• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

UN and NATO to Gaddafi: Operation Odyssey Dawn |OT|

Status
Not open for further replies.

AndyD

aka andydumi
Ignis Fatuus said:
Being atheist I wouldn't really know. I was wondering whether there was any particular significance to Mosques like there is to the Quran versus the Bible.

I think it depends.

Accidental bombing is one thing, but targeting a religious building, particularly one that is old and renowned can be offensive to any religion if it appears specifically targeted.

See damage to European cathedrals in WW2 and huge mosques in Iraq. You try to avoid it but when you bomb from planes, stuff happens.
 

Wazzim

Banned
AndyD said:
I think it depends.

Accidental bombing is one thing, but targeting a religious building, particularly one that is old and renowned can be offensive to any religion if it appears specifically targeted.

See damage to European cathedrals in WW2 and huge mosques in Iraq. You try to avoid it but when you bomb from planes, stuff happens.
We do have the war laws for that sort of stuff, culturally important building should be avoided in combat, let alone bombed. "Stuff happens" is what many military generals say when anything against international laws happens, it's just stupid. Militia near the big church? Too bad, no bombing for you.

Atleast, that's how it should go.
 

AndyD

aka andydumi
Wazzim said:
We do have the war laws for that sort of stuff, culturally important building should be avoided in combat, let alone bombed. "Stuff happens" is what many military generals say when anything against international laws happens, it's just stupid. Militia near the big church? Too bad, no bombing for you.

Atleast, that's how it should go.

True. I was thinking more of massive carpet bombing from the sky... WW2 style. Or fires that spread from bombing nearby and affect these buildings.
 

Xapati

Member
Wazzim said:
We do have the war laws for that sort of stuff, culturally important building should be avoided in combat, let alone bombed. "Stuff happens" is what many military generals say when anything against international laws happens, it's just stupid. Militia near the big church? Too bad, no bombing for you.

Atleast, that's how it should go.

I'm pretty sure that putting troops near culturally important buildings and using them as shields is against the law as well.
 

Wazzim

Banned
Xapati said:
I'm pretty sure that putting troops near culturally important buildings and using them as shields is against the law as well.
It certainly is, they did that in WW2; Many soldiers got in the high towers of cathendrals to look for the enemy. That one reason why many of them got damaged.
But one side doing the wrong thing isn't an excuse to break the laws yourself too.
 

AndyD

aka andydumi
Wazzim said:
It certainly is, they did that in WW2; Many soldiers got in the high towers of cathendrals to look for the enemy. That one reason why many of them got damaged.
But one side doing the wrong thing isn't an excuse to break the laws yourself too.

Does the law maintain the culturally sensitive buildings as protected if actively occupied by the enemy? Not up on my war law.
 

lo escondido

Apartheid is, in fact, not institutional racism
I just saw a video of an attack on Misrata I believe by gaddafi, people just standing around and then a artilery or bomb just comes down right by them. I hate gaddafi so much.

AndyD said:
Does the law maintain the culturally sensitive buildings as protected if actively occupied by the enemy? Not up on my war law.
I do not believe so. I think I read it in the Geneva Conventions somewhere. I'm not 100 percent sure.

I do have this line from the fourth convention about human shields ""the presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations"
 

Joel Was Right

Gold Member
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/22/libya-downed-airmen-rescue?CMP=twt_fd

US forces sent into Libya to rescue two downed American airmen botched the mission by shooting and wounding friendly villagers who had come to help, witnesses have said. Libyans who went to investigate the US warplane's crash site said that a US helicopter had come in with guns firing, creating panic and wounding onlookers, some of whom had to be taken to hospital; one 20-year-old man is expected to have his leg amputated. The villagers said they had been searching for the plane's missing airmen to welcome them and help them.

A member of the Libyan rebel forces at the site of the crash, Omar Sayid, a colonel of the military police, told Channel Four News: "We are disturbed about the shooting, because if they'd given us a chance we would have handed over both pilots. This shooting created panic." The airmen ejected from their F-15E at 10.30am local time on Monday after what the Pentagon described as "equipment malfunction"; it had not been shot down. The airmen's parachutes opened and they landed at separate locations in rebel territory, near Bu Mariem, 24 miles east of Benghazi. One hid in a sheep pen before being found by rebel forces, hugged, given juice and food, and taken to Benghazi. The other was picked up by US marines. Both are back in US hands, with only minor injuries.

