Am I alone in thinking that we have no right at all to meddle in another countries affairs?

I think the way we are interfering in Libya is a complete joke.

Why do we think we have right to tell another country how to conduct themselves when ours is as corupt and messed up as the worst of them.

If Gadafi has been seen as a legit ruler by the UN for 40 years and we saw fit to effectivly sell the Lockerby bomber to them for oil, then why now do they all of a sudden think they can help oust him. The rebels are more illegitimate than gadafi, who is to say if the rebels get into power they will start a 'democracy'

I think the ruler of a country has the right to try and fight off 'rebels' without other countries getting involved.

What has been going on in Bahrain is much worse than in Libya.

Quote from: DEViANCE on March 19, 2011, 17:12:06 PM
Am I alone in thinking that we have no right at all to meddle in another countries affairs?

I think the way we are interfering in Libya is a complete joke.

Why do we think we have right to tell another country how to conduct themselves when ours is as corupt and messed up as the worst of them.

If Gadafi has been seen as a legit ruler by the UN for 40 years and we saw fit to effectivly sell the Lockerby bomber to them for oil, then why now do they all of a sudden think they can help oust him. The rebels are more illegitimate than gadafi, who is to say if the rebels get into power they will start a 'democracy'

I think the ruler of a country has the right to try and fight off 'rebels' without other countries getting involved.

What has been going on in Bahrain is much worse than in Libya.

If you have opposition to the current party in power you go out and protest and that has happened in England many times, and the US. People then vote and choose who they want.
You do not see Labour for example rolling out tanks and planes to bomb people to shut up.
Does not matter about anything else, when you do that to stay in power then things need to be done. To the other countries similar? Well the armed forces have backed down or the diplomatic lines at least are still open.

The latest attacks last night/morning/few days Libya are like "Nah, were not doing anything, huh? were attacking? no, were doing what you say" As Reporters and civilians film these.
You would see more youtube videos but the web is pretty much locked down there.

• Bahrain is strange because it's bad but there is again some level of diplomatic communications.
  Syria there is some political communication and things are not on the scale of Libya.
  Sudan - No idea there.

It is good to see the people over in the middle east finally really wanting true change, there are many that finally get it and wanting to do something about it. It could very easily turn into a complete f**k up there mind and with the middle east the main source of oil - not good.

There is nothing diplomatic going on in Bahrain, you protest, you get shot is basically what is happening.

I'm not saying what is happening in Libya is ok but just that we have no right to get involved. Are we going to go and help oust every none elected ruler on the whole planet?

Countries need to be left to develop, once upon atime people in this country would be killed for protesting against the govt/ruler/monarch.

but, if the army started shooting protesters, the raf started bombing out cities and the tanks started to roll in over here..... wouldn't you want another country to step up and help out ?

I'm not sure tbh. If I was part of a rebal group I would rather fight and win or lose on my own.

What is likely to happen in Libya now? are we suppose to keep helping the rebals until Gadafi steps down?

He will never step down for a start, it will be a fight untill he is killed. Then Libya will become another failed forced/artificial democracy like Iraq and Afgan occupided by the UN, no one will any better off but there has been huge blood shed and military cost.

then what? move onto another country that doesnt run itself like we think it should.

We cant even get democracy to work here, so why are we selling it as the perfect soloution to the middle east.

The way I understood it, we aren't helping the rebels. We're helping the civilians that are getting slaughtered/harmed in the process. The no fly zone applies to both sides etc. Kinda like the referee in a boxing match.

Quote from: zpyder on March 19, 2011, 21:06:49 PM
The way I understood it, we aren't helping the rebels. We're helping the civilians that are getting slaughtered/harmed in the process. The no fly zone applies to both sides etc. Kinda like the referee in a boxing match.

the rebels have no planes...

The 'civilians' are pretty much are the rebels and most are armed with AKs and RPGs, I dont think this is a case of gunning down unarmed protestors like it is in Bahrain.

BBC website is reporting UK, French and US subs and planes hitting Gadafi's forces.

This is not going to end well.


edit:
I need to stop posting now, I'm starting to look like I am supporting Gadafi, I'm not I just dont think we/anyone should be interfering.

