Stay Beautiful Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 Just what the f#ck is happening with our wars abroad? Watching News at Ten and the RAF have stated that they are f#cked if our campaign in Libya continues. War is getting out of hand, if it was ever in hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecrashingisles Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Dear Mr President, won't you lend me a future? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cashinmattress Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Just what the f#ck is happening with our wars abroad? FYI, the conflict in Libya is not a war. This is and American led invasion to support their global energy hegemony. Conflict is big money for the private sector. Getting it yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stay Beautiful Posted June 21, 2011 Author Share Posted June 21, 2011 FYI, the conflict in Libya is not a war. This is and American led invasion to support their global energy hegemony. Conflict is big money for the private sector. Getting it yet? My op was rhetorical, been getting it for quite a while now. Thanks for the reply though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riedquat Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Just what the f#ck is happening with our wars abroad? Watching News at Ten and the RAF have stated that they are f#cked if our campaign in Libya continues. War is getting out of hand, if it was ever in hand. It's not war getting out of hand, it's the politicians getting out of hand, wanting to add two and two to get five. They could easily make the cuts work if they didn't want to keep dropping bombs on people (and probably letting Argentina steal the Falklands). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichB Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 It's not war getting out of hand, it's the politicians getting out of hand, wanting to add two and two to get five. They could easily make the cuts work if they didn't want to keep dropping bombs on people (and probably letting Argentina steal the Falklands). If they didn't drop them they would no doubt have to pay over the odds to have them decommissioned as end of life ordnace or whatever they call it. Bombs aren't forever - if you don't use them you need to dispose of them eventually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riedquat Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 If they didn't drop them they would no doubt have to pay over the odds to have them decommissioned as end of life ordnace or whatever they call it. Bombs aren't forever - if you don't use them you need to dispose of them eventually. They've got self-disposal built into them Disposing of them would presumably be cheaper than putting them on an expensive plane in order to dispose of them on Tripoli. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichB Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 They've got self-disposal built into them Disposing of them would presumably be cheaper than putting them on an expensive plane in order to dispose of them on Tripoli. What would the planes be doing otherwise? Oh yes, flying about doing training missions. May as well up the ante and get some more realistic training done... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riedquat Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 What would the planes be doing otherwise? Oh yes, flying about doing training missions. May as well up the ante and get some more realistic training done... But the difference there is that you need enough resources to do the job if you're out on a real mission. Training missions can be at whatever level you feel like, and you simply don't get involved in any real situations that are beyond your ability to handle. The real mission gets through more consumables too. Once you've dropped your bombs for real you need to go and buy some more if you want to carry on. The final amount you've got to dispose of when they get too old may be the same but you've used up far more in the meantime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichB Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 The real mission gets through more consumables too. Once you've dropped your bombs for real you need to go and buy some more if you want to carry on. The final amount you've got to dispose of when they get too old may be the same but you've used up far more in the meantime. Well, if you bought 10 year bombs, and you are now in year 9, it probably makes sense to drop them on someone, then buy some new ones that have a 10 year life. Obviously the goal is to find someone you can drop more than one set on so that technological advances can be field tested, and we managed to get 20 years of bomb testing sorted on Iraq. Handy that Libya came up just as Iraq stopped being free for this purpose... http://wanderingraven.wordpress.com/2011/04/14/israel-may-sell-battle-tested-drones-to-finland/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
libspero Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 I'm not generally in favour of policing the world (Iraq / Afghanistan).. personally I feel Libya is different. In Libya we are (for once) fighting in a country that actually want us there. In a way it's a shame we don't have enough resources to help the Syrians too.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cashinmattress Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 In Libya we are (for once) fighting in a country that actually want us there. In a way it's a shame we don't have enough resources to help the Syrians too.. Eh? How the hell do you reckon that? Absolutely no African country wants to be invaded by white men, under any circumstances. Especially under the guise of a very disingenuous 'humanitarian' mission. We are destroying civilian infrastructure, pasting targets with depleted uranium ammunition, killing civilians, killing Libyan soldiers, killing 'rebels' and financially supporting a faceless hoarde of paid mercs! Maybe you need to get off the whisky and stay away from television and other MSM, which has obviously dulled your senses. Edit: How terrifying for the citizens of Libya is it to see this terminator-esque western military hardware zooming overhead 24-7? It's about oil, and the denomination of the energy market. Simple. Little brown people don't matter for sh1t, and surely you aren't naive enough to believe otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stay Beautiful Posted June 21, 2011 Author Share Posted June 21, 2011 It's about oil, and the denomination of the energy market. Simple. Hellish hardware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahoo Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 I'm not generally in favour of policing the world (Iraq / Afghanistan).. personally I feel Libya is different. In Libya we are (for once) fighting in a country that actually want us there. In a way it's a shame we don't have enough resources to help the Syrians too.. Are you serious??!!?...or pulling our plonkers? We have done a deal.....'We're gonna go for the oil in Libya.....you can shoot the crap out of your Syrian population and we won't get involved' type of thing. But...you already knew that, and are pulling our plonkers....! