White House Now Says War in Libya Open Ended

[LuciferSam]

The hypocrisy occurs when someone posits that it makes a difference who is President.

No matter who is President, they dance when their owners pull the strings. The owners say attack Iraq, they do it. The owners say attack Libya, they do that to. Ultimately, the folks with the power (and the money) own the office and pull the strings. That's why "Change you can believe in" turns out to be the S.O.S. As long as this kind of megamoney controls the political process, it won't make a whit of difference which candidate wins.

The same thing to varying degrees applies to the Congress as well.

Exactly. The original poster implied that it made a difference who is president. I'm with you on that.

 

[scooterbug44]

I don't think we should be involved in either, but at least in Libya we were reacting to a volatile situation and NATO was leading the charge to invade, not us.

Frankly, I think our role in Libya should only be to make $$ selling weaponry to our European allies so they can fight and we should focus our efforts/billions on ending our dependence on oil.

 

[30ashopper]

I don't think we should be involved in either, but at least in Libya we were reacting to a volatile situation and NATO was leading the charge to invade, not us.

Frankly, I think our role in Libya should only be to make $$ selling weaponry to our European allies so they can fight and we should focus our efforts/billions on ending our dependence on oil.

If the reasoning for doing this was purely humanitarian, we would also be in about twenty other countries right now, including Syria. Which begs the question, why Libya? Obama hasn't exactly been forthcoming on his reasoning for getting us involved in this particular civil war.

 

[scooterbug44]

My point was that when we invaded Iraq that was not the case.

Definitely agree that we pick and choose regarding involvement for "humanitarian" reasons. Genocide or massive injustice sans oil reserves seems to not require our assistance. :roll:

 

[LuciferSam]

If the reasoning for doing this was purely humanitarian, we would also be in about twenty other countries right now, including Syria. Which begs the question, why Libya? Obama hasn't exactly been forthcoming on his reasoning for getting us involved in this particular civil war.

Perceived chances of success I'm sure is a major factor in these decisions, or at least it should be.

 

[30ashopper]

Perceived chances of success I'm sure is a major factor in these decisions, or at least it should be.

If those chances are high you feel we should feel free to invade unprovoked? Interesting.

 

[LuciferSam]

If those chances are high you feel we should feel free to invade unprovoked? Interesting.

In my opinion, there are so many factors in making such a crucial decision. I would never say any country should invade another country, but I also don't think too many people in the world feel unprovoked by Ghadafi.

I'm also not saying I know for sure this was a good move on our part. I'm saying this is no Iraq, and fortunately, Obama is no Bush.

 

[30ashopper]

In my opinion, there are so many factors in making such a crucial decision. I would never say any country should invade another country, but I also don't think too many people in the world feel unprovoked by Ghadafi.

I'm also not saying I know for sure this was a good move on our part. I'm saying this is no Iraq, and fortunately, Obama is no Bush.

I think it's a fairly easy decision. We shouldn't be in Libya. Hind sight dictates we shouldn't have gone into Iraq. We shouldn't have gone into Kosovo either. Afghanistan is the only war we are involved currently where we were justified, and I think the time table is ticking down on that as most of the bad guys we went in to get have since been vaporized by very large bombs or Marines. We could have also saved some money in that all the people we fought in Iraq would have eventually come to Afghanistan anyway (like flies to flypaper).

I will add on Libya, and this was my view of Iraq as well, now that we are there we damn well better finish what we started.

 

[Andy A]

I have said on many occasions that Iraq was a bad mistake but for the life of me, I cannot understand why some cannot see the parallels so obvious between Iraq and Libya. There is no reason for us to be there, either.

 

[LuciferSam]

I have said on many occasions that Iraq was a bad mistake but for the life of me, I cannot understand why some cannot see the parallels so obvious between Iraq and Libya. There is no reason for us to be there, either.

One obvious difference is that with Libya we responded to a volatile situation. In Iraq we created one.