One villager who saw the crash, Mahdi Amrani, told AP: "I saw the plane spinning round and round as it came down. It was in flames. They died away, then it burst into flames again." Although the US military refuses to confirm or deny reports of any shooting, villagers told reporters that the American rescuers strafed the field where one airman had landed, and villagers had been injured. Hamid Moussa el-Amruni, whose family owns the farm where the US plane's weapons officer had hid, told AP that he himself had wounds in his leg and back from shrapnel. He was using a crutch, but said he held no grudge, believing the incident to have been an accident. A team of 12 marines was sent to rescue the two aboard two large Osprey helicopters launched from the USS Kearsarge, a large assault ship off Libya.

Channel Four's Lindsey Hilsum spoke to the villagers, and visited Jala hospital in Benghazi where some of the injured were treated. Among them was Hamad Abdul Ati, 43, who had bullet and shrapnel wounds. He said he was puzzled rather than angry, and did not understand why the Americans had been so aggressive in their rescue mission. "We consider that whoever is shot down or a prisoner of war, we should save him and hand him over," he told Hilsum from his hospital bed. "But another plane shot at me and Hamdy, my son. I have shrapnel in my hand."Hospital staff said that Hamdy, aged 20, wa s having an operation to amputate his leg. "Why did this happen? My car is destroyed, my home is damaged. We would have just picked the second pilot up and put him wherever he wanted in a safe place. Even the other one, we had a celebration for him," Abdul Ati said.

Reporters said the villagers had showed no animosity after the incident; instead, they expressed gratitude for the US-led coalition, which they said had saved them from massacre by Gaddafi's forces. The downed plane is the first confirmed loss on the US side. The F-15E Strike Eagle was based at RAF Lakenheath but had been flying out of Aviano airbase in Italy; it was totally destroyed. One board the USS Kearsarge, the commander of the US naval flotilla stationed off Libya did not respond to questions on whether civilians had been shot by US marines. "I have no knowledge of reports," said Rear Admiral Peg Klein. She said that the F-15E pilot had been picked up by one of the Osprey helicopters and brought to the USS Kearsarge. The second member of the F-15E's crew, its weapons officer, was "recovered by the people of Libya and treated with dignity and respect", said Klein. A US officer had earlier said he was now in US hands. Klein declined to give any furtherdetails about the crew, beyond saying: "These jets go several times the speed of sound, they eject and it is fairly traumatic.

"We are solely focused on those two crew members being cared for. It is a thorough process. We want to evaluate them to make sure they are OK." Admiral Samuel Locklear, the US commander co-ordinating coalition operations from aboard USS Mount Whitney in the Mediterranean, declined to deny that the marines had opened fire. He merely said that the rescue had been executed as he would have expected, "given the circumstances"; an investigation was under way.
 

Wazzim

Banned
AndyD said:
Does the law maintain the culturally sensitive buildings as protected if actively occupied by the enemy? Not up on my war law.
I am working on an essay about war law now and unless I missed something, it should still count even if the enemy occupies the building. That would be logical too because you can't bomb a hospital just because some militia are hiding in it, so the same should count in this case too.
 

Zenith

Banned
US RoE really need to be rewritten. They were heavily criticised by British forces in Iraq as being too lax and encouraging a shoot first approach.
 

sangreal

Member
Zenith said:
US RoE really need to be rewritten. They were heavily criticised by British forces in Iraq as being too lax and encouraging a shoot first approach.

US RoE have been widely criticized for being too strict in Afghanistan.
 
Zenith said:
US RoE really need to be rewritten. They were heavily criticised by British forces in Iraq as being too lax and encouraging a shoot first approach.
i suppose they go in very aggressive to avoid that us soldiers fall into gaddafis hands. i think that would be one of the worst case scenarios at the moment.
 

Lost Fragment

Obsessed with 4chan
Roude Leiw said:
i suppose they go in very aggressive to avoid that us soldiers fall into gaddafis hands. i think that would be one of the worst case scenarios at the moment.

I would imagine that turning the people you're trying to help against you is worse than that. Christ. Can't believe shit like this has already gone down.
 

raphier

Banned
The_Squirrel_Menace said:
Bad news indeed...

I knew something was up, reading about that 'chopper strafing the mob.
Like i've said when this conflict began. I knew this would happen eventually. US is careless as result of their doctrines.
That's why I've been against US command of this operation since the beginning.

Also, good luck getting extra help from them with another possible aircraft crash...
 

