Get Western military involvement on the ground in Libya , and you'll end up helping islamic radicals in all of Middle East, or even the corrupt regimes in countries like Iran and Saudi.

Libyans can fight and resolve their crisis themselves. 'Quick and easy' western military solutions, seldomly become either quick or easy..

West doesn't care about Libyan people, and certainly doesn't intend to free Libyan people, west wants to free Libyans from their wealth (oil).

Libyans do not want foreign intervention, least of all from the US. Besides that, any intervention on the part of the US will be to support Ghaddafi or install a puppet. Either way it's not good for the freedom of Libyans.

Let them deal with it themselves.

"Get Western military involvement on the ground in Libya , and you'll end up helping islamic radicals in all of Middle East, or even the corrupt regimes in countries like Iran and Saudi."

-Libya isn't in the midst of an islamic revolution. Al Qauida doesn't even exist in Libya.

"West doesn't care about Libyan people, and certainly doesn't intend to free Libyan people, west wants to free Libyans from their wealth (oil)."

-That may be true, but are you saying that no one feels the urge to help a democratic movement?

"Libyans do not want foreign intervention, least of all from the US. Besides that, any intervention on the part of the US will be to support Ghaddafi or install a puppet. Either way it's not good for the freedom of Libyans."

-This isn't exactly true. The U.S. does not want Ghaddafi in power anymore. Also, it's the Ghaddafi gov't that doesn't want the intervention. The rebels however, DO want the foreign intervention.

Have you seen the big signs the rebels are holding up saying "No Western Intervention"? Evidently not.

Anyway, the West wants its grubby hands on Libyan oil. The rebels could have been in government by now if they weren't so hard headed about Gaddafi.

Do. Not. Send. Troops.

Seriously.

This isn't a democratic movement. Look at the flag they're waving. That's the old monarchist flag. They've also been found to be murdering black Africans in Libya. And Al Qaeda most certainly exists in Libya. The LIFG.

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

And I wonder why nobody is talking about intervening in Cote D'Ivoire. Black Africans killing each other is just fine and dandy, I guess.

I'm not talking about a ground intervention. I'm talking about a no fly zone. The rebels have been asking for that for 2 weeks now.

Basically. Western media only pays attention when Western governments do, and that generally only happens if they have a vested interest... like, say, some kind of valuable resource that can be exploited, perhaps?

"And I wonder why nobody is talking about intervening in Cote D'Ivoire. Black Africans killing each other is just fine and dandy, I guess."

Oh come on. It's obviously the oil. However, the U.S. doesn't get any real amount of oil from Libya. I wonder what's got us riled this time?

"I wonder what's got us riled this time? "

I'll tell ya...Israel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrZB-hasXf0&feature=youtu.be

Israel has hired mercenaries to fight the rebels and keep Ghaddafi in power. And the US has lobbied the UN to give them immunity.

Furthermore,

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703580004576180522653787198.html

After weeks of internal debate on how to respond to uprisings in the Arab world, the Obama administration is settling on a Middle East strategy: help keep longtime allies who are willing to reform in power, even if that means the full democratic demands of their newly emboldened citizens might have to wait.

USreal is pathetic.

You hit the nail on the head, StevenC. They don't get any oil from Libya. A client state would change all of that. You don't see us riled up about Bahrain (who has little oil and is a US client state) or anywhere else, do you?

"I'm talking about a no fly zone. The rebels have been asking for that for 2 weeks now."

There's no need for a no fly zone. The west just invented stories about the Libyan air force. This is another Iraq has WMDs, Iraq is invading Saudi Arabia story.

"The U.S. official noted, though, that there had been a noticeable decline in Libyan air attacks on insurgents in recent days. And he said there had been no evidence of any large-scale and indiscriminate bombardment of civilian populations."

http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2011/03/09/1906278/libyan-opposition-calls-for-no.html



http://www.google.com/images?q=libyablogoutsde.jpg&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1024&bih=683

"However, the U.S. doesn't get any real amount of oil from Libya. I wonder what's got us riled this time?"

While Libya doesn't sell oil directly to the U.S., it's important to remember that there is a global market in oil. If Libya's share of the oil supply suddenly went off the market, there would be a contraction in the overall supply and prices would rise worldwide. Countries that rely on Libyan oil would have to meet their needs elsewhere - bidding up prices on other oil supplies.

