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.

 

Are you for or against the deployment of NATO 'ground' invasion troops in Libya to ouster Gadahfi

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Paulioetc15
 


Reason why I disagree with deployment

The entire thing is yet another capitalist FARSE. What we should REALLY be doing is protesting our various governments involvment in the entire situation like we did before Iraq. This just goes to show that people's motivation, and drive has been killed significantly since 2003.




posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by My.mind.is.mine
 


and how many people protesting in the streets against Libya? Not a lot. It's useless now and most people do it for attention. I'm talking about a military strategic plan for this fall 2011.



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Paulioetc15
 


Best plan I can think of.... FALL BACK, it's POINTLESS. We're paying for this war, if it takes us stopping, then we should stop. Something has to change.



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by My.mind.is.mine
 


Yep when you get involved, too late you are stuck.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 06:30 AM
link   
I fully support the NATO efforts in Libya, at it is NATO is supporting the rebels, as soon as we have conventional troops on the ground I the rebels would be supporting NATO. At the very least appear that the rebel forces are the one’s calling the shots for the Arab Spring to continue to work, that is what is unique about it, it is the people forcing the change not foreign politicians and corporations. Troops on the ground would send the message that the current battlefield that is Libya is no longer being directed by the rebel forces but by American forces. This then just becomes another one of “America’s wars”, another western infidel force meddling in another Islamic nation.

As things stand Gaddahfi’s time in Libya is slowly dwindling, it might not happen tomorrow, next week or next month but Gaddahfi will lose power in Libya as a result of thing combined NATO/Rebel alliance. Troops on the ground would only speed up the inevitable, and at the same time angering many in the Middle East and have an overall negative impact on the Arab Spring.

It is very difficult to judge weather they will deploy ground forces in Libya, with the reduction in troop number in Afghanistan announced by Obama it may be more logistically feasible to send troops into Libya than it would have been otherwise. However at the same time, the west has to think about the past 10 years in Afghanistan and the unpopularity of that war, troops in Libya to over through yet another Islamic leader would only cause concern in the West that they are involved in yet another war in Afghanistan only with a different name and on a different map. There is also concern over other states at risk due to the Arab Spring where it may become absolutely necessary for a force deployment for reasons of national security such as securing oil fields and the extraction of western nationals. The unpredictable nature of the Arab Spring raises other issues, there is no telling if Yemen is going to fall to the forces of AQAP and if that was to happen the west would be forced to intervene with a large military force to prevent Yemen turning into a base for a regrouping Al’Qa’ida. There are other foreseeable crisis’s that could arise from the Arab Spring that would be more deserving of a large scale military invasion over the removal of Gaddafhi, for example the Spring was to spread to Saudi Arabia or Pakistan the west would again have to act.

So on Balance, I do not agree with the deployment of conventional ground forces in Libya.

Isn’t it funny that when the Taliban of Afghanistan fight against their corrupt government and the violent occupation force they are called “terrorists”, yet when it’s in Libya and a group are fighting against their corrupt and a violent military force, we call them “rebels”. How long is it going to take for these “rebels” to turn into tomorrow’s “terrorists”, in other words how long will it take for the “rebels” of Libya to lose favour of the west.

edit on 23-6-2011 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 06:43 AM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


That's the problem with Politicians from the UK, France and the USA. Right now, someone just started a thread about this situation as well. www.abovetopsecret.com...

I have a big legit reason why that NATO efforts in Libya is screwed.




top topics
 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join