Joel Was Right

Gold Member
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2011/mar/22/libya-air-strikes-live-updates

Tom Kington, who is on board the USS Kearsarge in the Mediterranean, has filed an update for the Guardian which clarifies the circumstances in which a number of villagers were injured during the extraction of a downed US air crew on Monday night:

A US military spokesman has said that American Harrier jump jets dropped two bombs in Libya on Monday close to where a US pilot parachuted to the ground after his jet suffered a mechanical failure.

Reports from Libya on Tuesday claimed that a US helicopter arriving to rescue the F-15E pilot near Benghazi fired on locals, injuring six.

The spokesman denied those reports, but he later conceded on Tuesday that two Harrier aircraft on the scene had dropped two 500lb laser guided bombs on armoured vehicles seen near the downed pilot.

"We did drop two GPU bombs to defend the pilot," said Captain Richard Ulsh. "There were armoured vehicles in the area, close to him, enough to be a threat."

Ulce said he could not confirm reports that the strike had been called in by the downed pilot.

"I know the vehicles were spotted by the Harrier pilots. They did a show of force, flying very low, but the vehicles continued on their path. The pilots got permission to strike because they believed they were endangering our pilot."

The Harriers flew to the scene from the USS Kearsarge off the Libyan coast. Two Osprey tiltrotor aircraft were also dispatched from the Kearsarge to pick up the pilot and returned him to the vessel where he is now being given medical treatment.

Early reports claimed those helicopters fired on locals, but Ulsh said there had been no gun fire, suggesting the Libyans may have been injured by the bomb blasts.

A second crew member who ejected was rescued by Libyans and later handed over to US officials.

"The two Ospreys went after the pilot because we had a fix on him. We did not have instructions to go after the other crew member," said Ulsh. "It must have been felt he was safe."

The New York Times has more on the controversial circumstances in which the crew of a downed US fighter were extracted from eastern Libya. (See 7.07pm)

It quotes a Marine Corps officer as saying that two Harrier attack jets dropped two 500-pound bombs during the rescue of the pilot on Monday night.

The officer added that the grounded pilot, who was in contact with rescue crews in the air, asked for the bombs to be dropped as a precaution before the crews landed to pick him up.

"My understanding is he asked for the ordnance to be delivered between where he was located and where he saw people coming towards him," the officer said.

He added that the pilot evidently made the request "to keep what he thought was a force closing in on him from closing in on him."
 

mAcOdIn

Member
Lost Fragment said:
I would imagine that turning the people you're trying to help against you is worse than that. Christ. Can't believe shit like this has already gone down.
Help? The US isn't out to help the rebels right now. This is peacekeeping mission, that means killing a few to save a lot and while I disagree with the act of shooting to clear an area before finding out if they're friendly or not you're going to see more innocents killed in airstrikes and the like, this is what the world voted for. When you do a peacekeeping mission you yourself kill who you need to kill and keep the masses from killing each other, you take in their hate and fury.

If they were there to help the rebels they'd take out Gaddafi. They may hope the rebels win but they're not exactly 100% on either side right now although their presence hurts Gadaffi more than the rebels.
 

Lost Fragment

Obsessed with 4chan
mAcOdIn said:
Help? The US isn't out to help the rebels right now. This is peacekeeping mission, that means killing a few to save a lot and while I disagree with the act of shooting to clear an area before finding out if they're friendly or not you're going to see more innocents killed in airstrikes and the like, this is what the world voted for. When you do a peacekeeping mission you yourself kill who you need to kill and keep the masses from killing each other, you take in their hate and fury.

If they were there to help the rebels they'd take out Gaddafi. They may hope the rebels win but they're not exactly 100% on either side right now although their presence hurts Gadaffi more than the rebels.

Not fucking up our relationship with the middle east even more should be a top priority, regardless if we're trying to help the rebels or not.
 

[Nintex]

Member
What I'm more shocked about is that they thought there were 2 hostile vehicles approaching them. They bombed everything with wheels and guns to shit during these last few days, the french even had to return to base because of a lack of targets. Ah well, this shit isn't going to end well anyway you could see that coming from a mile away.
 
oh btw gaddafi gave a short speech on tv today. he claims people all over the world are demonstrating for him and libya. he also said that hell continue his fight against the rebels.

a little bit earlier one of his ministers declared a ceasefire (the third so far?)
 
Roude Leiw said:
oh btw gaddafi gave a short speech on tv today. he claims people all over the world are demonstrating for him and libya.
He said he is laughing at the rockets. Really, that's what he said.
 

