US Military Action in Libya - Poll

[Exi5tentialist]

Whether the US was right to take military action in Libya is another interesting question. Is it plausible that the 'rebels' would have been routed in Benghazi as the Cameron / Sarkozy axis claimed? Did the US military intervention take the rebellion away from the revolutionary movement in hand it to a pro-US neo-liberal cabal? Was it all justified anyway to kick ass and get rid of Ghadaffi? All these issues and more are wrapped up in the fundamental question, was the US right to take military action in Libya?

[Ian]

Why is this question about the US? Just 'cuz?

[Exi5tentialist]

Why is this question about the US? Just 'cuz?

You think it would have been possible without the US?

[Ian]

Why is this question about the US? Just 'cuz?

You think it would have been possible without the US?

Possible: definitely. Likely to happen without the US: no. Prior to US agreement to get involved, the rest of NATO didn't look like it could organize its own funeral procession.

[Exi5tentialist]

Why is this question about the US? Just 'cuz?

You think it would have been possible without the US?

Possible: definitely. Likely to happen without the US: no. Prior to US agreement to get involved, the rest of NATO didn't look like it could organize its own funeral procession.

There you go then.

[sandinista]

Why is this question about the US? Just 'cuz?

You think it would have been possible without the US?

Most likely...not possible.

[JimC]

CES had a big thread discussion on this when it was happening, and made some very cogent points against US involvement, which may surprise some here...

In some ways, all these debates about whether a variety of military actions in the past were justified are rather sterile and pointless; a little like theologians discussing angels and pin heads... They happened:

"The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it."

People may say they need to be studied and examined to learn from them; sure, but as a useful political analysis, not an after-the fact-thumbs up or thumbs down...

And I take Ian's point that they are all about US military action; rather pointedly one-sided, which is the usual way with leftist or islamic tunnel vision. Only the Great Satan is to be taken to task...

[sandinista]

...which is the usual way with leftist or islamic tunnel vision. Only the Great Satan is to be taken to task...

[JimC]

...which is the usual way with leftist or islamic tunnel vision. Only the Great Satan is to be taken to task...

I can see you are back to your incisive best, producing deeply reasoned, cogent rebuttals of various positions...

[Exi5tentialist]

And I take Ian's point that they are all about US military action; rather pointedly one-sided, which is the usual way with leftist or islamic tunnel vision. Only the Great Satan is to be taken to task...

I'm happy to set up 7 different polls on each of the minor parties' involvement in military in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen and Pakistan but it seems rather pointless if the Great Satan ( ) isn't going to be at the party.

[JimC]

I wish I could link to the thread earlier about this issue. CES had a point of view that essentially questioned the legality of the intervention, both from a US POV and an international law POV...

Pragmatically, though, the question is probably whether the rebels would have had any chance whatsoever without outside military support, whoever it was provided by...

I doubt very much that the rebels feel locked into a pro-western stance by simple gratitude - they can give the bird to the west anytime they like, now...

[Exi5tentialist]

No doubt a pro-western liberal government in Libya is better than what went before, but it is far from clear that the revolution against the former regime would have been unsuccessful without western military intervention, nor that the resulting Libyan government wouldn't have been fundamentally different in character without western air support. To contemplate the possibility that western military intervention might not have been needed to overthrow Gadaffi is to entertain a possibility that undermines the case for it - and obviously, now that Gadaffi's overthrow is sealed, such dangerous ideas cannot be allowed to gain headway, nor will they.

[sandinista]

...which is the usual way with leftist or islamic tunnel vision. Only the Great Satan is to be taken to task...

I can see you are back to your incisive best, producing deeply reasoned, cogent rebuttals of various positions...

no rebuttal is needed for the broken record quoted above.

[JimC]

...which is the usual way with leftist or islamic tunnel vision. Only the Great Satan is to be taken to task...

I can see you are back to your incisive best, producing deeply reasoned, cogent rebuttals of various positions...

no rebuttal is needed for the broken record quoted above.

Oh yes it is. Only US military interventions are to be considered, apparently...

And I am perfectly willing to concede that many of them were at least ill-judged, and in some cases reprehensible...

But your broken record is a monotonous litany of "US wrong, their enemies right, end of fucking story..."

[sandinista]

...which is the usual way with leftist or islamic tunnel vision. Only the Great Satan is to be taken to task...

I can see you are back to your incisive best, producing deeply reasoned, cogent rebuttals of various positions...

no rebuttal is needed for the broken record quoted above.

Oh yes it is. Only US military interventions are to be considered, apparently...

And I am perfectly willing to concede that many of them were at least ill-judged, and in some cases reprehensible...

But your broken record is a monotonous litany of "US wrong, their enemies right, end of fucking story..."

as before...