UN Libya decision and it's possible ramifications

[Activi-T]

So after about 2 weeks of seeing how events play out the UN has decided to support measures up to but not including all out invasion.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12781009

While this could potentionally be very good news to rebel forces that were being pushed back in key cities, will this not just draw things out into a more prolonged conflict?

Also will this ultimately lead to similar measures in Bahrain?

------------------------

I personally believe that it will especially after previous statements from Gaddafi and his son about fighting till the end.
As for Bahrain: I'm not entriely sure what will happen as they have the backing of Saudi Arabia a country which has alot of political influence.

I'm interested in what you think about these issues so.

[Wells]

Its a good thing. It gives the rebels a chance to fight on even footing. The UN can't just go in and wipe out the current government if they ever want the new one to have any sense of legitimacy.

[Deleted]

Well, nobody wants to get involved in ground war in lybia, the rebels will have a very hard time as long as the military is backing Al-Gadaffi and there is only so much you can do from air.

[JohnnyTKF]

I'm glad they did it, an invasion would've been really costly, and most countries can't afford it, but a No fly zone and aid for the rebels (I guess it means bombing some Pro Gaddafi positions) should be enough for now. They had to do it, eventually, so I'm happy it happened, and I feel sorry for the people in Bahrain, but I don't know if something similar will happen there.

[tofu_soldier]

what I find interesting is - Russia + China are not voting against the resolution, like what they usually do.
Instead, they chose to be abstain. Thus allowing the resolution to pass.

China + Russia are probably doing so to amuse themselves:-
"The yankees have got their hands on too many pies -- let's see how they pull this one out. Mr. Putin, could you pass me that vodka bottle please ?"
"Certainly Mr. Hu -- could you please pass me that Youtiao (油条) please ?"

It's also interesting to see how many western countries will jump in.

[artemishunter1]

Is it a good idea for u.s. or other western countries to get involved? we are already in a deficit, the rebels won't pay us or give us free oil even if they somehow win. why are we doing this anyway? gaddafi might been a ass hole but he is a u.s. ally on fight on terror even though he sometimes creates it himself, but not directly against us. when the rebel dispose him, who is take over, the oil company? every other leadership is dead, the rebels are only joined for their hatred of gaddafi nothing else.

[Feel The Power]

Is it a good idea for u.s. or other western countries to get involved? we are already in a deficit, the rebels won't pay us or give us free oil even if they somehow win. why are we doing this anyway? gaddafi might been a ass hole but he is a u.s. ally on fight on terror even though he sometimes creates it himself, but not directly against us. when the rebel dispose him, who is take over, the oil company? every other leadership is dead, the rebels are only joined for their hatred of gaddafi nothing else.

As you may have noticed, the UN made this decision, not just the U.S., as the U.S. has not wanted to get directly involved with this alone since the beginning. Libya is part of the UN, and Gaddafi has committed war crimes against his own people...therefore, regardless if he is an "ally" on the war on terror he has broken UN rules. The US does not expect the rebels to pay us anything, since the UN or the US or any country involved is not a mercenary force for hire.
Living in a country ruled by a crazed dictator is not something any of us can understand, therefore I can only imagine that just about any alternative would be better to the Libyan people than having Gaddafi rule. Libya is a country that is made up of many tribes, most likely it will end up being split amongst tribal rule if Gaddafi were to fall. Obviously "the oil company" will not rule, since the oil and everything else is owned by gaddafi.

[Activi-T]

Is it a good idea for u.s. or other western countries to get involved? we are already in a deficit, the rebels won't pay us or give us free oil even if they somehow win. why are we doing this anyway? gaddafi might been a ass hole but he is a u.s. ally on fight on terror even though he sometimes creates it himself, but not directly against us. when the rebel dispose him, who is take over, the oil company? every other leadership is dead, the rebels are only joined for their hatred of gaddafi nothing else.

Well no they won't repay countries that aid them financially but doing things judt for financial benefit isn't always the best way to dictate foreign policy. Sometimes you have to do stuff to improve an area even if they don't thank you for it (even though they have been celebrating hearing the news about UN intervention).

The UK has sold weapons to his regime in the past, which have been used against the rebels (tear gas and anti protesting things like water canons). So we sort of have a moral responsibility toward the rebel forces.

They usually place in an interim government of prominent anti government (gaddafi) politicians/interllectuals as they did with Egypt until free elections can be held. Either that or we can install another dictator we like :P

[Bikni]

"Here you go free weapons, consider a loan, pay us back later with natural resources contracts."

Military contractors sell their weapons legally, oil prices will keep being speculated to higher prices, all legal and in paper, whats not to like?!

Ha wait i have to pay for petrol, food and bank loans... and i dont own any interests in these sort of companies, hummm am i being stitched up again by the UN?!

[shiftbull]

So... U.S. give the ok to Saudi Arabia move troops to Bahrain, and this "democratic killing" happens, only BBC reporting? So, are UN gonna take some measure against Saudi Arabia and Bahrain.... ??

[Wells]

what I find interesting is - Russia + China are not voting against the resolution, like what they usually do.
Instead, they chose to be abstain. Thus allowing the resolution to pass.

China + Russia are probably doing so to amuse themselves:-
"The yankees have got their hands on too many pies -- let's see how they pull this one out. Mr. Putin, could you pass me that vodka bottle please ?"
"Certainly Mr. Hu -- could you please pass me that Youtiao (油条) please ?"

It's also interesting to see how many western countries will jump in.