Wazzim

Banned
Cmagus said:
this is why the US should have stayed out of this
You already knew it was bad news when they launched more than 100 fucking rockets on the first freaking attack.

Besides, I really question if those US soldiers even know what's going on in the country. They probably even barely know their objectives: "Wait, those muslms were the good guys?! Fuck...well atleast I didn't touch the oil field!"...next time, let Europe handle the fucking job damn it.
 

AndyD

aka andydumi
Wazzim said:
I am working on an essay about war law now and unless I missed something, it should still count even if the enemy occupies the building. That would be logical too because you can't bomb a hospital just because some militia are hiding in it, so the same should count in this case too.

I dont mean a hospital which is probably protected as a red cross type building and it has civilians. I was thinking more along the lines of a culturally significant building (mosque, cathedral, pyramids) that is occupied by combatants but has no civilians or such other side issues.

That would bring us back to the original question of whether targeting/damaging a place of worship is a fair game and culturally sensitive or not.
 
Wow at the obvious schadenfreude at the US rescue. Just waiting in the bushes weren't you?

6 injured versus countless saved...hmm.
 

Swifty

Member
You already knew it was bad news when they launched more than 100 fucking rockets on the first freaking attack.
So how many Tomahawk missiles should have the US fired? I'm really curious what's the baseline criteria for figuring how how many missiles are necessary for suppressing the air defenses of an entire country. You appear to have an accurate picture of how many SAM sites, radar stations, AA batteries, and airfields there are in Libya.
 

Wazzim

Banned
AndyD said:
I dont mean a hospital which is probably protected as a red cross type building and it has civilians. I was thinking more along the lines of a culturally significant building (mosque, cathedral, pyramids) that is occupied by combatants but has no civilians or such other side issues.

That would bring us back to the original question of whether targeting/damaging a place of worship is a fair game and culturally sensitive or not.
Yeah that is what I meant with "in this case". With the info I have, attacking the (as per example) pyramid would not be allowed. A cultural object is a cultural object. So I don't think damaging a cultural important object is fair game.
 
Wazzim said:
You already knew it was bad news when they launched more than 100 fucking rockets on the first freaking attack.

Besides, I really question if those US soldiers even know what's going on in the country. They probably even barely know their objectives: "Wait, those muslms were the good guys?! Fuck...well atleast I didn't touch the oil field!"...next time, let Europe handle the fucking job damn it.

Europe has the capability but not the balls. They are happy to hide behind the US skirts and pretend to be the good white people.
 

SUPREME1

Banned
Fuck off. The UN voted for a coalition to ensure that Gaddafi doesn't continue to slaughter civilians by the masses.

That said, the US is going to do what it needs to do to keep it's own soldiers alive. There was no way to communicate with those armoured vehicles. They kept heading toward the downed pilot, so the US took action to preserve their pilot's life.

It's fucked up, but who ever said war was anything but?


Let the Europeans handle it? They can't even agree on whether it should be NATO in control or not.

Then you have Turkey with the bullshit muslim mindset that if a muslim dies at the hands of the west, regardless of their nationality or reasons, it's an attack on Islam itself. Fuck off. You're either secular or you ain't.

The arab league is even worse. You want to be accepted as a regional force, then do what is needed and make the hard decisions and face the consequences that come with it. Until them you're a joke.

France, lol, France... the little bitchass of Europe. Always wants to be one of the big boys but also never wants to do what is necessary. They want all the benefits but are to fucking pussy to put in the work. What they're doing now reminds me of when they fought the US tooth and nail on Iraq, but then wanted some of the contracts. Fuck you the most France.



The rebels are willing to give up their lives for freedom. I doubt they want the coalition to leave now. They weren't going to make any headway and they know it. That's why they kept pleading for an intervention.
 

Zenith

Banned
Advance_Alarm said:
Europe has the capability but not the balls. They are happy to hide behind the US skirts and pretend to be the good white people.

ImperialConquest said:
France, lol, France... the little bitchass of Europe. Always wants to be one of the big boys but also never wants to do what is necessary. They want all the benefits but are to fucking pussy to put in the work. What they're doing now reminds me of when they fought the US tooth and nail on Iraq, but then wanted some of the contracts. Fuck you the most France.

Jingoism out in full force today. It was France that led the first missions as well.
 
Zenith said:
Jingoism out in full force today. It was France that led the first missions as well.

who's in command? what supercarrier is on station? what command and control ship is on station? sorry i dont keep a white flag in my pocket in case shit gets real
 

Evlar

Banned
Advance_Alarm said:
who's in command? what supercarrier is on station? what command and control ship is on station? sorry i dont keep a white flag in my pocket in case shit gets real
This all seems like another way of asking, "Who are the chumps?" America! Fuck Yeah!
 
