Mercer: Why did America decide to take action against the Libya government?
Who made the decision to step in to take action against Libya?
Answers and Views:
Answer by JYogi
The UN took action against Libya, the US were just the closest and had the most
forces to act first. The US has been joined by other UN partners and will be handing
over power in the next couple days.
It is VERY important people realize the US did not go into Libya just on their own, they are acting under the request and authority of the UN so if you are unhappy with it complain about the UN this time not the US as they are just doing what all of the other UN countries asked them to.
Answer by Menard KThe WARMONGERS want more MONEY!
War Profiteers want more power to rip-off the public treasury.Answer by mikedelta
the UN did not take action against the libyan government. The UN security council voted to permit action of a coalition consisting of the US, UK, France, UAE, the Arab League and others act to prevent hostilities against the libyan people by the Libyan government forces. There is a great distinction between the UN acting against Libya and permitting action against Libya. That being said, I would ask the same question “Why did America decide to take action?”.
There really doesn’t seem to be a good reason. If its for humanitarian reasons then why are we not also interveening in other places much worse such as darfur, ivory coast or congo? Where is our nation interest?
the un mandate was to provide protection to the libyan people by any means. does this permit going on the offensive against the Libyan government such as bombing government buildings in Tripoli? or providing close air support for advancing rebel forces?
what is the definition of “Libyan People” in the un mandate? notice how they’re not referred to as civilians. Aparrently rebel combatants fall within the definition of “Libyan people” and are to be protected.
Im no fan of Kaddafi. I wish he was taken out by Reagan in 86. That bombing was a response to a bombing in a german nightclub frequented by american servicemen, which in by opinion gave it ligitimacy. This current “kinetic action” seems to be a real debacle in the making for the folowing reasons:
Its an internal conflict in another country where we have no vital national interest.
It can prolong the conflict and there prolong the suffering and death indefinately.
Under the current mandate there is no provision for the removal of Khadaffi, and if he is removed will one of his sons just take over.
As long as this conflict remains, the oil will not flow. which is counter to the interest of the EU and to a lesser degree the rest of the world.
From the US point of view its bad because it puts us in a position where a case can be made among the muslim world that we are at war with muslims, now on three fronts.
American serviceman and material are put in harms way for no apparrent reason.
American prestige is at stake in the event of failure or even a stalemate.
It sets an incredibly bad precident of intervention in areas wherever there is conflict and human suffering, begging the question, “why not Syria, Behrain, Yemen, etc?”
We cant afford it> We borrow 40 cents of every dollar spent. The last thing we should be doing is spending a billion a week for no benifit.
This action seems to be poorly thought out and seems almost like it was concieved out of an emotional response to the situation in Libya. I personally cannot think of one good reason for it but i can find many reasons not to do it. I look forward to an explanation from our president and hope that there is a reason that i dont know of. I wont hold my breath though.
My answer to your question is,…I don’t know.
Answer by AliApparently Muammer Gaddafi killing his own people, but mainly they have gone ther to take hold of the oil obviously, why do America have to stick their noses in all the time, they talk about’killing’, what about the innocent civilians they killed in Afghanistan and Iraq etc, wtf!, why don’t they justify that! before they talk about Libya.
Leave a Reply