Was the intervention in Libya a....

[dead0man]

The UK Parliament put out a report yesterday...short version or long version.  The short version in full....

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm leaning towards "sh**t show".

[Antonio the Sixth]

It was a sh*tshow, but a sh*tshow is still better than sitting there and doing nothing while a tyrant commits mass-murder.

I supported it at the time and I would support it again.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I supported and still support the UN resolution setting up a no-fly zone to end what was going to be a slaughter in Benghazi (even if they exaggerated the extent of the planned bloodbath). However what we got instead was a war for regime change dedicated to oust Gadaffi with literally no follow through or deeper understanding of Libya, all so that Nicholas Sarkozy could stick a feather in his hat. I wish Obama had listened to his instincts.

[Person Man]

It was a sh*tshow, but a sh*tshow is still better than sitting there and doing nothing while a tyrant commits mass-murder.

I supported it at the time and I would support it again.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I supported and still support the UN resolution setting up a no-fly zone to end what was going to be a slaughter in Benghazi (even if they exaggerated the extent of the planned bloodbath). However what we got instead was a war for regime change dedicated to oust Gadaffi with literally no follow through or deeper understanding of Libya, all so that Nicholas Sarkozy could stick a feather in his hat. I wish Obama had listened to his instincts.

     This seems reasonable. Qadaffi was terrible, but what happened to Libya in the wake of the civil war was a genuine disaster and one that shouldn't have happened. I voted Option 2.

[Blue3]

I supported it then strongly, and would support is strongly again.

It was not another Iraq. We caused the Iraq mess.

Libya was already a mess, caused by Libyans, and the responsibility of Libyans to resolve it. We intervened to end the mad dictator's grip on power, which we did cheaply (only $1b), with no loss of life on our side, and it was over relatively quickly.

Would it have been France's fault if the newly-independent United States had its civil war over slavery a few decades earlier than it ended up being? No. Would that have made France's intervention in the American Revolution a sh**show? No.

[Wolves]

It was a sh*tshow, but a sh*tshow is still better than sitting there and doing nothing while a tyrant commits mass-murder.

I supported it at the time and I would support it again.

Leaks prove Ghadfi was open for elections so the attack was COMPLETELY unneeded and was nothing but a murder of innocent lives.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

It was awfully executed. The coalition exceeded it's "no flying zone" mandates and after Gaddafi was killed they declared mission accomplished and left the whole mess.

I did support some sort of international intervention, but it should've been aimed at separating the two sides and forcing a truce rather than joining one. Given the complexity of Libya regional and tribal loyalties, we'd simplify things by looking at this as a classic "freedom fighters v. bad dictator" situation.

Libya no longer exists as a functioning state and NATO bears a share of responsibility for this. Especially now, with the ISIS filing some of the void.

[Green Line]

It was a mess.  When we act we need to go all in or not act at all, no half measures designed to placate the public. If we were going to get involved in Libya it should have been with massive firepower and troops. We should have gone in and ensured that the government being set up in the aftermath was exactly the government that we wanted and that it would work for us.  Not just drop a few bombs, scatter the army, and leave the rebels to pick up the pieces.

It was a similar situation to Iraq.  We cheaped out in the Iraq War because Rumsfeld wanted the invasion to be as cheap and undisruptive to the public as possible.  We should have gone in with <600,000 troops, enough to actually occupy the entire country and clean up any dissenters.

[White Trash]

Absolute sh*tshow. Neocons gonna Neocon.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Leaks prove Ghadfi was open for elections

[Citation needed]

[ingemann]

I think western action in Libya and Syria send the right message together. If you're a obnoxious ass, while being a mass murdering dictator and terrorist supporter. We willing to to help your people sodomising you with a knife. While if you're able to behave as a civilised human being on the international scene, we're not just going to bomb you, but will try to find a negotiation solution.

[parochial boy]

It was justified yes, and was on balance still the right thing to do; but that doesn't mean it couldn't have been managed better. In practice it was just the west blundering into a situation they didn't properly understand.

On a wider point, more succesful western intervention (UK in Sierra Leone in 1999, France in Mali at the moment) has been based on taking the time to actually understand the local reality.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I must agree with Green Line about half measures. It appears Washington thought they'll sent some planes to support the rebels and once Gaddafi's out of picture everything will be just honky dory.

There's some funny bipolarism regarding American administrations and going to war. At one hard, deeper commitment, especially with a ground troops, is like a taboo (pretty much since Korea), while they think they can do just all right with limited commitment.

[Enduro]

There isn't many modern interventions that ended up being a good idea.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

There isn't many modern interventions that ended up being a good idea.

There isnt any war that ended up being 'all cool baby'.

Well, it's never been 'no fly zone' only, it was 'all measures to protect civilians' France been subtle enough for it.

All the bombing could fall under it since it was destructing the offensive regime means.

Where it went beyond the point it's when France sent all its beautiful weapons to guys in Zintan, which later made the way to Tripoli, but at one point, u can understand they just wanted all of this to end quickly, thus actively helping to oust the bad drama queen of the place.

Politically, was dealt the vest they could I guess, with the way the transitional gvt tried to work since the beginning of the intervention.

Then, u can't create a reality, u deal with what u have, and so went the aftermath.

Strongly supported, and apparently I'm still defending.

On a wider point, more succesful western intervention (UK in Sierra Leone in 1999, France in Mali at the moment) has been based on taking the time to actually understand the local reality.

Hmm, or just based on something still less thought than Lybia since the decision been taken within mins based off an attack possibly leading to a raid toward the capital of the country.

Then yeah, the colonial post colonial habits helped to the 'understanding.

That being said I supported that one too, and would also call it rather successful, yeah.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/war-weary-libyans-miss-life-under-kadhafi-055129690.html?.tsrc=jtc_news_index

I guess we all, whether we supported or opposed the original intervention, can agree it was a botched job.

[dead0man]

I think my favorite part is how similar the excuses made for Libya line up with the excuses made for Iraq....but from the exact opposite sides.  (not that the same mistakes were made in both, clearly there are some key differences....but the excuses often oddly line up)

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Horrible decision.  THANKS OBAMA

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I think my favorite part is how similar the excuses made for Libya line up with the excuses made for Iraq....but from the exact opposite sides.  (not that the same mistakes were made in both, clearly there are some key differences....but the excuses often oddly line up)

Just imagine what if Iraq happened under a Democratic President. We'd have our resident hacks defending it to this day.

[Antonio the Sixth]

The Iraq comparison is utterly ludicrous. If saying that makes me a hack, so be it.