country following anti-Gadhafi protests here in recent weeks.
At a Pentagon briefing, Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced he had ordered to the Mediterranean the USS Ponce and the USS Kearsarge, an amphibious-assault ship that typically carries infantrymen and troop-transport helicopters. Those ships currently have 800 marines, in addition to 400 U.S.-based Marines who will be airlifted to meet the ships. He said the ships would be ready to perform evacuations and humanitarian relief.
Mr. Gates wouldn't specify the other military options he has offered President Barack Obama. But he sounded a note of caution about sending U.S. assets into Libya. "We have to think about the use of the U.S. military in another country in the Middle East," Mr. Gates said. "We are sensitive about all these things."

Source
I think this may be just posturing but who knows, and perhaps it is more for "humanitarian" reasons as mentioned. I do know that I have not heard much from Gadhafi over the years, but he sounds a little nutty and defiant to me. Does that mean we should intervene? Well that is debatable, and the reasons probably vary between securing resources and helping the people. Are we playing police again? Should we be in this particular instance? Does it really matter what we think?
Well, one can certainly say change is happening over there, let's just hope it's for the better.

ETA:


spec
edit on 2-3-2011 by speculativeoptimist because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 04:30 PM
link   
UPDATE:

As if this were a surprise:






Obama: Military action against Libya possible

President says U.S. and NATO allies considering action as Libyan people face "unacceptable" violence

President Barack Obama says the U.S. and its NATO allies are still considering a military response to violence in Libya.

Speaking in the Oval Office, Obama says the U.S. will stand with the Libyan people as they face "unacceptable" violence. He says has authorized millions of dollars in humanitarian aid.

The president sent a strong message to Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, saying he and his supporters will be held responsible for the violence there. Libyan warplanes launched multiple airstrikes Monday on opposition fighters in the second day of a harsh government crackdown to thwart rebels advancing on Gadhafi's stronghold in Tripoli.




new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join