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riedquat Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Are you serious??!!?...or pulling our plonkers? We have done a deal.....'We're gonna go for the oil in Libya.....you can shoot the crap out of your Syrian population and we won't get involved' type of thing. But...you already knew that, and are pulling our plonkers....! Weren't we getting oil from Libya anyway? Syria would probably stir up more problems with the rest of the Middle East. Gadaffi doesn't really have any friends anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellerkat Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Weren't we getting oil from Libya anyway? Syria would probably stir up more problems with the rest of the Middle East. Gadaffi doesn't really have any friends anywhere. At least one I can think of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHERWICK Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 At least one I can think of. Ah yes, the Middle East Peace Envoy. What a great job he's doing. Surely he's due some sort of promotion soon for all his hard work bringing war peace into the region? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riedquat Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 At least one I can think of. OK, two people together that no-one would miss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Britney's Piers Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I'm not generally in favour of policing the world (Iraq / Afghanistan).. personally I feel Libya is different. In Libya we are (for once) fighting in a country that actually want us there. In a way it's a shame we don't have enough resources to help the Syrians too.. When our tanks roll in to Tripoli they will welcome us as liberators, with flowers and kisses, just like Baghdad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
libspero Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I'm not going to criticise anyone for being cynical.. there is usually good reason to be. Here is the chain of events as I see it: At the start: Britain has great relationship with Libya (Gaddafi), much to the annoyance of the US. See picture of Tony earlier in thread. We enjoy lucrative oil contracts. Next.. Gaddafi is a bit heavy handed and some citizens start to protest Jan 2011 Linky Feb 2011, Gaddafi responds with increasingly heavy handed attacks to quell the uprising shooting into funerals and then all out war against the protesters. Early March 2011, Libyan rebels beg UN/NATO to impose a no fly zone , British special forces sent in to assist the rebels are ejected by the rebels in fear that the British might still be loyal to Gaddafi. Mid March 2011, William Hague and Hillary Clinton push hard for a no fly zone. 17th March, 2011 Celebrations in Benghazi as UN approve no-fly-zone. From there (3 months later) Gaddafi has been pushed back in to Tripoli and we arrive where we are today. There clearly are oil contracts at stake here.. but we already had those with Gaddafi so we had nothing to gain by inciting a civil war. We are not sending in tanks and standing armies.. the people of Libya are fighting this battle for themselves. Gaddafi is clearly a pretty nasty (or at least desperate) individual, and I really don't think helping depose him is a bad thing for the Libyans. Whether they will thank us for it.. who knows. There is quite a lot on it here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Number79 Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I'm not going to criticise anyone for being cynical.. there is usually good reason to be. Here is the chain of events as I see it: At the start: Britain has great relationship with Libya (Gaddafi), much to the annoyance of the US. See picture of Tony earlier in thread. We enjoy lucrative oil contracts. Next.. Gaddafi is a bit heavy handed and some citizens start to protest Jan 2011 Linky Feb 2011, Gaddafi responds with increasingly heavy handed attacks to quell the uprising shooting into funerals and then all out war against the protesters. Early March 2011, Libyan rebels beg UN/NATO to impose a no fly zone , British special forces sent in to assist the rebels are ejected by the rebels in fear that the British might still be loyal to Gaddafi. Mid March 2011, William Hague and Hillary Clinton push hard for a no fly zone. 17th March, 2011 Celebrations in Benghazi as UN approve no-fly-zone. From there (3 months later) Gaddafi has been pushed back in to Tripoli and we arrive where we are today. There clearly are oil contracts at stake here.. but we already had those with Gaddafi so we had nothing to gain by inciting a civil war. We are not sending in tanks and standing armies.. the people of Libya are fighting this battle for themselves. Gaddafi is clearly a pretty nasty (or at least desperate) individual, and I really don't think helping depose him is a bad thing for the Libyans. Whether they will thank us for it.. who knows. There is quite a lot on it here The key thing that you miss imo was the turning point. Shortly after the uprising began when it looked like the rebels winning was a sure thing we and the french threw our support behind the rebels because we need to be cosy with whoever is in charge of the oil for the sake of BP and Total. When gadaffi started spanking the rebels and they showed themselves to be the bunch of retards that we knew they were gadaffi declared that bp and total were fked, that our oil contracts and interests were over and that from then on he would be selling his oil to china and others. From that point on it became an assassination mission. Gadaffi has to be rubbed out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
libspero Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 The key thing that you miss imo was the turning point. Shortly after the uprising began when it looked like the rebels winning was a sure thing we and the french threw our support behind the rebels because we need to be cosy with whoever is in charge of the oil for the sake of BP and Total. When gadaffi started spanking the rebels and they showed themselves to be the bunch of retards that we knew they were gadaffi declared that bp and total were fked, that our oil contracts and interests were over and that from then on he would be selling his oil to china and others. From that point on it became an assassination mission. Gadaffi has to be rubbed out. I agree with that analysis. When Gaddafi said he would no longer supply oil to the West he signed his own warrant. It was the single biggest mistake he made.. he got cocky. To be fair, Hague was critical of Gaddafi quite early on in the protests.. before it was a done deal and a month before he announced he would no longer trade with us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurt Barlow Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Weren't we getting oil from Libya anyway? Syria would probably stir up more problems with the rest of the Middle East. Gadaffi doesn't really have any friends anywhere. The tribal loyalties cross national boundaries. I work in a department with Saudi's who have relatives in Syria. We go in it will stir up all sorts of sh1t and lets not forget Iran and Iraq have majority Shia populations and close ties with Syria. Anyway Syria has oil but enough to go to war over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Number79 Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 The tribal loyalties cross national boundaries. I work in a department with Saudi's who have relatives in Syria. We go in it will stir up all sorts of sh1t and lets not forget Iran and Iraq have majority Shia populations and close ties with Syria. Anyway Syria has oil but enough to go to war over. Syria dont have enough to go to war and they dont have enough to be interested in. The syrians are on their own unless stories of atrocities and mass graves leak out. And, ask me if I give a fk...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stay Beautiful Posted June 22, 2011 Author Share Posted June 22, 2011 And, ask me if I give a fk...... enough to comment you melt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.