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.

 

U.K Prime Minister, David Cameron, has not ruled out military action in Libya

page: 1
3
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Funny isn't it that when an Oil producing country turns on its people military action is never ruled out.

Unfortunately, we didn't take the same stance in Zimbabwe. We allowed tyrant Robert Mugabe to slaughter hundreds, if not thousands of politcal opposition supporters. All we did was apply sanctions through a U.N resolution, which has only been supported by Western countries in the main.

I see on another thread that Mugabe has punished his own people for keeping tabs on the ongoing situation in the Middle East and North Africa.

IMO, as a former colony and with so many links to this country, we have let down the majority of the people in Zimbabwe by not taking military action and ousting such a vile human being.




posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Cobaltic1978
 


And what is the UK going to do militarily exacly?

Arent our Armed forces over stretced as it is.

Our Navy,Army,Airforce are being cut to hell. By this Coalition Government.

I would love to know what Military assets Cameron is referring to!

And what right, do we have to stick our noses in other countries business.

And there you go I thought the UK would have learned, from what happenned in Iraq,obviously we have not.


As per usual it is allabout OIL not the ordinary people in Lybia who just want change.
edit on 25-2-2011 by Laurauk because: Adding more context.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
Funny isn't it that when an Oil producing country turns on its people military action is never ruled out.

Unfortunately, we didn't take the same stance in Zimbabwe. We allowed tyrant Robert Mugabe to slaughter hundreds, if not thousands of politcal opposition supporters. All we did was apply sanctions through a U.N resolution, which has only been supported by Western countries in the main.

I see on another thread that Mugabe has punished his own people for keeping tabs on the ongoing situation in the Middle East and North Africa.

IMO, as a former colony and with so many links to this country, we have let down the majority of the people in Zimbabwe by not taking military action and ousting such a vile human being.



Erm I hate to break this to you but Libya is quite a large oil producing country. In fact the UK gets most of it's fuel for cars from Libya & BP recently got a large contract. That is probably more of a reason why they have ruled out military action because they don't want to sour relations with a country that supplies you with a lot of your fuel.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:21 AM
link   
like i said before, thanks in advance for trying to help the people britain/nato/usa, but why hijack the protest? let the libyans overthrow ghadaffi with their blood. thats the libyans glory. let them have it. if you really want to help then send food and medicines to the countries after their revolutions so they can get back on their feet. for now let them die in honor for their country and freedom. dont intervene!!



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Laurauk
 


if we do get involved militarily, then I think it would be more likely to be a minimum force backing up a U.S Invasion. I don't know how many U.S ex-pats there are in Libya, but if they are threatened then the U.S will use this as an excuse and like the lap dogs we are, we will go along with them.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   
I can't see the UK taking military action in Lybia, i'd be suprised if we had any resources left to effectively mount any kind of invasion given that we're still in Afgannistan. Plus i don't see how David Cameron would be able to justify the cost of going to another war given the state of our countries finances and the level of cutbacks going on.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Cobaltic1978
 


Lets hope the UK population, come out more strongly against it then this time, than previously leading up to the Iraq invasion.

I for one am writing to my MP,etting him know My strong opposition to any UK Armed forces becomming invovled in Lybia.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by mclarenmp4
 


Sure, but they have not ruled out the use of military action.

As the previous Administration demonstrated, it is not Human Rights that matter, it's keeping the flow of oil maintained. If they do go in and liberate the people, this will not affect the relationship regarding the oil. In fact, it will probably be used as a bargaining tool with the new government when it comes about.

My main point though was that we totally ignored what was happening in Zimbabwe, no mention of military action at all. The silence regarding this, spoke volumes.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by snoochieboochies
I can't see the UK taking military action in Lybia, i'd be suprised if we had any resources left to effectively mount any kind of invasion given that we're still in Afgannistan. Plus i don't see how David Cameron would be able to justify the cost of going to another war given the state of our countries finances and the level of cutbacks going on.


