China preventing UN action on Libya

[Armand2REP]

as a old chinese saying ("成事不足，败事有余") tells, China now is not mighty enough to set up a new world order,but mighty enough to break the current world order.....

Doesn't that say "You suck"?

 

[ace009]

Why Libyan War is America's War
by Stephen L. Carter

All of the squabbling among the allies over Libya ignores the simple fact that this is America's war. Stephen Carter says no one else has the firepower it takes for humanitarian interventions.
American officials insist that they are eager to hand off the Libyan war to the allies to run. They want to avoid, says The New York Times, lengthy involvement in "a third armed conflict in a Muslim country." Easy to understand; not so easy to accomplish. Despite what news reports say, the Libyan war is very much an American show. We are supplying not only the logistics, but the bulk of the weaponry, the crucial technology, and the more important personnel. We could carry the entire weight of battle very easily without our titular allies; but none of them, singularly or in combination, could do it without us.
Indeed, the Libyan war (and an attack on a sovereign country is a war, no matter how many times the White House says it isn't) illustrates perfectly the proposition that there are no multilateral armed forces any longer. Other countries may contribute a bit of ordnance or a handful of planes, but, in truth, only the United States can project power over any distance for any length of time. Nobody else can even come close.

for more, read ...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-...-whether-we-like-it-or-not/?cid=hp:mainpromo2

 

[ace009]

I have been reading and hearing the argument that if the USA and Europe does not meddle into EVERY democratic movement, then they cannot do it for ANY democratic movement. Also, there's the "who are the west to police what other countries do?" argument. Generally from the same people - the Chinese, the Russian "nationalists", the Indian left/ left leaning a-holes and the despots from all other countries.

Let's put the two together. The US and Europe are the "Police", maybe somewhat selfish. The Chinese, Russian nationalists, Indian leftists and anti-US countries (like Venezuela, Cuba etc) are the "generic neighbors" and the despots oppressing their own people are criminals - right?

Then, the argument is, if the police cannot bring to justice ALL criminals, they should not bring to justice ANY criminals. How does that work in regular society?

How will a society look if the police stop investigating, prosecuting and stopping ANY criminal because they cannot do it to ALL criminals? You know how it would be? Every robber baron will reign supreme - anyone with money and musclepower will dominate and kill, maim, rape and loot. when they are very successful, they will take over the whole society and become like gods!

Oh wait - THAT IS how it is in most of these despotic countries - Libya, Jordan, Egypt (till Dec 2010), Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Rwanda - shall I go on?

 

[Armand2REP]

Sarko's War

By Joseph A. Harriss

PARIS -- You've got to hand it to France's little big man, he has a way of getting what he wants. Whether it be the presidency of his country, a trophy wife, or generally punching above France's weight in international affairs, Nicolas Sarkozy pushes, inveigles, argues and seduces until others let him have his way, if only to be quite frank of him. This time he wanted to lead a George Bush-style coalition of the willing into war with an Arab dictator. On Saturday he got that too.

for more, read...

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/03/21/sarkos-war

 

[The Messiah]

You are absolutely right. You have been seeing my posts right from the beginning. I always maintained this is more about Libya's oil than anything 'humanitarian'. With every passing day, the situation vindicates my point. Sometimes I wish PRC never occupied Indian territories and we could have been very good friends, formed an alliance with the Russian Federation and stopped NATO from carrying out these bullying tactics. Alas, PRC does not want to have good relations with any of its neighbours.

India needs to get the ICBM capability soon, and test them.

Ive been saying that for a long time on this forum.

And china is an idiot! making India an enemy will be its undoing since west will capitalize on it.

 

[badguy2000]

I have been reading and hearing the argument that if the USA and Europe does not meddle into EVERY democratic movement, then they cannot do it for ANY democratic movement. Also, there's the "who are the west to police what other countries do?" argument. Generally from the same people - the Chinese, the Russian "nationalists", the Indian left/ left leaning a-holes and the despots from all other countries.