Advance_Alarm said:
Europe has the capability but not the balls. They are happy to hide behind the US skirts and pretend to be the good white people.
This is nonsense talk. The French jet pilots flying sorties over Libya right now have the same ball size as rest of their EU and US allies. I hate this type of crap.
 
RustyNails said:
This is nonsense talk. The French jet pilots flying sorties over Libya right now have the same ball size as rest of their EU and US allies. I hate this type of crap.


Hi did you read the thread? I was responding to someone who was blasting the US for "using too many cruise missiles" and thought that the EU should be in command. If the UK or France wanted to be in control of the libya situation they would have but its quicker and easier to let the US do it and be the dark knight. Where did I say French soldiers were cowards? thanks for taking what i say out of context to bash america
 

KRS7

Member
Advance_Alarm said:
Hi did you read the thread? I was responding to someone who was blasting the US for "using too many cruise missiles" and thought that the EU should be in command. If the UK or France wanted to be in control of the libya situation they would have but its quicker and easier to let the US do it and be the dark knight. Where did I say French soldiers were cowards? thanks for taking what i say out of context to bash america

The US is ready and willing to relinquish command to the Europeans. Now the internal European bickering will come to full force. From what I understand, Italy and UK want NATO involvement. France doesn't, and Turkey will object to it. I have to give the US military some props for dealing with Afghanistan, Iraq, AQAP, Somail Pirates, Japanese relief effort, and now Libya. But some people (looking at you raphier, Wazzim, and Cmagus) are complaining that we aren't good enough. I'm sure France or the UK would have dropped candy and flowers on armored vehicles approaching their pilots.
 

Tabris

Member
Advance_Alarm said:
who's in command? what supercarrier is on station? what command and control ship is on station? sorry i dont keep a white flag in my pocket in case shit gets real

Actually France has the only super carrier in this mission, the Charles De Gaule. America has their command and control ship, and has more submarines there, thus why they are operating the first phase which required a highly co-ordinated strike between US and UK forces with cruise missiles.

Nice try though. Research before you spill out retarded comments.

Canada keeping it classy. Canadian pilots abort bombing over risk to civilians and hospital.

I love being Canadian.
 
Tabris said:
Actually France has the only super carrier in this mission, the Charles De Gaule. America has their command and control ship, and has more submarines there, thus why they are operating the first phase which required a highly co-ordinated strike between US and UK forces with cruise missiles.

Nice try though. Research before you spill out retarded comments.
Uh, doesn't the US have the Enterprise there too? Pretty sure it was actually there first. I recall the Charles De Gaulle only left port after the bombing began.
 

Tabris

Member
Ignis Fatuus said:
Uh, doesn't the US have the Enterprise there too? Pretty sure it was there first. I recall the Charles De Gaulle only left port after the bombing began.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12806112 <-- This shows the collation's contributed firepower. America is running all flight operations from bases (as it can having so many in the middle east and europe).

Once again, America is handling the initial operations (outside of France's first involvement pre-collation) due to the need to co-ordinate cruise missile strikes with the UK.
 

Wazzim

Banned
KRS7 said:
The US is ready and willing to relinquish command to the Europeans. Now the internal European bickering will come to full force. From what I understand, Italy and UK want NATO involvement. France doesn't, and Turkey will object to it. I have to give the US military some props for dealing with Afghanistan, Iraq, AQAP, Somail Pirates, Japanese relief effort, and now Libya. But some people (looking at you raphier, Wazzim, and Cmagus) are complaining that we aren't good enough. I'm sure France or the UK would have dropped candy and flowers on armored vehicles approaching their pilots.
No, they would actually know that most of benghazi is in hands of the rebels and that normal civilians shouldn't be a target.
 

Kogepan

Member
ImperialConquest said:
Fuck off. The UN voted for a coalition to ensure that Gaddafi doesn't continue to slaughter civilians by the masses.

That said, the US is going to do what it needs to do to keep it's own soldiers alive. There was no way to communicate with those armoured vehicles. They kept heading toward the downed pilot, so the US took action to preserve their pilot's life.

It's fucked up, but who ever said war was anything but?


Let the Europeans handle it? They can't even agree on whether it should be NATO in control or not.

