• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

So is Gadhaffi Arrested or Not?

after this is done should we bump up all of the neocon conservatives comments who thought this was the worst idea ever?

lol. I want obama to have a katrina and a shit economy and a iraq as much as the next ballsack but this was a good move.

Oil bitches.
 
JSt0rm said:
after this is done should we bump up all of the neocon conservatives comments who thought this was the worst idea ever?

lol. I want obama to have a katrina and a shit economy and a iraq as much as the next ballsack but this was a good move.

Oil bitches.
Click to expand...
Maybe, I wanted it to happen while NATO was still talking about it but it's very, very possible that Libya is like Iraq; without a strong arm to keep the idiots (multitude of disparate groups) in check they splinter and kill each other anyway.
 
Should not this be part of the other ongoing thread on Libya? But still that is not my place to decide, its is and remains a anand tech moderator decision.
 
I was listening to developments on NPR, then I heard a conflict regarding our supposed policy towards the Libyan conflict. Seems we have ground forces assisting the rebels now.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2011/03/18/obama-no-ground-troops-in-libya.html
President Obama is still doing his best to avoid entanglement in Libya: He said Friday that U.S. ground troops will not deploy in Libya and that force will not be used beyond protecting civilians.
Click to expand...

Many here stated that there were no "boots on the ground" in Libya and that all of the targets being selected for airstrikes were coming from drones and other spy planes / satellites. US involvement is limited to a support role only or doing the occasional airstrike.

Then, why is an adviser to Obama receiving reports from US ground forces in Libya?
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61802.html
The White House said Obama was briefed Sunday morning on the latest developments by counterterrorism adviser John Brennan and heard reports from U.S. teams on the ground in the rebel stronghold of Benghazi.
Click to expand...
 
Lemon law said:
Should not this be part of the other ongoing thread on Libya? But still that is not my place to decide, its is and remains a anand tech moderator decision.
Click to expand...


I am against having only 1 thread per topic as it squashes debate. These issues are all very complex and can have multiple conversations going on in multiple threads.
 
Schadenfroh said:
I was listening to developments on NPR, then I heard a conflict regarding our supposed policy towards the Libyan conflict. Seems we have ground forces assisting the rebels now.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2011/03/18/obama-no-ground-troops-in-libya.html


Many here stated that there were no "boots on the ground" in Libya and that all of the targets being selected for airstrikes were coming from drones and other spy planes / satellites. US involvement is limited to a support role only or doing the occasional airstrike.

Then, why is an adviser to Obama receiving reports from US ground forces in Libya?
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61802.html
Click to expand...

Certainly not improbable that a few special ops types might be keeping an eye on things. That and I presume the CIA is still in business....
 
Deja Vu with Vietnam under Eisenhower and Kennedy, as 'no boots on the ground' versus 'military advisers' who are closer to combat than they admit are debated.

Good thing the comparison pretty much ends there and we aren't facing a major war with millions killed.
 
Craig234 said:
Deja Vu with Vietnam under Eisenhower and Kennedy, as 'no boots on the ground' versus 'military advisers' who are closer to combat than they admit are debated.

Good thing the comparison pretty much ends there and we aren't facing a major war with millions killed.
Click to expand...



So you say. We don't however have the best luck and track record when we do nation building and regime changes. Hopefully the rebels when they take control don't start going after all the regime supporters and killing them.
 
TalonStrike said:
Wolf Blitzer is a liar. He said Moammar Gadhaffi was arrested.
Click to expand...

About 5 years ago, I woke up one Saturday morning to a breaking BBC article that Fidel Castro had died. it was reported at that moment, so I didn't find much anywhere else.

I mentioned it a few times during the day, but didn't really think about it much after that. Imagine my surprise a few weeks later, when there were a few articles talking about Fidel celebrating his birthday.

Point is, in this age of the blogosphere, and ave joe moron mistaking such outlets as journalism, the original news-providers have stupidly resorted to the same laziness in reporting. take all breaking news with a grain of salt--especially when there is a war going on.
 
zinfamous said:
About 5 years ago, I woke up one Saturday morning to a breaking BBC article that Fidel Castro had died. it was reported at that moment, so I didn't find much anywhere else.

I mentioned it a few times during the day, but didn't really think about it much after that. Imagine my surprise a few weeks later, when there were a few articles talking about Fidel celebrating his birthday.

Point is, in this age of the blogosphere, and ave joe moron mistaking such outlets as journalism, the original news-providers have stupidly resorted to the same laziness in reporting. take all breaking news with a grain of salt--especially when there is a war going on.
Click to expand...

There is an organization out there that purposefully puts out fake news articles. They sound professional but most of the time they are not believable if you have a clue about the subject material. The general idea is that once one news outlet picks up a story, and they try to do so for free, the others will run with it without checking sources. I don't remember the exact number but it was happening quite often. They were calling for better journalism.

The last example I can think of is the death of that congresswoman who got shot in the head. She didn't actually die but every news organization ran with it.
 
JSt0rm said:
after this is done should we bump up all of the neocon conservatives comments who thought this was the worst idea ever?

lol. I want obama to have a katrina and a shit economy and a iraq as much as the next ballsack but this was a good move.

Oil bitches.
Click to expand...

well I'm no neocon/conservative but Libya was a bad idea. I guess blood for oil is ok when it's your guy though.
 
I'm reading that it's propaganda and that they were claiming to have arrested him only to have him pop up elsewhere and give interviews showing he was clearly not under arrest.
 
Schadenfroh said:
I was listening to developments on NPR, then I heard a conflict regarding our supposed policy towards the Libyan conflict. Seems we have ground forces assisting the rebels now.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2011/03/18/obama-no-ground-troops-in-libya.html


Many here stated that there were no "boots on the ground" in Libya and that all of the targets being selected for airstrikes were coming from drones and other spy planes / satellites. US involvement is limited to a support role only or doing the occasional airstrike.

Then, why is an adviser to Obama receiving reports from US ground forces in Libya?
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61802.html
Click to expand...

None of what you've written about is news. The US was very open about the fact that CIA operatives that were in the country prior to the rebellion would remain in the country and that the SAD (Special Activities Division) would be an active player during the civil war. Their goals were not limited to selecting targets for NATO, but also for evaluating the rebel leadership, determining the composition of the rebel group (ie presence of AQ or other terrorist organizations, and also for training rebel groups.

Obama's pledge was not to put boots on the ground, not to have no American presence on the ground. The difference is subtle, but important. "Boots on the ground" originated as a euphemism for putting soldiers into battle. That is something Obama hasn't done and has promised not to do.
 
Oh well and cheer up, as the final Libyan Rebel victory is basically complete, even if they can't yet find ole frizzie, they make due with the next best thing, as they symbolically behead every Qaddafi statue they can find.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top