Quote from: DEViANCE on March 19, 2011, 21:18:28 PM

Quote from: zpyder on March 19, 2011, 21:06:49 PM
The way I understood it, we aren't helping the rebels. We're helping the civilians that are getting slaughtered/harmed in the process. The no fly zone applies to both sides etc. Kinda like the referee in a boxing match.

the rebels have no planes...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Libyan_Air_Force

Quote from: Quixoticish on March 19, 2011, 21:58:34 PM

Quote from: DEViANCE on March 19, 2011, 21:18:28 PM

Quote from: zpyder on March 19, 2011, 21:06:49 PM
The way I understood it, we aren't helping the rebels. We're helping the civilians that are getting slaughtered/harmed in the process. The no fly zone applies to both sides etc. Kinda like the referee in a boxing match.

the rebels have no planes...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Libyan_Air_Force

Fair enough I stand corrected.

Quote from: DEViANCE on March 19, 2011, 22:00:19 PM

Quote from: Quixoticish on March 19, 2011, 21:58:34 PM

Quote from: DEViANCE on March 19, 2011, 21:18:28 PM

Quote from: zpyder on March 19, 2011, 21:06:49 PM
The way I understood it, we aren't helping the rebels. We're helping the civilians that are getting slaughtered/harmed in the process. The no fly zone applies to both sides etc. Kinda like the referee in a boxing match.

the rebels have no planes...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Libyan_Air_Force

Fair enough I stand corrected.

They have been doing a lot through the web, very cordinated  to the government basically blocked net access country wide.

Other countries with issues are not sending tanks and planes and actually using them.

I kind of thought that even if only one side had planes, it would prevent the use of said planes from carpet bombing areas and causing mass civilian casualties. Same would go for artillery, though that's harder to enforce.

This is the same mistake as getting involved in the Balkans.  If we'd kept our noses out of that, it would all have been over in a year or two.  But, no - we dragged out the mysery for, what... 15 years?  Should have just let the Serbs level the place. (And don't tell me the muslims didn't commit atrocities there...).

In Libya, do we really know who will eventually take power?  Will he/they be as 'stable' as Gaddafi?  We should just leave it be - or will we install an 'ally' in the form of a Western puppet?  "Thanks for helping us, here's some cheap oil".

Time will tell...

Quote from: Eagle on March 20, 2011, 01:30:32 AM
This is the same mistake as getting involved in the Balkans.  If we'd kept our noses out of that, it would all have been over in a year or two.  But, no - we dragged out the mysery for, what... 15 years?  Should have just let the Serbs level the place. (And don't tell me the muslims didn't commit atrocities there...).

In Libya, do we really know who will eventually take power?  Will he/they be as 'stable' as Gaddafi?  We should just leave it be - or will we install an 'ally' in the form of a Western puppet?  "Thanks for helping us, here's some cheap oil".

Time will tell...

Getting people to vote and that vote to actually stick will be a start.
US and UK and France have all said they will have NO troops on the ground in Libya, They are strictly taking out military targets and any threat to air patrols to insure the no fly zone and no military forces are attacking civilians.

Strange most thought it was ok to take Saddam because he was a bad guy (but it was the oil that UK and the US wanted) but it is not OK to take Gaddafi (not enough oil?)

Does no-one else feel we have a moral duty to help because we can? The fact that we have the means to help indicates that we should, if we sit back on our laurels as we continue to do with many places and have done in the past with others then we're guilty of turning a blind eye to murder.

Because that's what it is occurring in Libya and a number of other places; using your own military to kill members of the civilian populace for protesting is murder, pure and simple. Like it or not they're human beings exactly the same as we are and my own personal moral imperative indicates that of course we should be helping police the area. I worry deeply about the stuff people are made of if they think any differently to be honest.

I understand that this is all deeply idealistic and its applicability to real world scenarios is sadly not without its problems, but at its core that is the essence of the problem. Off course we should be helping. If you don't think that then you're a heartless, selfish swine. The trick is to carefully consider precisely how we help and more importantly how we can continue to help and police things and encourage the situation to settle down after a stop has been put to the killings and Gaddafi has been tried for war crimes. Sadly the all important "how can we continue to help" part is where we sometimes fall flat on our faces, if we bother to get involved at all.