carlfense Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 But, what is different between what McCain is proposing and what Obama did with Libya? Wait . . . what are the similarities between US involvement in Libya and what McCain is proposing? Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted May 31, 2013 Author Share Posted May 31, 2013 I honestly don't know. I haven't read much on what McCain is doing or proposing. I get it that he wants us to support the rebels. Well....in Libya, we supported the rebels in their civil war. So....just trying to learn. PS....again, I am not for getting involved in Syria. Link to comment
carlfense Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 I honestly don't know. I haven't read much on what McCain is doing or proposing. I get it that he wants us to support the rebels. Well....in Libya, we supported the rebels in their civil war. So....just trying to learn. PS....again, I am not for getting involved in Syria. McCain wants to arm the rebels despite acknowledging that approximately 7,000 of those rebels are al-Queda fighters. We didn't (as far as I know) arm the rebels in Libya. We just supported them by conducting airstrikes on the Gadafi forces. Those seem quite different to me. What do you think? Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted May 31, 2013 Author Share Posted May 31, 2013 So, in Syria we would be helping Al-queda and in Libya we helped rebels that had many members of Muslim Brotherhood involved. When the elections happened, it was very close to them taking power. They didn't have the success they wanted but they are still a very powerful force in that country. So, in both cases, we have helped or would help people gain influence that I'm not real comfortable with. However, we would be getting rid of two pathetic human beings as leaders. As far as arming the rebels or bombing people for them...I don't see a big difference. Link to comment
carlfense Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 As far as arming the rebels or bombing people for them...I don't see a big difference. You can't be serious. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted May 31, 2013 Author Share Posted May 31, 2013 As far as arming the rebels or bombing people for them...I don't see a big difference. You can't be serious. Very serious. Don't like either one. Link to comment
walksalone Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 How about we just sit back, let them blow each other to bits until the U.N. decides to get off their asses and do something. Then we sit back, and watch them through away billinons of dollars and send some Pakinstani's in a APC to make things better.. Link to comment
strigori Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 How about we just sit back, let them blow each other to bits until the U.N. decides to get off their asses and do something. Then we sit back, and watch them through away billinons of dollars and send some Pakinstani's in a APC to make things better.. Sounds like a good idea to me. A good rule we should follow is Stay the F*** Out of Other Nation's Civil Wars. 1 Link to comment
walksalone Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 How about we just sit back, let them blow each other to bits until the U.N. decides to get off their asses and do something. Then we sit back, and watch them through away billinons of dollars and send some Pakinstani's in a APC to make things better.. Sounds like a good idea to me. A good rule we should follow is Stay the F*** Out of Other Nation's Civil Wars. Absof*ckinlutely Link to comment
MLB 51 Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 How about we just sit back, let them blow each other to bits until the U.N. decides to get off their asses and do something. Then we sit back, and watch them through away billinons of dollars and send some Pakinstani's in a APC to make things better.. Sounds like a good idea to me. A good rule we should follow is Stay the F*** Out of Other Nation's Civil Wars. Absof*ckinlutely Sadly, this won't be the case. If Russia does in fact send those missiles to Syria, we will get involved. Israel has said they would conduct airstrikes to stop these missiles from ending up in the wrong hands. We will back Israels play on this. It's just a wait and see game at this point. Link to comment
carlfense Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 As far as arming the rebels or bombing people for them...I don't see a big difference. You can't be serious. Very serious. Don't like either one. Just because you don't like either doesn't mean that there isn't a big difference between the two. Link to comment
walksalone Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 As far as arming the rebels or bombing people for them...I don't see a big difference. You can't be serious. Very serious. Don't like either one. Just because you don't like either doesn't mean that there isn't a big difference between the two. The only real difference in my estimation is the level of douchebaggery on each side... Link to comment
carlfense Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 The only real difference in my estimation is the level of douchebaggery on each side... I disagree. Giving weapons directly to al-Queda is quite different from performing airstrikes on Gadafi's regime. I'd imagine that the Muslim Brotherhood won't be able to use those airstrikes against us . . . Link to comment
MLB 51 Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 The only real difference in my estimation is the level of douchebaggery on each side... I disagree. Giving weapons directly to al-Queda is quite different from performing airstrikes on Gadafi's regime. I'd imagine that the Muslim Brotherhood won't be able to use those airstrikes against us . . . I agree with Carl. The last thing we should be doing is arming al-Queda. The bold part says it all. Link to comment
walksalone Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 The only real difference in my estimation is the level of douchebaggery on each side... I disagree. Giving weapons directly to al-Queda is quite different from performing airstrikes on Gadafi's regime. I'd imagine that the Muslim Brotherhood won't be able to use those airstrikes against us . . . I agree with Carl. The last thing we should be doing is arming al-Queda. The bold part says it all. We shouldn't be arming anybody in that part of the planet, is what I'm talking about... Link to comment
Recommended Posts