Slashdot Mirror


UN Intervention Begins In Libya

maliamnon writes "US, French, and British forces began enforcing a UN resolution (1973/2011) to defend civilians in Libya today. French aircraft are attacking tanks, while the US and possibly UK are supporting the operation with cruise missiles from sea." Update: 03/19 22:34 GMT by T : Adds reader bloggerkg: "More than 110 Tomahawk missiles fired from American and British ships and submarines hit about 20 Libyan air and missile defense targets in western portions of the country, US Vice Adm. William Gortney said at a Pentagon briefing. The US will conduct a damage assessment of the sites, which include SA-5 missiles and communications facilities. A senior US military official, who was not authorized to speak on the record, said the missiles landed near Misrata and Tripoli, the capital and Gadhafi's stronghold."

10 of 688 comments (clear)

  1. Re:What's the goal of it? by preaction · · Score: 5, Informative

    FTFA: "The UN Security Council has passed a resolution authorising "all necessary measures" to protect civilians in Libya from pro-Gaddafi forces."

  2. Bombing for peace... by camcorder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...is like fucking for virginity!

    1. Re:Bombing for peace... by GuldKalle · · Score: 5, Funny

      How else are you gonna make more virgins? :)

      --
      What?
    2. Re:Bombing for peace... by Nidi62 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, because sitting idly by while Gaddafi uses indiscriminate tank and artillery fire as well as air strikes on cities that contain not only rebels but innocent noncombatants such as women and children, detains foreign journalists, and outright lies to the rest of the world(the rebels are all brainwashed by al-Qaeda, and the Libyan government is abiding by the ceasefire) is a significant contribution to peace. To buy peace, you sometimes have to pay in blood.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  3. Re:What's the goal of it? by WilliamTheBat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The mandate for action and the goal seem clear. Clear the way so the Lybians themselves can march into Tripoli. Much better outcome than having US troops on the ground not knowing who to shoot. Added bonus, we -start- to make a clear break from the ruthless dictators we've supported in the name of the cold war and later the phantom menace, er, I mean the war on terror.

  4. Re:A very sad day by Urza9814 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We aren't wanted there? Ask the protesters. They want us there.

    What, we aren't wanted there by the Libyan government? The leader who has said he has no problem killing as many people as it takes to retain control over his country? The government that has been gunning down peaceful protests with machine guns (sure, the protests aren't very peaceful now, but that's why)? The government that was sending fighter jets against chants and flags?

    When innocent people are being murder by the hundreds and thousands for doing nothing more than speaking their minds...we have a responsibility as human beings to take action to help them. I can agree that military action is not always the best choice. If you have some alternative proposal, I may agree with you 100% after hearing it. But at the moment, I see no other option.

    On a related note, it could be said that France wasn't wanted in the American Revolution either. But they got involved. And without their involvement, it is quite likely that the US would not exist as a nation.

  5. Re:The US shouldn't be there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We are effectively playing the role of the French in the American Revolutionary War - keeping the powerful weaponry at bay so that they can liberate themselves. In the Revolutionary War, the French helped keep the British Navy at bay, something we could not do for ourselves. Similarly here we are keeping the planes/armor that the Libyans can't deal with themselves at bay.

  6. Re:And... by PeterBrett · · Score: 5, Informative

    the rest of the UN nations are doing what exactly to support this?

    • UAE: 24 strike aircraft
    • Qatar: 4-6 strike aircraft
    • Spain: two airbases; 4 FA-18s; air refuelling and surveillance assets; submarine and frigate
    • Cheese-eating surrender monkeys: pretty much their entire navy and air force
    • Canada: Lots of air assets (not clear what yet)
    • Italy: several bases including 3 in Sicily

    That's just what I could quickly dredge up from BBC News

  7. Re:The US shouldn't be there by louic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is easy to say that the US should not interfere with other countries, but: "with great power comes great responsibility".

    Like it or not: the US are the world police. They have a big army and lots of fancy military equipment, and most of the time I believe they are really trying to do what is best for everybody, and prevent bloodshed etc. etc. With an army as big as theirs, they have a moral obligation to intervene when people are being killed for no apparent reason (or for "bad" reasons, whatever that means). It is however not so easy to decide when to intervene, because it is often not clear what exactly "good" and "bad" reasons are: wars and international politics are not as straightforward as movies (I wish they were. It would either make the movies more interesting or the politics easier to understand).

    And yes, they will sometimes decide to intervene when it should not have been done. That is always easy to say afterwards. How many times have you made wrong decisions in your personal life (or in your MMORPG if you prefer)? Often enough, I bet. The consequences may be smaller in case of personal decisions, but should that be a reason for a country to sit back and do nothing? No.

  8. Re:A very sad day by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 5, Informative

    You're right... it doesn't work like that... here is how it works:

    Popular uprising begins in a country, popular uprising controls half the country. Dictator starts rolling over the people who have formed their own democratic government, UN drops a no fly zone over dictator and starts bombing the crap out of their military resources so the rebels can continue to free themselves.

    It works a lot better like that than it did the Neo-Con way which wasted over a trillion dollars and over ten thousand lives of US service members.