Libya's Violent Rebellion & other ME revolutions
 

I'm sure you all have watching the historic revolts in the ME, this the lastest wave of revolt in Libya. Gadhafi's has responded violently, but using airplanes, heavy weaponry, and african mercs to attack and kill protesters, in great contrast to what was seen in Tunisia and Egypt.

Should the rest of the world (really US/Europe) intervene to protect the protesters fighting and dying for freedom?

Personally not so hot into putting US troops on the ground (we have enough probs as is, and it's important for these revolutions domestic grassroots efforts) but seems like the west could/should enforce a no-fly zone and ramp up pressure on Libya. Italy is just across the Med, and likely in easy reach of western airbases. Two Libyian jets have already defected to Italy, as well as a number of Libyian diplomats are revolting.

I don't think we should intervene in the affairs of other countries, otoh we should hold to our ideals promoting freedom and democracy across the world, esp in the face of brutal dictators, with a history of terrorism (Lockerbie bombing) and WMD production.

We should be on the right side of history on this, and would seem a failure of western ideals to just stand by and let a murderer continue to plunder and repress his country when the entire region in on the cusp of a historic transformation (into what exactly we shall see.)

US Foreign policy: You're damned if you do and damned if you don't.

If we step and help out either side, everyone will be mad at us for interfering.
If we don't do anything, everyone will be mad we didn't try to save lives.

I think it's time we wash our hands of people who don't have our interests in mind. Every time we intervene in the middle east to try and change the way they work it bites us in the butt. If we have an issue with someone I say we handle militarily if necessary but do it as "get in, get out, and be on our way" type routine.

In most of the cases it seems your are trading AIDS for colon cancer with a dose of herpes in the mix.

The middle east has had issues long before the US existed and will continue to have issues.

As you said, we should be taking more care of our own problems before traipsing off helping (or maybe harming) other countries.

But, if we do get called to go somewhere, I think it should be under these conditions:

1: All other countries under the UN should be required to lend equal support as well. The amount from each country should be defined by the "real" wealth of the country. I get tired of reading how other people hate the US because we always stick our nose in where it doesn't belong (in their opinion). At least if the work is spread around equally, those people can hate everyone equally.

2: If we do get called in, we go in, do what needs to be done, and get the hell out! Things just take wayyyy too long IMO. Personally, if a country needs help for more than, say 5 years, chances are something isn't being done right and staying there longer won't help.

3: Countries we help should return the favor somehow whether it be money, trade, etc. Although this last item could be waived for natural disasters since it's no one's fault.

This is true and can be found in one of the oldest history books....the Bible, Koran, you get the idea.

I really wish we would mind our own business, its costing us too much money, and frankly we cant really afford it. I know it may sound bad to you guys in other countries, but I say USA comes first....in every aspect.

+1 :yes:

Sorry, no aid from us. If they cant work it out themselves, let their dollar tank.
Now if it's in OUR best interest to invest a few 1000lb stealth delivered hay makers :whistle:

But what would happen to the world economy if we do nothing? I for one hope the world economy would tank, just cause I am sick of all the bleeding heart liberals. In fact, lets send them to fight the wars and the rest of us can just watch them fail.

I agree that we need to worry more about america and less about everyone else. I think the world is look at america like a saftey net, and they will keep on doing stuff expecting us to roll in and throw money at them to fix it. We need to stop that. I say we go back to the wars that ended with the winner owning everything the loser had. Land, animals, stuff, people (gonna get in trouble for that!), everything. At least we would have something to show for all of the trouble and money spent...

Really they should just be left to their own. Western ideals only work here, in the west. I cannot imagine the Libyans having anything we need, or that they are buying a ton of stuff from us... Let them go and it will work itself out. Democracy and capitalism is not for everyone, check out Korea...

OIL....:whistle:

The US does need to modify its foreign policy & in the process make some decisions about where it positions itself in a rapidly developing world. The previous administrations self inflicted wounds will take a long time to heal

Australian & the US are allies; we have a long history together & outwardly share a common goal. There is however a sense of dread among average Australians each time the US take on a new 'foe' & call on its allies to support the cause. This support has in some instances been called for in no small part to add credibility to the strategy...like with Iraq. The UN weren't campaigning for that war...a war with an outcome that was predictable & not popular globally that we are all still suffering the outcomes of. Perspective is another issue. If you hear the internal rhetoric often enough maybe you believe the conflict (whatever it may be) is honourable & justified? - I don't know because I don't hear it at the same volume - but different cultures & societies have different priorities. To assume that if another country doesn't share yours then they are unworthy or worse is extremely poor judgment regardless of where you are

The position the US finds itself in (deserved or not) a lot of the time is the global bully...there are a lot of countries who would love to beat up the global bully. Some of these countries may have the interest & the ability in coming years.... it would be prudent for the US to develop a more diplomatic foreign policy. The fortunes of the global economy no longer rely as heavily on the US, there are different drivers now. With all respect the US economy is down the toilet & in recovery mode. Look at China, India etc they heavily influence the global economy & have an increasingly large stake on how consumers like the US are participating

PBO, previous and current administrations have screwed the pooch, Obama has plenty of blame on himself too. Of course he fumbles foreign policy like a retarded squirrel on crack so hey.

As far as the UN is concerned, when they start pulling equal share from all countries and stop getting most of their funding from the US then they can speak, otherwise the UN and all involved can stick it. Besides, the prime real estate they occupy in New York City could be put to better use.

I have lost all tolerance for people continually demanding our help and then telling us how to do it and in the next breath bashing us for all they don't like.

As far as the allies go, they are their own country and can readily say no. If the individuals in said country don't like it, let your government know. I can't recall that the US forced any country into joining with us.

In regards to the middle east, the only interest we have in them is oil, and they act like the only kid at the playground who has a baseball with it. Fine, we can move on and explore here. Will it be tough, yes, but it will be worth it.

Meanwhile we can bring our troops home and let them enforce border security and help deport all the illegal freeloaders sucking cash out of our economy.

It's all win win as far as I am concerned.

I'm not sure who you think is continually demanding US help but this type of statement perpetuates the stereotype that the US would be smart to dissolve

The US can ill afford to be the world's police! Time for "US" to take care of and mind our own business.

Bingo, lots of it. Oil just broke $100 today, first time since the econ crash in 2008. Kadafi hasn't even set the fields on fire yet. I think as much as we'd like it not to be, what goes on in the rest of the world effects us here regardless of what we do (as well those in other countries.)

I guess my opinion comes weighs on two points. Its important for the US to maintain influence and credibility in the world. Benefits politics and business. Esp as an undemocratic China, who freely make resource deals w/ 3rd world dictators, is on the rise and exerting increasing influence in the region. Kadafi had been turning to Russian and Chinese oil firms as of late as political disputes with the Eu and US have gone on (like the Swiss ban on mosque minarets last year.)

The west wants to be on the good side of the people that will rule this region after the revolts end.
I don't think (hope) it will go unforgotten that it was US & western technology (Facebook/twitter/youtube) along with free press that helped end the dicatorships, and nowhere did you see the Chinese govt calling on the dicators to stop killing their people and give them more freedoms.

Also, I think as the region gains more freedom, freer economies, and more prosperity, certain members will calm down and leave us the F alone and stop blaming us for their problems. I prefer a "help them help themselves" approach. Being broke and unemployed makes people pissed off and crazy, no matter where you are.

Time will tell.

Ain't that the damned truth! ;)