Or....China and Russia do a lot of business in the middle east and don't want to risk stepping on too many toes

[tofu_soldier]

Or....China and Russia do a lot of business in the middle east and don't want to risk stepping on too many toes

If that's the case, they can just vetto against that resolution.

[artemishunter1]

As you may have noticed, the UN made this decision, not just the U.S., as the U.S. has not wanted to get directly involved with this alone since the beginning. Libya is part of the UN, and Gaddafi has committed war crimes against his own people...therefore, regardless if he is an "ally" on the war on terror he has broken UN rules. The US does not expect the rebels to pay us anything, since the UN or the US or any country involved is not a mercenary force for hire.
Living in a country ruled by a crazed dictator is not something any of us can understand, therefore I can only imagine that just about any alternative would be better to the Libyan people than having Gaddafi rule. Libya is a country that is made up of many tribes, most likely it will end up being split amongst tribal rule if Gaddafi were to fall. Obviously "the oil company" will not rule, since the oil and everything else is owned by gaddafi.

I think libiya has some minister or a gov't buracracy controlling oil business under gadaffi. so, after gaddafi gets disposed off that minister or the buracratic agency will be only one with enough stable power to rule

[Wells]

If that's the case, they can just vetto against that resolution.

You must have missed the part about not wanting to step on toes. This way they don't have to support action against a middle eastern government, and they don't have to support a guy the rest of the world hates.

[artemishunter1]

Well no they won't repay countries that aid them financially but doing things judt for financial benefit isn't always the best way to dictate foreign policy. Sometimes you have to do stuff to improve an area even if they don't thank you for it (even though they have been celebrating hearing the news about UN intervention).

The UK has sold weapons to his regime in the past, which have been used against the rebels (tear gas and anti protesting things like water canons). So we sort of have a moral responsibility toward the rebel forces.

They usually place in an interim government of prominent anti government (gaddafi) politicians/interllectuals as they did with Egypt until free elections can be held. Either that or we can install another dictator we like :P

Half the world's citizens and leaders replace "N" from UN to "s". Even if it is not our decision, world will see us interferring especially with people here asking u.s. to interfere.

---------- Post added 2011-03-17 at 11:51 PM ----------

The UK has sold weapons to his regime in the past, which have been used against the rebels (tear gas and anti protesting things like water canons). So we sort of have a moral responsibility toward the rebel forces.

They usually place in an interim government of prominent anti government (gaddafi) politicians/interllectuals as they did with Egypt until free elections can be held. Either that or we can install another dictator we like :P

Now, we have harsh choice between morality and real politik. i did not look the situation in moral but how its going to affect us in the long run. U.s. needs reliable stable base in middle east. gaddafi provided that anchor. but without him our already existing foriegn policy gets messed up. if he wins, what will we do then, i mean we can not ask his help later with terror stuff, not to mention he would actively fund terriosm attacks against us and its bases in middle east. If the rebels win, what guarentee that they will help us with terror stuff in the region, they might just stay neutral.

[Activi-T]

Half the world's citizens and leaders replace "N" from UN to "s". Even if it is not our decision, world will see us interferring especially with people here asking u.s. to interfere.

The way they got the UN resolution was by finding legal pressident and by getting arab nations actively involved with the process. Also it looks like French and UK forces will be making the initial strikes so if they blame anyone it would be us in the UK or France.

[Wells]

The way they got the UN resolution was by finding legal pressident and by getting arab nations actively involved with the process. Also it looks like French and UK forces will be making the initial strikes so if they blame anyone it would be us in the UK or France.

Thats not how these things go. It gets played as Western Interference. The UN is tightly tied with the US in internal middle eastern politics as well.

[Activi-T]

Thats not how these things go. It gets played as Western Interference. The UN is tightly tied with the US in internal middle eastern politics as well.

Gaddfi probably will attempt to play it off like that but who apart from his supporters and people who already hate the West are going to believe him?

The rebels will be thanking us (West) for getting involved.

I believe the fact that nations have UN backing and support in the area will prevent what you fear about further negative feeling.

[Deleted]

This action is another Afghanistan/Iraq, no fly zone means if it is not followed by Gadaffi, the UN (read USA) will have to bomb key points not to mention the hundred and thousands of AA batteries Libya has acquired which means war in another country. But don't worry Libya's main export is broccoli, so nothing worth fighting to have control of there ....

Will we see this for Bahrain ? are people that dense .... Saudi Arabia are helping Bahrain suppress the people rising up, SA are shower friends with the USA, so don't expect any hard or truthful words against those two countries.

[Countergod]

This action is another Afghanistan/Iraq, no fly zone means if it is not followed by Gadaffi, the UN (read USA) will have to bomb key points not to mention the hundred and thousands of AA batteries Libya has acquired which means war in another country. But don't worry Libya's main export is broccoli, so nothing worth fighting to have control of there ....

Will we see this for Bahrain ? are people that dense .... Saudi Arabia are helping Bahrain suppress the people rising up, SA are shower friends with the USA, so don't expect any hard or truthful words against those two countries.

Actually this is not strictly true. Only if said fighters are able to be seen on Radar would this be the case, as Lybia does not have any counter for stealth fighters. The best they could do then is take the WWII route and grab lots of AA guns and shoot at them (if they even see them, its still before the spring equinox, so its 12 hours of night +) and pray to Allah that they hit something. Their fighters would be completely useless, as US fighters have twice the range, twice the speed and about 30 years of technology upgrades on their side. Thank god Mr. Gates has the F-22 in his arsenal... oh wait...