A successful revolt in Libya would also encourage would-be rebels elsewhere. And revolts in the Arab oil states (like in, say, the world's largest oil producer) could have a serious impact on the lives of everyone in the developed world whether they buy their oil from there or not.

I'm surprised no one detected the sarcasm in my "riled up" statement.

"And revolts in the Arab oil states (like in, say, the world's largest oil producer..."

Yup.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/10/AR2011031003269.html

Once you cross that line of shooting on your own people, you can never go back.

This is erupting into a worldwide revolution and there will be implications for ALL.

"May you live in interesting times..." - Confucius

""I wonder what's got us riled this time? "

I'll tell ya...Israel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrZB-hasXf0&feature=youtu.be

Israel has hired mercenaries to fight the rebels and keep Ghaddafi in power. And the US has lobbied the UN to give them immunity.

Furthermore,

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703580004576180522653787198.html

After weeks of internal debate on how to respond to uprisings in the Arab world, the Obama administration is settling on a Middle East strategy: help keep longtime allies who are willing to reform in power, even if that means the full democratic demands of their newly emboldened citizens might have to wait.

USreal is pathetic. "

only thing pathetic is that you are stupid enough to actually believe this

"only thing pathetic is that you are stupid enough to actually believe this"

hmmm...good argument.

hmm... great argument on your part, citing Iranian TV to implicate Israel in supporting Gaddaffi, something they have no interest in doing

SantaClausowitz, you have some very interesting and intellectual ideas. Please do go on.

"the West wants its grubby hands on Libyan oil."

The west already has its grubby hands on Libyan oil: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cabs/libya/oil.html

If oil were the chief concern it would be in the interests of 'the West' to support Qaddafi and see to it that the boat is not rocked, as they've been doing in Saudi Arabia for 80 years now.

but i guess a zionist or Jew has to be behind every major atrocity in the middle east right? Fucking twit

i have interesting intillectual ideas, but first i feel i have to fight a god damned blood libel.

Sorry for the slight snark, just felt like calling someone stupid without actually backing it up was a bit rude.

IT WAS IRANIAN TV

Haha, yeah, I get that that isn't the most reputable source. Obviously.

I think you have that reversed. American silence on Bahrain is not because they have no oil left, but because they are next to Qatar and Saudi Arabia and Abu Dhabi that have lots of oil. Oil, btw, is a fungible commodity and it does not matter in the least where it actually physically goes. Also, at the moment that the Col. took over, Libya was pumping more oil than Saudi Arabia and production has massively declined pretty much every year he's been in power. It got to be enough of a crisis that he let the US oil companies back in a few years ago to try to increase production. Given Libya's reserves and population they should be Kuwait in terms of living standards. Even as democracies consistently provide the highest living standards, an oppressive authoritarian regimes like Kuwait still provides living standards 4 times those of Libya's current totalitarian regime, starting with similar material. Any alternative regime, even with only minor decreases in aggregate insanity, should be able to generate considerable improvements in social well-being.

As for the Ivory Coast, what is going on now has been building for quite awhile and the Bush Administration did VERY much intervene at the beginning. That was the moment that Charles Taylor was removed from Liberia. His intervention in the Ivory Coast was the last straw that got the US to engineer his removal, and he played a significant role in magnifying the North vs. South conflict in the Ivory Coast. Plus the Ivory Coast has all of the world's chocolate and is in fact quite vital to the global corporate supply chain of advanced capitalism. Also, the US has to consult Nigeria, at the very least, before doing anything policy-wise in the direction of the Ivory Coast. It is my understanding that the former president of Nigeria has been to Abidjan multiple times in the last few months trying to negotiate a graceful exit for the current regime. If and when the US moves in West Africa, it will probably be in the person of Nigeria as a proxy.

To answer the posters question, The United States should not intervene unless the Arab League or African Union, preferably both, specifically ask us to. In any type of intervention, no fly zone, no drive zone, air support, naval support, civilians will die, and bottom line what horse do we have in this race? Let the guys who will later be criticizing us for any misstep ask us to come in, dont let them point their finger and arouse even more world sentiment against the U.S. Don't let this turn into another public relations disaster over some Wilsonian ideals.