Let's put the two together. The US and Europe are the "Police", maybe somewhat selfish. The Chinese, Russian nationalists, Indian leftists and anti-US countries (like Venezuela, Cuba etc) are the "generic neighbors" and the despots oppressing their own people are criminals - right?

Then, the argument is, if the police cannot bring to justice ALL criminals, they should not bring to justice ANY criminals. How does that work in regular society?

How will a society look if the police stop investigating, prosecuting and stopping ANY criminal because they cannot do it to ALL criminals? You know how it would be? Every robber baron will reign supreme - anyone with money and musclepower will dominate and kill, maim, rape and loot. when they are very successful, they will take over the whole society and become like gods!

Oh wait - THAT IS how it is in most of these despotic countries - Libya, Jordan, Egypt (till Dec 2010), Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Rwanda - shall I go on?

the funny thing is that USA is "self-given" police and CHina/Russia don't buy it at all.

the two country alway wait for a good chance to "uneasy" USA.

As for Europe....Europe is just one "Yesman" of USA......without the help from USA, Europe is nothing.

 

[Armand2REP]

As for Europe....Europe is just one "Yesman" of USA......without the help from USA, Europe is nothing.

Speaking of "Yesman", China has yet to vote differently than Russia in the UNSC. Where Russia leads China follows Mr. "Abstention."

 

[badguy2000]

Speaking of "Yesman", China has yet to vote differently than Russia in the UNSC. Where Russia leads China follows Mr. "Abstention."

well, are you suggesting that CHina has not done enough to "uneasy" west countries?

I still remember quite well how CHina "uneasy" west countries including USA as for the hot areas like N.Korea,Iran,Sudan...etc.....

As for Lybia.....Beijing and Most Chinese have distrusted Gaddaffi since he gave up Nuke and made friends with Taiwan in sneaky way.

BTW,
During Sino-Africa summit hosted in Beijing several years ago,almost all Africa countries sent their president or PM to Beijing ,except that Gaddafi just sent one subministry department chief to Beijing......Beijing felt quite offended by it.....

 

[Armand2REP]

well, are you suggesting that CHina has not done enough to "uneasy" west countries?

I still remember quite well how CHina "uneasy" west countries including USA as for the hot areas like N.Korea,Iran,Sudan...etc.....

As for Lybia.....Beijing and Most Chinese have distrusted Gaddaffi since he gave up Nuke and made friends with Taiwan in sneaky way.

N. Korea, Sudan, Iran... all following the Russian lead etc. As for Libya, you still do the same thing. Do you take your orders from Moscow Mr. Yesman?

 

[badguy2000]

N. Korea, Sudan, Iran... all following the Russian lead etc. As for Libya, you still do the same thing. Do you take your orders from Moscow Mr. Yesman?

you should ask MR.Putin if Russia has enough confidence and might to "lead" china......

BTW, I don't think that there is any country on the earth that has enough might to "lead" CHina....

 

[ace009]

the funny thing is that USA is "self-given" police and CHina/Russia don't buy it at all.

the two country alway wait for a good chance to "uneasy" USA.

As for Europe....Europe is just one "Yesman" of USA......without the help from USA, Europe is nothing.

Yeah sure ... Russia, China are the beacons of open societies, law and order and human rights.

Russia - polonium anyone?

China - internet regulation?

The western countries are hypocritical about who they support (Saudi Arabia) and who they oppose (Libya), but they also have a MUCH better record (albeit not perfect) of human rights in their own countries compared to the despotic countries.

 

[pmaitra]

Yeah sure ... Russia, China are the beacons of open societies, law and order and human rights.

Russia - polonium anyone?

China - internet regulation?

The western countries are hypocritical about who they support (Saudi Arabia) and who they oppose (Libya), but they also have a MUCH better record (albeit not perfect) of human rights in their own countries compared to the despotic countries.

I have my misgiving about freedom, or lack thereof, in PRC.

However, Russia is a different story all together.

Polonium anyone? Me, for sure. Good job by KGB. Traitors are traitors.

