Jump to content

Recommended Posts

To enforce a no fly zone we would need planes (of which there are now very few) and, more importantly, a suitable base within range but free from interference - that's best provided by an aircraft carrier - which we have just dispensed with.


So no matter what we should do - we can't.


The current degree of instability is a very good reason for maintaing appropriate armed forces, ours have just been emasculated by the Treasury.

Weirdly I thought we normally lifted no fly zones when dictators are quelling insurrections.


The Iranian ships going through Suez* is first sign of exactly what the west fears, middle east governments doing what they want, rather than what they're paid to do. Imagine what they'll do when they're answerable to the people**.


Double edged sword that democracy malarkey isn't it!!


Interesting times ahead!!


*of which I personally have no issue

**probably try and improve the economy, a surfeit of young unemployed men is feeding this wave of jasmine after all.

Theoretically Cyprus could be used to impose a no-fly zone albeit with air to air refuelling, but the RAF has lost so much capability it would be difficult to sustain it over time.


More importantly, the days when the UK could politically impose its will in such as way are long, long gone and rightly so.


I suspect that any western led intervention would simply provide a rallying point for the Gadaffi regime and would be counter productive. An Arab led intervention would be better, but most of the neighbouring Arab countries have their own problems.


I fear the Libyans are on their own.

Yes, I understand where you're coming from, but I'm neither in Benghazi, or being bombed/persecuted by my country's military. But I still don't see the need for British military intervention. Let them sort this out for themselves. And if your counter-argument, which you're more than entitled to make, is that we should be protecting our oil interests in Libya, then let me declare now that I think this country should be making the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy, and investigating new, more productive ways of harnessing renewable energy. If we do, then we'd have a lot less cause to be interferring and getting ourselves caught-up in the affairs of (often unstable) countries that possess the reserves of oil that the base infrastructure of the western world currently relies on.

If I had a counter-argumnet, it would be that, within reason, we should offer support to people fighting for democracy and human rights. In extremis, this might mean military support.


In ten years, Libya could be a fully functioning democracy, where human rights and the rule of law are enshrined and where the citizens drive around in electric cars and carry re-usable bags bearing the legend "Tripoli Says "La" To unwanted Bags

Interestingly, if this scheme comes off


http://www.desertec.org/en/organization/


then our energy interests will continue to be tied to North Africa. We are also connected, it seems, by an innate human desire for our rights to be respected.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I'd also recommend Silvano for anyone in the area looking to learn automatic, having just passed first time with 5 minors. He's a very patient teacher and ensured I learned how to drive safely above all. 
    • You don't need to do the research. I had to know the numbers as a TV buyer. I analysed the potential advertising revenue and Channel Four didn't cover their costs. They had some nice 'Channel Four' signs when someone hit the ropes but, In all honesty, a lot a potential revenue was lost because most old knackers were pissed off because they couldn't perve at Carol Vorderman on 'Countdown'.       Sorry, cross-post. I was replying to Malumbu. Give me a minute, if you will. I listened to the first two sessions (today) on TMS and popped down to the pub for the evening one.   I do miss the days of Peter West, Richie Benaud and Tom Graveney on BBC2.   But, the BBC are at least putting on 'Today At The Test' on at around 7pm instead of after midnight.   And it was on the 10pm news.      
    • "PGC, do you reckon this 'Anderson -Tendulkar' series could make Tests a bit more interesting to the wider word?" Alas no. Until it comes back to terrestial telly, I think it will always suffer from elitism(?).  Excepting The Guardian, cricket is barely mentioned in other press. I am fortunate in that my daughter has just added me to her subscription on NOW TV. It has been great to watch this test; it really could have gone either way, eariler in the day, which always makes it more exciting. The only bugbear is that I am a TMS afficianado, and they are about eight deliveries ahead of the tv! I thought Tongue was excellent in mopping up the tailenders, and Duckett was a delight to watch. Bumrah and Jadeja were brilliant to see. I'm sure the Edgbaston crowd will have tremendous supporters for both sides. PS: I don't think Jofra will be back on the strength of one county wicket.
    • Why it a strange first post Sue?  We all have to start somewhere! These kids have created a situation where they have been very unpleasant. Surely their physical appearance etc is a key factor in identifying them?  I don’t understand. Are you defending these kids? 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...