[andyt]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

I’m just poor bloody infantry. I support our military in the missions Parliament sends them on. It's the least I can do.

Well then soldier, you should be falling in line on this mission as well. Except it doesn't involve any infantry anyway. Bet the pilots are all gung ho.

[EyeBrock]

andyt andyt:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

I’m just poor bloody infantry. I support our military in the missions Parliament sends them on. It's the least I can do.

Well then soldier, you should be falling in line on this mission as well. Except it doesn't involve any infantry anyway. Bet the pilots are all gung ho.

You pretty much miss the point andy. Are you just looking for a fight?

[andyt]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

andyt andyt:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

I’m just poor bloody infantry. I support our military in the missions Parliament sends them on. It's the least I can do.

Well then soldier, you should be falling in line on this mission as well. Except it doesn't involve any infantry anyway. Bet the pilots are all gung ho.

You pretty much miss the point andy. Are you just looking for a fight?

Easy there, Brock. I don't see how I miss the point. You say you support the military on any mission Parliament sends them on. They sent them to fly over Libya, so presumably you support that as well.

I get the feeling you're as conflicted about this stuff as I am, and so when I try to nail you down you get upset.

[EyeBrock]

I'm not getting upset andy, but if you push, expect to get resistance mate.

There is a huge difference between fulfilling our commitments under Article 6 of the NAT. This is way different. Volunteering to give teeth to that esteemed body, the United Nations, mmmmmmm.

And Parliament hasn't voted on this Libyan deployment so it isn't something that carries the same credibility of the Afghan mission. A mission voted on twice as a confidence-type motion and passed by MP's of all parties.

[Lemmy]

[Thanos]

Posting this as a reminder as to where President Obama stands on this issue, and probably on other similiar issues. Best quote:

$1:

I believe that force can be justified on humanitarian grounds, as it was in the Balkans, or in other places that have been scarred by war. Inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to more costly intervention later. That's why all responsible nations must embrace the role that militaries with a clear mandate can play to keep the peace.

I know that I'm the local apologist for the President around here but this sums up my own viewpoint quite accurately. There is a clear and well-defined place staked out for the responsible use of outside military force that falls in-between the cowardice of inaction and isolationism and far away from full-blown invasion, conquest, and interminable garrisoning. I defintely see this middle ground as being the moral place to stand on with this situation in Libya.

[andyt]

Thanos Thanos:

I know that I'm the local apologist for the President around here but this sums up my own viewpoint quite accurately. There is a clear and well-defined place staked out for the responsible use of outside military force that falls in-between the cowardice of inaction and isolationism and far away from full-blown invasion, conquest, and interminable garrisoning. I defintely see this middle ground as being the moral place to stand on with this situation in Libya.

Good one. We've been so scarred by Iraq and Astan we can't see when there is a time to act, and a proper way to do it.

I'm not as clear cut about the issue as you are, because the West does seem to know how to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory, but I could see Libya working out OK. And there's no moron in the White House this time.

[martin14]

Thanos Thanos:

Posting this as a reminder as to where President Obama stands on this issue, and probably on other similiar issues. Best quote:

$1:

I believe that force can be justified on humanitarian grounds, as it was in the Balkans, or in other places that have been scarred by war. Inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to more costly intervention later. That's why all responsible nations must embrace the role that militaries with a clear mandate can play to keep the peace.

I know that I'm the local apologist for the President around here but this sums up my own viewpoint quite accurately. There is a clear and well-defined place staked out for the responsible use of outside military force that falls in-between the cowardice of inaction and isolationism and far away from full-blown invasion, conquest, and interminable garrisoning. I defintely see this middle ground as being the moral place to stand on with this situation in Libya.

Bahrain ?
Yemen ?
Ivory Coast ?
Congo ?
Sudan ?
Iran ?

no middle ground there..

[andyt]

Because we have no clear way of acting there, does that mean we shouldn't act when the way does seem reasonably clear? Try getting involved in Bahrain - where do you think that will lead. Sudan seems to have worked out it's problems on it's own with the division. I believe in part a threat from the west to get involved if the North had not respected the vote was what made it work.

You're making the same sort of argument FOG uses to argue against post legalization. Because it wouldn't magically solve the whole problem, we'd better not do it, even tho the outcome likely would be better than what we're doing now.

[EyeBrock]

So you are all for us using military force in Libya andy? On what grounds is this Canada's mission?

[ShepherdsDog]

He doesn't think that the Libyans were being paid a fair minimum wage.

[bootlegga]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Ok, so why do the people of Libya deserve our intervention but the people of Eygpt, Tunisia, Bahrain, Yemen etc don't?

Why are we going to Libya? We don't get any oil from there, it's not even in the same continent as us and we have few cultural/historical links with Libya.

I can't understand why the French are all over this too. There's a few grudges to be sorted out with Libya, the US and the Brits so them wanting to throw some fun Ghadaffi's way, well I can see their reasoning.

But Libya is still not worth the bones of a single grenadier guard, and I have no clue why we are deploying F18's to this when they haven't even got a bit of Afghan dust in their intakes over the 10 years our army has been in combat there.

It doesn't make any sense.

No doubt.

The only reason an old cynic like me can see us participating is that Harper is still upset we missed all the fun in Iraq.

[andyt]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

So you are all for us using military force in Libya andy? On what grounds is this Canada's mission?

What I said was:

$1:

I'm not as clear cut about the issue as you are, because the West does seem to know how to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory, but I could see Libya working out OK. And there's no moron in the White House this time.

But I know, for you it's all black and white, so I'll guess we'll have to leave it at that. You want to engage someone who does seem unequivocally for it, talk to Thanos.

[EyeBrock]

You are funny andy. I see a pattern in your posts. You will have to find somebody else to amuse you.

[Lemmy]

What an uncanny resemblance.