Other than that, I would rather live in a Russia under Putin than under Yeltsin. We have seen what 'freedom' and 'democracy' did to Russia, especially the re-election of Yeltsin (it's off topic, but read up on it). The western version of freedom and democracy ain't heavenly manna you know.

'I'll be honest with you: we, of course, would not want to have a democracy like in Iraq.' - Vladimir Putin; words to go by. (Putin: Don't lecture me about democracy)

 

[Armand2REP]

you should ask MR.Putin if Russia has enough confidence and might to "lead" china......

BTW, I don't think that there is any country on the earth that has enough might to "lead" CHina....

If little ole France can lead the mighty USA to war, Russia can tote the Chinese baby around in the UN.

 

[amoy]

IMO China is a loser in many ways by not vetoing the UN resolution that allows NATO abuses, and consequently the humanitarian disaster.

Even though Col. Qaddafi was no friend of China, China has a stake in Libya that Hu/Wen should have defended. Even though Monsieur Sarkozy (NATO) would have done the same with or witout the UN backing, why should have UN (and China by absention) endorsed their raid with a resolution?

but >>

The Terrorist Consequences of the Libyan InterventionPaul Pillar
| More Paul R. Pillar | March 23, 2011

In trying to figure out just what we have gotten ourselves into by applying military force to Libya, one set of consequences that has received relatively little comment so far concerns international terrorism. The problem has multiple dimensions.

The dimension that is hardest to gauge but ultimately may have the broadest impact is the effect on perceptions and resentments of many people far beyond Libya who might be recruited into terrorism, or at least might support or sympathize with it. Any use of Western and especially U.S. military force in a Muslim country runs the risk of energizing Islamist terrorism. Such use bolsters the extremist narrative of a Judeo-Christian West that is out to kill Muslims, dominate their lands, and plunder their resources. This cost was a significant consequence of the Iraq War. As the U.S. involvement in Afghanistan has dragged out, that war also has increasingly been seen as a motivator stimulating Islamist terrorists—as reflected in the statements of those who have been captured, including ones captured in the United States. To the extent that the story coming out of the operation in Libya becomes focused less on Qaddafi and more on the immediate drama of Western forces, military action, and inevitable civilian casualties, this operation as well will play into the extremist narrative.

Other terrorist-related effects directly involve Libya. The understandings that Qaddafi had earlier reached with the United States and Britain about terrorism (as well as unconventional weapons) are now obviously dead letters. This means that counterterrorist cooperation, including exchange of information about Libyan radical jihadists (who have been disproportionately represented in the ranks of transnational terrorists) is presumably also dead. A result is the loss to the United States of a source of information that could otherwise be used to go after these extremists. The loss is all the more disadvantageous coming at a time when we need to know as much as possible about any of the extremists working their way into the ranks of the opposition taking shape in eastern Libya. The most direct effect involves terrorist retaliation by Qaddafi. This is another result of the destruction of understandings that had been reached with him. The best guide to what he is likely to do is simply to recall his behavior before he got out of the terrorist business. One of the most noteworthy entries on his record was the bombing of Pan Am 103 in 1988, which very likely was at least in part a response to the U.S. military strike against Libya in 1986, which was shorter and less extensive than Operation Odyssey Dawn has already become. Qaddafi's ability to use asymmetric attacks against the United States and its western partners will continue even if he controls only a rump of the Libyan state. He may very well have already put terrorist operations in train.

Finally, we should remember that anything done to Qaddafi is being done to someone who had given up terrorism. Much has been said about what lessons other authoritarian regimes in the region will draw if the Libyan ruler is allowed to use force to stay in power. We also should think about the lessons that will be drawn if someone who gave up not only terrorism but also his unconventional weapons programs in return for normal relations and acceptance in the international community is made a target for regime change. The lesson that the mullahs in Tehran and others will draw is that it would be useless to reach any agreement with the West about terrorism or nuclear weapons because the West is really interested above all in regime change and, regardless of any agreements that may have been reached, will seize the first opportunity that comes along to try to realize that goal.