Then you have Turkey with the bullshit muslim mindset that if a muslim dies at the hands of the west, regardless of their nationality or reasons, it's an attack on Islam itself. Fuck off. You're either secular or you ain't.

The arab league is even worse. You want to be accepted as a regional force, then do what is needed and make the hard decisions and face the consequences that come with it. Until them you're a joke.

France, lol, France... the little bitchass of Europe. Always wants to be one of the big boys but also never wants to do what is necessary. They want all the benefits but are to fucking pussy to put in the work. What they're doing now reminds me of when they fought the US tooth and nail on Iraq, but then wanted some of the contracts. Fuck you the most France.



The rebels are willing to give up their lives for freedom. I doubt they want the coalition to leave now. They weren't going to make any headway and they know it. That's why they kept pleading for an intervention.

AMERICA FCK YEH!!!!!!
 

Mael

Member
ImperialConquest said:
Fuck off. The UN voted for a coalition to ensure that Gaddafi doesn't continue to slaughter civilians by the masses.

That said, the US is going to do what it needs to do to keep it's own soldiers alive. There was no way to communicate with those armoured vehicles. They kept heading toward the downed pilot, so the US took action to preserve their pilot's life.

It's fucked up, but who ever said war was anything but?


Let the Europeans handle it? They can't even agree on whether it should be NATO in control or not.

Then you have Turkey with the bullshit muslim mindset that if a muslim dies at the hands of the west, regardless of their nationality or reasons, it's an attack on Islam itself. Fuck off. You're either secular or you ain't.

The arab league is even worse. You want to be accepted as a regional force, then do what is needed and make the hard decisions and face the consequences that come with it. Until them you're a joke.

France, lol, France... the little bitchass of Europe. Always wants to be one of the big boys but also never wants to do what is necessary. They want all the benefits but are to fucking pussy to put in the work. What they're doing now reminds me of when they fought the US tooth and nail on Iraq, but then wanted some of the contracts. Fuck you the most France.



The rebels are willing to give up their lives for freedom. I doubt they want the coalition to leave now. They weren't going to make any headway and they know it. That's why they kept pleading for an intervention.

I wasn't aware that people this stupid actually still existed....
I mean this is the single most monochrome type of speach I've had the pleasure of reading in years.
There's basically everything from the 'They don't care about freedom, only money' to the 'we're the only one who can do the right thing'.
I mean there's only 1 thing missing : a freaking 1800x1200 gif of the american flag waving for this post to be complete.
8/10
 
I wish gaddafi would make good on his threat and give China and India exclusive oil and natural gas contracts. That would end this stupid war in a second.
 

Mael

Member
ukresistance said:
I wish gaddafi would make good on his threat and give China and India exclusive oil and natural gas contracts. That would end this stupid war in a second.

So....basically nobody should have come to Lybia and we should have given free reign to Gaddafi in killing his own population?
You could then come into the thread saying how the western world is full of shit doing nothing, got it.
 

goomba

Banned
Mael said:
So....basically nobody should have come to Lybia and we should have given free reign to Gaddafi in killing his own population?
You could then come into the thread saying how the western world is full of shit doing nothing, got it.

When was the last time anyone complained that america hadn't attacked someone ?

?
 

Red UFO

Member
ImperialConquest said:
Fuck off. The UN voted for a coalition to ensure that Gaddafi doesn't continue to slaughter civilians by the masses.

That said, the US is going to do what it needs to do to keep it's own soldiers alive. There was no way to communicate with those armoured vehicles. They kept heading toward the downed pilot, so the US took action to preserve their pilot's life.

It's fucked up, but who ever said war was anything but?


Let the Europeans handle it? They can't even agree on whether it should be NATO in control or not.

Then you have Turkey with the bullshit muslim mindset that if a muslim dies at the hands of the west, regardless of their nationality or reasons, it's an attack on Islam itself. Fuck off. You're either secular or you ain't.

The arab league is even worse. You want to be accepted as a regional force, then do what is needed and make the hard decisions and face the consequences that come with it. Until them you're a joke.

France, lol, France... the little bitchass of Europe. Always wants to be one of the big boys but also never wants to do what is necessary. They want all the benefits but are to fucking pussy to put in the work. What they're doing now reminds me of when they fought the US tooth and nail on Iraq, but then wanted some of the contracts. Fuck you the most France.



The rebels are willing to give up their lives for freedom. I doubt they want the coalition to leave now. They weren't going to make any headway and they know it. That's why they kept pleading for an intervention.

ImperialConquest
Wishes he were a penetrator
(Today, 12:02 AM)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom