Here Come the French!

[Motherland]

Are you suggesting that we should have invaded and forcefully removed him from power?

Not at all... however 'like Reagan did', considering the outcome of the affair, is hardly something I'd want to encourage for the course of action...

I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to hit Gaddafi in an airstrike, however hopefully they won't do it 'like Reagan did', and kill him.

[Rhah]

just throwing this out there, but can we please not get this thread locked? was getting a lot of good info from here...

[Reaper90]

I'm a bit confused.... specifically, from your perspective, what did Reagan do wrong in that situation?

Target Quaddafi's residence?

[Reaper90]

just throwing this out there, but can we please not get this thread locked? was getting a lot of good info from here...

I'd be shocked if there is anything currently being discussed that is "lock" worthy..... with respects to the immediate discussion, we're just discussing history....

[Penguin]

and?


<--- old, and apparently doesn't know what "yoink" means

Yoink: verb, To put a quote in one's signature

-Penguin

[ROX]

"how does one say...........BANSTICK?"


Oh...


and IN

[Rhah]

I'd be shocked if there is anything currently being discussed that is "lock" worthy..... with respects to the immediate discussion, we're just discussing history....

I know, but it can go south quick

[Russian]

Watching dumb heads talk right now.

CNN- "OMFG! There are HEAVY anti-aircraft. They are HEAVY HEAVY! They have Early Warning system! With HUGE multiple anti-aicraft fire. "

In the background one ZU-23 fires into sky.

 

[Motherland]

I'm a bit confused.... specifically, from your perspective, what did Reagan do wrong in that situation?

Target Quaddafi's residence?

Just perhaps it's not quite the best thing to say 'let's do it like last time' when last time was a failure...
But also I couldn't pass up a shot at Reagan, I'm not going to sit and pretend that has nothing to do with it, the discussion is pointless really and it may as well end

[Rhah]

Just perhaps it's not quite the best thing to say 'let's do it like last time' when last time was a failure...
But also I couldn't pass up a shot at Reagan, I'm not going to sit and pretend that has nothing to do with it, the discussion is pointless really and it may as well end

lol tiny type FTW

[Plawranc]

I am very straight forward, you fight a war, or you dont.

its either total victory or non committal.

So, you kill them all, or you have "Rules of Engagement"

speaking of those "ROE" how many brave young Americans have died because of not being able to act on instinct?

My point is you cannot afford these "rules", do you honestly think Quadafi would follow them, I know we will hear the "we wont cause we are better" bull.

The Viet Cong  for example: had no rules, but the US did. Who won? lots of people on this Board have seen that horrible war first hand and have lost friends to the VC, and what about Iraq right now, casualties are mounting, oil prices are skyrocketing, billions of trillions of US dollars gone, for no gain. Why? because we cannot engage the enemy. The only way to win a guerilla OR ideaological (religion or dictatorial) war is to fight it brutally.

Thats reality, those who cannot realize this, are either refusing to look facts in the face, or just idealistic fools.

my 0.2     

oh and IN

[Motherland]

I am very straight forward, you fight a war, or you dont.

its either total victory or non committal.

So, you kill them all, or you have "Rules of Engagement"

speaking of those "ROE" how many brave young Americans have died because of not being able to act on instinct?

oh and IN

First you have to define total victory.
Total victory is protecting civilians, there is no other goal in this (although the overthrow of Gaddaffi will likely result from it).
What do you gain from destroying victory?
Also, there's no ground troops.

[Penguin]

I am very straight forward, you fight a war, or you dont.

its either total victory or non committal.

So, you kill them all, or you have "Rules of Engagement"

speaking of those "ROE" how many brave young Americans have died because of not being able to act on instinct?

oh and IN

You're a f**** up little kid aren't you?

-Penguin

[mbailey]

Amen. Two thumbs up to France for being at the front and having the sack to do the hard work first.  

Anyone who thinks the French have no history of being among the bravest and having fought the hardest in the face of the worst odds has little knowledge of history... don't brand an entire people with the failings of a few in their government and leadership....

Agreed 100%. Always confuses me how people can slam a country that helped us gain our freedom. Do we always agree with them? No, but when it comes down to it I'm damn  proud to have them on our side  
Thoughts and prayers to those brave pilots. Vive la France

[Yossarian]

Watching dumb heads talk right now.

CNN- "OMFG! There are HEAVY anti-aircraft. They are HEAVY HEAVY! They have Early Warning system! With HUGE multiple anti-aicraft fire. "

In the background one ZU-23 fires into sky.

 

Go watch Al Jazeera

I am very straight forward, you fight a war, or you dont.

Fair enough.

speaking of those "ROE" how many brave young Americans have died because of not being able to act on instinct?

And how many innocent Afghanis have been saved by the ROEs?  Nobody's instinct is perfect.

My point is you cannot afford these "rules", do you honestly think Quadafi would follow them, I know we will hear the "we wont cause we are better" bull.

Yeah, you are going to hear the "we won't cause we are better" stuff.

If you don't follow those rules, by default you lower yourself to the level of Gaddafi.  Since the entire point of the war is that Gaddafi isn't following the rules, if you're not going to follow them yourself, you might as well pack up and go home (or just declare war on yourself).

The Viet Cong  for example: had no rules, but the US did. Who won? lots of people on this Board have seen that horrible war first hand and have lost friends to the VC, and what about Iraq right now, casualties are mounting, oil prices are skyrocketing, billions of trillions of US dollars gone, for no gain. Why? because we cannot engage the enemy. The only way to win a guerilla OR ideaological (religion or dictatorial) war is to fight it brutally.

I think you'll find that the Vietcong did have rules.  AFAIK, one of them was that they were nice to the locals, and helped them out.  By doing that they gained the support of the locals, and in turn they gained hiding places, cover, food supplies, etc.  You cannot understate the size of that advantage.

To win an insurgency, you only need to do one basic thing: get the population of the region to like you more than they like the insurgents.  So let's look at two easy ways to get people to like you (or to avoid them disliking you): 1) you help them, 2) you don't kill their family members or friends.

About Iraq: all those things you listed are consequences of having a war there.  I fail to see what the ROE has to do with them.  And I thoroughly disagree with your last comment about guerilla/ideological wars - go read something about counterinsurgency online.

Thats reality, those who cannot realize this, are either refusing to look facts in the face, or just idealistic fools.

I prefer to consider myself a realistic idealist (or an idealistic realist, I haven't worked out which is better yet).

Agreed 100%. Always confuses me how people can slam a country that helped us gain our freedom. Do we always agree with them? No, but when it comes down to it I'm damn  proud to have them on our side 
Thoughts and prayers to those brave pilots. Vive la France
(Image removed from quote.)