I'd like to assure you that the UK has the power, recources, and will to go into more than one war in this current time. the UK is capable of single handedly invading and occupying many of the world countries. anyone who disagree is a liar. all the spending cuts are done so that the country can stockpile on resources for the upcoming war. not only that but the UK has always been ready for war, ever since world war 2. the UK is ready to attack and defend, they may not look powerful, but they are.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by RizeorDie
 


Tell that to those whom are loosing thier jobs in the Armed forces right now.

So what your teling me,is that the cut in harriers, mothballing of ships etc are alljust a cover for themstockpilling for future wars yes?



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Laurauk
 


Yes, but I think it would be over too quickly for any real protests to have any effect. But that should not deter people.

As I recall though there was a massive demonstration against the war in Iraq, but these elected officials only ever listen to us every 4/5 years. If it's not election time, then we don't count for anything when they make their decisions.

edit on 18/02/2011 by Cobaltic1978 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:40 AM
link   
And when gas hits $6 - 8 per gallon the citizens of the US and the UK will be begging for military intervention. Whether or not the increase would be justified is another matter and not one for this thread. The fact that should conditions in Libya continue to worsen the above gas prices become a reality -- just or not.

I am not in favor of a military operation occuring in Libya. I also can not afford to pay ridiculous rates for gas, diapers, shoes, etc....all of which get affected when the cost of oil rises. So, I'm a hypocrite like most.

As for the people of Libya and Zimababwe, of course on a human level I feel for them. Not one person should have to live in constant fear of being executed for merely an opinion or gesture. But I am also realistic enough to realize we can not save the world.

It is not our job to "save" the Libyans. Freedoms fought for, as opposed to being handed over, are the most revered. If Libyans really want to live in peace and experience democracy, then they should fight for it and we should cheer them on. But as we saw in Iraq, coming into a country and saying "Here's democracy...now run with it" doesn't work. Their idea of democracy may be far different from ours and who are we to say they are wrong.

I do know this -- as more and more protests pop up, and more regions of the world become unstable, I am certain that even the most modern of societies feel a potential threat from an uprising in their respective countries.

Can you imagine what would happen if protests started in the UK and/or the US on a large scale? Neither country can afford to lose millions and millions of dollars in revenue each day the protests continue. Especially because we are already operating at a deficit. I believe the violence would negligible but the economical impact would be far greater.

I am also certain that a sure fire way to start protests is to hit people with ridiculous rates at the pump. Gas is a very unifying flash point because the majority of people in this country -- democrats, republicans, black, white, hispanic, etc., can not function without it. One side will be clamoring "attack Libya and free the oil" while the other will be tauting clean energy alternatives and yet another may be shouting "drill, baby drill". It matters not if they are divided by their chosen course of action if they are united by the common cause of "anything but this".



edit on 25-2-2011 by lpowell0627 because: spelling



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Cobaltic1978
 


Very true, on supposes, like everything else in this country the UK that is. We stick our noses into other countries business,when it has nothing to do with us. A Warring Nation, that is an understatement!



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Enough with the testosterone fueled chest thumping for christ sake. Anyway, i hope common sense prevails and we don't go in...the events don't justify military invasion imo. It's akin to people who try to justify the war in Afghanistan because of womens rights. Sit at the table and discuss non violent ways to solve the problem...but that is it. Of course such an overreaction to these events simply means they have ulterior motives and don't give a crap about the Libyans...which shouldn't surprise most people on ATS.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by lpowell0627
 


So unless it has a direct impact on you, then sorry the rest of the world will have to fend for itself. But, if it effects the price of Gas, my God, no way, let's get in there and sort it out.

I will not condone military action against any country, unless it was to defend my own country. I was making a comparison between Oil Producing countries and other countries. However, regardless of how much Gas costs, I would much prefer to go to war under Human Rights banner than any other.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 12:16 PM
link   
One thing that really jars me off is when people say stupid things like "Britian has no army left" blah blah blah.... people only believe what they read in the papers which let me tell you, most of is JUNK and twisted lies...

