Is it a good idea to start war with Libya?

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
Is it a good idea to start war with Libya?
Sat, 03-19-2011 - 4:11pm

I know many weren't fans of the war in Iraq, many aren't fans of the war in Afghanistan. I'm wondering how many support the war we seem to be getting into with Libya?

U.S. Tomahawk Cruise Missiles Hit Targets in Libya

U.S., Allies Begin Action to Enforce U.N. Resolution Against Moammar Gadhafi

U.S. military officials have confirmed the first American tomahawk cruise missiles have been fired at targets inside Libya from ships in the Mediterranean Sea.

The move is the first direct U.S. involvement in the international operation mobilizing to stop Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's attacks on opposition strongholds and enforce a U.N.-backed no-fly zone.

Pentagon officials said there were 11 U.S. ships stationed in the Mediterranean Sea, including three submarines and two destroyers capable of firing cruise missiles, and several amphibious ships and supply ships.

The first strikes in what is being called "Operation Odyssey Dawn" were expected to target air defense missile sites around Tripoli, Misratah, and Surt, but no areas east of that or near Benghazi, officials said.

President Obama told members of Congress Friday that he had not yet authorized the use of U.S. planes, but a senior military official said Saturday that U.S. aircraft would be involved. It's unclear if those planes include bombers and fighters among support aircraft that could provide airborne surveillance, refueling and radar-jamming capabilities.

Earlier Saturday French warplanes destroyed several Libyan military vehicles, including tanks, in eastern Libya, as pro-Gadhafi forces battled towards the rebel stronghold of Benghazi, French Defense officials said.

At one point a fighter jet resembling a Libyan MiG 27 was shot down over the city, according to news reports from inside Libya.

Meanwhile, world leaders met in Paris to discuss the nature and scope of the international military intervention to make Gadhafi respect a U.N. Security Council resolution that authorized "all necessary measures" to protect Libyan civilians.

"Our planes are blocking the air attacks on the city" of Benghazi, French President Nicholas Sarkozy said following the meeting. It was also clear the effort would target ground forces, including tanks, that might be used against the Libyan people.

French, British and Canadian aircraft were expected to launch sorties as night falls over the country, ahead of a larger coalition deployment that could happen later in the day. Spain and Denmark have also contributed fighter planes to the international force.

"We have every reason to fear that left unchecked, Gadhafi would commit unspeakable atrocities," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told reporters following the meeting in Paris. "Further delay will only put more civilians at risk. So let me be very clear on the position of the United States: We will support an international coalition as it takes all necessary measures to enforce" the U.N. resolution.

President Obama, in Brazil for the first stop on a trip to Latin America, told reporters the international consensus on Libya remained "strong, and our resolve is clear."

"The people of Libya must be protected," Obama said at a press conference with Brazil's President Dilma Rousseff. "And in the absence of an immediate end to the violence against civilians, our coalition is prepared to act and act with urgency."

Gadhafi warned the international coalition Friday not to interfere in Libyan affairs, calling the U.N. resolution "invalid" and appealing directly to world leaders, including President Obama, in a letter.

"Libya is not yours. Libya is for the Libyans," he said in the letter. "If you had found them taking over American cities with armed force, tell me what you would do."

The United States, Britain and France issued a joint statement late Friday, with backing from several Arab countries, warning the "international community will make him [Gadhafi] suffer the consequences" unless he stops the attacks, restores water, electric and gas services and allows humanitarian aid to enter the country.


iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Sat, 03-19-2011 - 9:17pm



iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
Sun, 03-20-2011 - 12:26am
I tend to agree, this was posted elsewhere, I haven't checked for accuracy, but it was interesting to me. Same date, 8 years apart.

MARCH 19, 2011
OBAMA: 'Today we are part of a broad coalition. We are answering the calls of a threatened people. And we are acting in the interests of the United States and the world'...

MARCH 19, 2003
BUSH: 'American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger'...
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-30-2007
Sun, 03-20-2011 - 10:32am

March 19, 2003.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
Sun, 03-20-2011 - 1:40pm
My heart goes out to you and your family. I'm warred out (if that's a word).

We need a break from war for a while as a nation.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-07-2002
Sun, 03-20-2011 - 2:12pm
Am I happy? No. Do I believe it is necessary? Yes, as long as we are only a part of the coalition. American planes are not involved. It's U.N. forces (French, British & Canadian only at this time). This action also has the backing of several Arab countries. I just hope that it can be dealt with quickly. The Libyan people are in a much worse situation that the Iraqi people were. And the Libyans are actively rebelling & fighting for their freedoms - which the Iraqi people weren't.

As for Afghanistan - I supported going in after bin Laden. However, the Bush Admin never finished the job. After a meager effort, they turned their attention towards Iraq - which was really Bush's main goal anyway.


iVillage Member
Registered: 02-05-2011
Sun, 03-20-2011 - 5:43pm
The majority of Democrats voted for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Many complained about not having a declaration of war. Obama spoke against war prior to holding federal office, now he has taken us into a new war. We are still engaged in wars he promised to end, Gitmo was ordered closed over 2 years ago but is still open. Obama promised trials for all held, but has changed his mind and will hold many in Gitmo without trial indefinitely.

I'd like to think we are war adverse, and some politicians claim to be, but the proof is in their actions after election.

Obama's 2002 anti war speech is here - it contains words which may violate the TOS of this site. Adult language is used.
Avatar for xxxs
Community Leader
Registered: 01-25-2010
Mon, 03-21-2011 - 12:32am

Has it not occurred to us not to interfere in a civil war?fmig29_p_01_l.jpg


Avatar for papparic
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Mon, 03-21-2011 - 10:03am

New president needs a new war. All those fun new war toys to play with. How fortunate a suitable bad guy has pushed himself onto the world stage.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-07-2002
Mon, 03-21-2011 - 12:18pm
First of all, Afghanistan was a completely different thing. Secondly, they supported the actions in Iraq ONLY because we were all LIED to. Last time I will say that because I'm tired of reiterating it.

Obama has not 'gotten us into a new war'. We are a part of U.N. actions - unlike Iraq, where the U.N. opposed our actions. We are currently shooting missiles into Libya (along with Great Britain) while British, French & Canadian planes work on the no-fly zone enforcement.

Things happen - just like after Bush took office. FYI, I (a, 'liberal') supported going into Afghanistan. However, I assumed we would stay & finish things...that didn't happen. Just because one opposes 'war' doesn't mean that one won't find themselves in a military action...again, this is not a 'war' by your definition.

As for Gitmo...I wish it were closed. And I despise 'war'. But that doesn't mean that I don't understand that the Libyan people need our help (as a part of U.N. actions only).


iVillage Member
Registered: 04-07-2002
Mon, 03-21-2011 - 12:21pm
The Libyan people are begging for help...are we supposed to just sit back and watch Ghaddafy slaughter them? Besides, what everyone seems to be ignoring is the fact that this is a United Nations action...not JUST the U.S.