I say we pull out of Libya and let the Libyans deal with their own conflict. It's their civil war. It seems like that the U.S just followed their European buddies into a bar fight between a a low budget army and some rag tag misguided rebel group.
This was originally supposed to be a 30 day intervention.....
but hey, if we support the people of Libya, why not support the people of Syria? (Oh wait, we can get nothing of value there....)
I say we pull out of Libya too. I don't see a need to be there. It's cool we defended them and dropped a few bombs but that should have been it... a few bombs.
Eh, we should, but it seems this has been the "American Way" for a while now. Ignore countries that have genocides, go to ones with civil wars and help a side, but don't fix that much. I'm not sure whether we should pull out or not. It wouldn't satisfy our capitalist demands to leave.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
We should have never intervened. If the UN wanted to, fine- but no American soldiers should have been pledged. It was a waste of money not to mention unconstitutional.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZuFi
Well, I think we want to start a domino effect for all of our suppliers of oil. I'm not the best with this stuff.
...that's ridiculous. If we want low oil prices, we satisfy OPEC by keeping their rulers in place. The ones they like, anyways.
We should have never intervened. If the UN wanted to, fine- but no American soldiers should have been pledged. It was a waste of money not to mention unconstitutional.
The U.N. did... A U.N. resolution was passed to stop Libya from murdering many of its own innocent civilians.
The intervention was probably started for the wrong reasons, but the result is that many innocent lives have been saved, which is what matters.
Are you really putting a small amount of your money above the lives of many innocent people?
Are you really putting a small amount of your money above the lives of many innocent people?
From a Utilitarian standpoint, yes. Those people don't contribute to our society, and citizens have been known to show aggression towards Americans (like all the reporters which were attacked.) Which causes us even more money.
From a moral standpoint, no, you can't put a price on a life.
My standpoint, yes, (see Utilitarian standpoint). We are clearly not wanted there.
From a Utilitarian standpoint, yes. Those people don't contribute to our society, and citizens have been known to show aggression towards Americans (like all the reporters which were attacked.) Which causes us even more money.
From a moral standpoint, no, you can't put a price on a life.
My standpoint, yes, (see Utilitarian standpoint). We are clearly not wanted there.
Yeah, some show aggression, so throw them all in the same pot, right? If some of them are a certain way, the rest of them must be the same way.
Right, I forgot for a moment that money is more valuable than morality.
I guess you missed the pleas for help from the innocent cilvilians that were being murdered by their government as well as the rebels that have been trying to overthrow their oppressive government.
Do you agree with the intervention in Libya?
