If we attack Libya

Forum Index » Political Discussion
[Post New]03/02/2011 10:14
Anonymous
Will it be quick and dry or long and bloody?
If we choose to attack, what should be our basis? To protect the protesters or to impose democracy?
Also, how much will this cost us?
It is a much prettier area than Iraq, I could see a nice resort there in 15 years.
[Post New]03/02/2011 11:34
Anonymous
We won't get involved in significant combat in Libya. The most we will do is to temporarily invade particular areas to facilitate the evacuation of U.S. citizens, and to suppress the Libyan air force to aid the rebels, which is easily done for us.
[Post New]03/02/2011 14:28
Anonymous
Why should the US Government do anything? The private company should get their employees out at their expense. If you want to US Government doing it, then they should pay for it. (in cash)
[Post New]03/02/2011 22:28
Anonymous
Those who do not know their history are bound to repeat it. US has already bombed it, but under a different president.
War is never cheap, quick and not bloody
[Post New]03/02/2011 22:33
Anonymous
How can we afford a third war? And they want to furlough federal workers...
[Post New]03/02/2011 23:24
Anonymous
We won't since they didn't attack us and Democrats will not allow it unless they were just being anti-American when Bush was in charge.
[Post New]03/02/2011 23:44
Anonymous
Democracy can't be imposed from outside
[Post New]03/03/2011 05:57
Anonymous
Nobody would even be thinking about this if they did not have oil
[Post New]03/03/2011 07:23
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Nobody would even be thinking about this if they did not have oil


Agreed.
[Post New]03/03/2011 09:09
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Nobody would even be thinking about this if they did not have oil


Agreed.


And rightly so. Like it or not, oil is a critical resource that allows advanced economies to function, and there will be a tremendous amount of short-term suffering if supplies drop unexpectedly. And while that will cause Americans a lot of economic pain in the short term, it is *not* the wealthiest nations that will suffer the most.
[Post New]03/03/2011 21:27
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Nobody would even be thinking about this if they did not have oil


Agreed.


And rightly so. Like it or not, oil is a critical resource that allows advanced economies to function, and there will be a tremendous amount of short-term suffering if supplies drop unexpectedly. And while that will cause Americans a lot of economic pain in the short term, it is *not* the wealthiest nations that will suffer the most.

And just think. Now we even have a good explanation.
Therefore we can do what we like. Thank goodness the days of Mr Bush are over. That is the only silver lining.
They most probably would be free if there was no oil. Western nations were happy to keep the dictators in power because that is how they made money
[Post New]03/03/2011 21:55
Anonymous
We are not going to attack Libya, you lunatics.

[Post New]03/04/2011 14:10
Anonymous
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/04/nyregion/04nyc.html

Right. We just allow them to blow up planes.
[Post New]03/29/2011 11:25
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:We are not going to attack Libya, you lunatics.



Lol.
[Post New]03/29/2011 12:35
Anonymous
blood for oil. YES WE CAN!
Forum Index » Political Discussion
Go to: 

Search   Recent Topics   Hottest Topics