 

[Armand2REP]

IMO China is a loser in many ways by not vetoing the UN resolution that allows NATO abuses, and consequently the humanitarian disaster.

Even though Col. Qaddafi was no friend of China, China has a stake in Libya that Hu/Wen should have defended. Even though Monsieur Sarkozy (NATO) would have done the same with or witout the UN backing, why should have UN (and China by absention) endorsed their raid with a resolution?

What humanitarian disaster? You mean the one caused by Gaddafi that we are stopping? lol

Gaddafi was a good friend to China, he put 36,000 to work worth $30 billion in construction contracts. China abstained because Russia abstained. They do not use their own minds.

 

[amoy]

You mean the one caused by Gaddafi that we are stopping?

go spout your black humour to Libyans killed in NATO air raids.

 

[Armand2REP]

go spout your black humour to Libyans killed in NATO air raids.

What Libyans killed in NATO air raids? The one's slaughtering thousands of civilians?

BTW, NATO hasn't been and won't be in command of airstrikes.

 

[ace009]

go spout your black humour to Libyans killed in NATO air raids.

I would ask you to read these up ...

Where Gaddafi's forces were using anti-armor bullets, chemical weapons on unarmed civilian protesters. Come on - wake up. This is not just a case of "us vs them" where Indians side with the Libyan dictator. Gaddafi was, is and would remain a tyrant and a mass murderer. The same as Yahya Khan did in Bangladesh (then east pakistan). Then the west did nothing and India had to step in - now the shoe seems to be on the other foot. Are Indians that blind in their post-colonial anti-colonialism that ANY intervention is "bad". Sure Chinese and Russians are unhappy. Their countries do not have any respect for human rights. The present level of human rights in China and Russia is the same as what was in India in 1975-1977 (Emergency).

As for Mr Maitra - Polonium was used to kill a "traitor" as you say, in a foreign country, exposing hundreds of innocent people. And the so-called "traitor" was once a BIG supporter of Mr Putin and had "betrayed" Russia by denouncing Mr Putin's dictatorial roles in forging elections. He was murdered NOT because he was an enemy of the state, but because he was an enemy to the dictator of the state. THAT is a big difference. Please read up the facts and stop eulogising another asshole dictator.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/26/libya-protests-tripoli-re_n_828586.html

 

[The Messiah]

I have been reading and hearing the argument that if the USA and Europe does not meddle into EVERY democratic movement, then they cannot do it for ANY democratic movement. Also, there's the "who are the west to police what other countries do?" argument. Generally from the same people - the Chinese, the Russian "nationalists", the Indian left/ left leaning a-holes and the despots from all other countries.

Let's put the two together. The US and Europe are the "Police", maybe somewhat selfish. The Chinese, Russian nationalists, Indian leftists and anti-US countries (like Venezuela, Cuba etc) are the "generic neighbors" and the despots oppressing their own people are criminals - right?

Then, the argument is, if the police cannot bring to justice ALL criminals, they should not bring to justice ANY criminals. How does that work in regular society?

How will a society look if the police stop investigating, prosecuting and stopping ANY criminal because they cannot do it to ALL criminals? You know how it would be? Every robber baron will reign supreme - anyone with money and musclepower will dominate and kill, maim, rape and loot. when they are very successful, they will take over the whole society and become like gods!

Oh wait - THAT IS how it is in most of these despotic countries - Libya, Jordan, Egypt (till Dec 2010), Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Rwanda - shall I go on?

What a ridiculous thing to say. So according to you bhagat singh was an asshole ?

 

[ace009]

What a ridiculous thing to say. So according to you bhagat singh was an asshole ?

BHAGAT SINGH?? Here? How did you manage to bring in Bhagat Singh in this mix?
Dude -Although I was borne and raised in India, I have lived in/ been to several countries - including democratic west and a not so democratic "dictatorial" country - I have seen what differences exist in terms of human condition and the value of peoples lives. I do not know if you have expreinced something similar, but the so-called "peoples revolutions" are the worst governments.
Do not drag Bhagat Singh into this and try to win some emotional Indian nationalistic points.