3 ms·

UN Security Council Authorizes Military Strikes on Libya

• deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
• cma 16y ago
  I don't know how I feel about it, but it is definitely war; one simple test: if Libya "enforced a no fly zone on the US," would we say, "Libya is enforcing a no fly zone on the US?"
  • jpitz 16y ago
    Depends on your definition of war. Logically, yes. Legally, no, not by US standards - it takes a large flock of congresscritters to do that. I'm mostly glad that the point was made that this wouldn't be an occupation.
    • spamizbad 16y ago
      > I'm mostly glad that the point was made that this wouldn't be an occupation. Not yet anyway. When news broke a few days ago that a NFZ was going to be implemented, John Bolton and other neoconservatives started floating idea of ground forces. If you give a mouse a cookie...
      • tzs 16y ago
        > If you give a mouse a cookie... ...you'd better get its consent first or the EU will come after you.
    • Pahalial 16y ago
      I don't know that that point was made at all. In fact, the intentionally loose verbiage of "all necessary measures to protect civilians" would seem to open the door to an occupational force, particularly as it authorizes member states to do so - without any manner of oversight UN task force. This is essentially carte blanche for a member state (though, realistically, only UNSC member states would have anywhere near the clout) to wander in and occupy Tripoli. That the Lebanese ambassador said otherwise is effectively meaningless in the face of the text of the resolution. I sincerely do hope both you and Lebanon end up being right, and no occupation happens. I hope.
• deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]