As it stands the British military has got rid of some *junk* and is purchasing new F35's along with the US, Britian is the only level 1 financer of the F35's, US being the main financer, italy is level 2 financer.... etc

Britain is also the 3rd country when it comes to military spending... USA 1, China 2, Britian 3, we also spend a lot on black projects aswell which is technology which the general public dont know about, most of the cutbacks are at whitehall getting rid of backroom staff which are not needed, the papers allways blow it out of proportion and everyone goes around saying britain is weak, we have one of the strongest militarys in the world, along with the US and now possibly China.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
reply to post by lpowell0627
 


So unless it has a direct impact on you, then sorry the rest of the world will have to fend for itself. But, if it effects the price of Gas, my God, no way, let's get in there and sort it out.

I will not condone military action against any country, unless it was to defend my own country. I was making a comparison between Oil Producing countries and other countries. However, regardless of how much Gas costs, I would much prefer to go to war under Human Rights banner than any other.


I guess you decided to edit my response and leave out this part of it:


I oppose military action in Libya.


Perhaps you didn't understand my post?
I would rather it be that than intentionally misstating my position on this subject.
edit on 25-2-2011 by lpowell0627 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by lpowell0627
 


No, I never quoted your previous text, but the main point you were making is that maybe you would be more supportive if it affected your life directly.

You did say we cannot Police the World and I agree with this, but your whole focus seemed to be on the price of Gas. You should try living in the U.K where we have to pay £6.20 per Gallon.

These protetsts are being used as an excuse to push up the price of oil, we can all see that.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
reply to post by lpowell0627
 


No, I never quoted your previous text, but the main point you were making is that maybe you would be more supportive if it affected your life directly.

You did say we cannot Police the World and I agree with this, but your whole focus seemed to be on the price of Gas. You should try living in the U.K where we have to pay £6.20 per Gallon.

These protetsts are being used as an excuse to push up the price of oil, we can all see that.


My whole focus is on the price of gas because that's what this is entire debate is really about....at least as far as our current governments are concerned.

One would have to blind and/or stupid to not notice that this morning (late last night?) they announced that the oil fields were taken over by rebels and suddenly everyone's discussing military action.

I was also bringing up another obvious point -- that by and by the average American (I will not speak about the UK since it is not my country), who probably has no idea what role Libya even plays in our oil consumtion -- will begin complaining and griping when the price of gas spikes. I also pointed out that this may be the spark that lights the fire of spreading protests both here and in the UK. Something both governments are hoping to avoid.

However, no matter what the cost of gas, let me be clear: I do not support military action in Libya or any other country under the guise of "granting" democracy.

To reiterate my earlier post, I believe the people of these countries, Libya included, need to fight this out themselves in order to form the government THEY want, not the government WE want.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by RizeorDie
 


I'm sorry, that could not be more wrong.

We are just about managing to deploy and support 9500 troops in afghanistan with a detachment of tornados as air support. It seems probable the tornados will also be scrapped as the SDSR got the sums wrong. To give an idea of the decline using the RAF as an example

The RAF had 33 fighter squadrons in 1990, 17 in 2003 and just 12 today. By April 2011, that number will shrink to eight squadrons with the retirement of the U.K.‘s Harrier jump jets and the retirement of two Tornado fighter squadrons. Its likely that will shrink to 6 when the other tornados bite the dust.

The navy has had a similar slash and burn. In 1990 three small carriers and small but effective fighters on them. In 2011, none.

Following the SDSR the only conclusion to draw is that we have no intent to project power anywhere else for at least a decade. As our economic power continues to decline the capability lost is probably gone forever.

The public perception of our armed forces strength is based on our historical performance with capabilities that no longer exist.




top topics



 
3
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join