The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / News  % width posts: 159

Poland ready to receive Libyan refugees


JonnyM 11 | 2,621
15 Apr 2011 #121
Everything could potentially cause bigger problems later.

Exactly. And we don't want huge loss of life and even bigger military spending if it all gets worse.

NATO is a defense treaty, not a police force.

Same difference really. A stitch in time saves nine.
convex 20 | 3,978
15 Apr 2011 #122
Exactly. And we don't want huge loss of life and even bigger military spending if it all gets worse.

What would have happened if there wasn't a no-fly zone and NATO bombing ground targets? The uprising would have ended a long time ago.

Same difference really. A stitch in time saves nine.

I guess, Iraq, Afghanistan, Georgia, Chechnya... Should NATO bomb Belarus? Israel? Syria? Iran? It's an act of aggression against a sovereign nation. This is AU territory. NATO shouldn't have gotten involved. ZA and Morocco have enough resources to enforce a no-fly zone.
JonnyM 11 | 2,621
15 Apr 2011 #123
What would have happened if there wasn't a no-fly zone and NATO bombing ground targets? The uprising would have ended a long time ago.

My feeling is that it would have got a lot worse.

This is AU territory. NATO shouldn't have gotten involved. ZA and Morocco have enough resources to enforce a no-fly zone.

That's the dilemma, isn't it. Gaddafi's gold reserves mean he called the shots at the AU. But when to intervene or not. I don't think it can have been an easy decision to get involved, but the oil in LIbya is too strategically important to leave anything to chance.
convex 20 | 3,978
15 Apr 2011 #124
My feeling is that it would have got a lot worse.

The insurgents were already pushed to nearly being toppled. Ghaddafi would have played the people against them (he had already started). That's what was going on. Now it's a deadlock. Perpetual war.

That's the dilemma, isn't it. Gaddafi's gold reserves mean he called the shots at the AU. But when to intervene or not. I don't think it can have been an easy decision to get involved, but the oil in LIbya is too strategically important to leave anything to chance.

The oil flows regardless of who's in power.
delphiandomine 83 | 17,788
15 Apr 2011 #125
NATO shouldn't have gotten involved.

I'm getting more and more pissed off with NATO acting as some sort of police force - Kosovo was bad enough, but this is a Libyan civil war and nothing that NATO should be getting involved with.

The insurgents were already pushed to nearly being toppled. Ghaddafi would have played the people against them (he had already started). That's what was going on. Now it's a deadlock. Perpetual war.

And in terms of stability, no bad thing.
JonnyM 11 | 2,621
15 Apr 2011 #126
The oil flows regardless of who's in power.

Thi issue is who it flows to, how much for, and who gets the contracts for keeping it flowing.
southern 75 | 7,096
15 Apr 2011 #127
Gadaffi applies maoist principles and knows that everything will be decided in the military field.It is the diplomacy of guns.
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 10,045
15 Apr 2011 #128
Same difference really. A stitch in time saves nine.

Then the countries who feel the need to "stitch" should do so alone but not abuse the NATO and pressure others to go along with them as in "You are either with us or you are a traitor".

What if North Korea starts to think suddenly "Let's the oppressed citizens of the UK liberate by force? They are already demonstrating against their undemocratic dictatorship!" What's good for the goose...

The NATO is no tool to be abused by some governments head for their ideas about foreign policy in far away countries, period!
gumishu 11 | 5,030
15 Apr 2011 #129
from what I gather Libyan rebels asked for help from the West and they still do - just read they ask for weapons to defeat Kaddafi so that they could do that with less air support or without it
Crow 137 | 7,833
15 Apr 2011 #130
Poland ready to receive Libyan refugees

that`s the EU`s plan

more Poles out of Poland, more Muslims in Poland
Piast Poland 3 | 182
15 Apr 2011 #131
It is not Poland responsibility to host these people. The countries who are there like the US, UK, France should. They, if anyone signed up for taking them in, certainly not Poland.
OP David_18 68 | 982
15 Apr 2011 #132
Gadaffi applies maoist principles and knows that everything will be decided in the military field.It is the diplomacy of guns.

He aint really a threat with his small army. Sooner or later he will loose.

It is not Poland responsibility to host these people. The countries who are there like the US, UK, France should.

Word!
hubabuba - | 113
15 Apr 2011 #133
well, it is not Poland responsibility to host refugees, but it doesnt really hurt to help some people...
As for the whole conflict, Libia is this "clan country" and it is hard to figure out what would be the outcome of the war but do you really think civilians should be left alone to be killed?maybe it isnt NATO responsibility but it is a right thing to do
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 10,045
15 Apr 2011 #134
I hope you remember that when the rebels win with the west help and start their revenge...killing civilians!

But somehow I can't see western jets flying for the "wrong" kind of civilians then...
hubabuba - | 113
16 Apr 2011 #135
might happen, but I still stand by my statement
besides NATO and especially USA would just look ridiculous if didnt take any action, after so much talking about freedom democracy etc
Pinching Pete - | 558
16 Apr 2011 #136
especially USA would just look ridiculous if didnt take any action, after so much talking about freedom democracy etc

??? Advocating democracy doesn't mean the US has to occupy and (consequently bomb) every country under oppressive regimes.
Wroclaw Boy
16 Apr 2011 #137
well after they got their asses kicked in Vietnam who can blame them.
rozumiemnic 8 | 3,675
16 Apr 2011 #138
Advocating democracy doesn't mean the US has to occupy and (consequently bomb) every country under oppressive regimes.

only the ones with plenty of oil..:)
Pinching Pete - | 558
16 Apr 2011 #139
.. looks like it :- ( except for Serbia. It's embarrasing bullshlt.
sascha 1 | 826
17 Apr 2011 #140
I hope you remember that when the rebels win with the west help and start their revenge...killing civilians!

But somehow I can't see western jets flying for the "wrong" kind of civilians then...

What did the author wanted to say? Anything or just babble as usual.

That war was under wrong circumstances from the start. The UN reslution is abused and since the UN is US protege it's logical. The amateurs from UK and F seem not to have that what it takes to 'win' this 'war'. Pure overestimation, like usual.

The lies and false arguments are more and more visible since the 'revolution' is stagnating. This may turn in another Irak, Afghanistan etc. for US/NATO, but that's nothing new. We know that Hau-ruck politics.
rybnik 18 | 1,462
17 Apr 2011 #141
I guess, Iraq, Afghanistan, Georgia, Chechnya... Should NATO bomb Belarus? Israel? Syria? Iran? It's an act of aggression against a sovereign nation. This is AU territory. NATO shouldn't have gotten involved. ZA and Morocco have enough resources to enforce a no-fly zone.

Wasn't all of this started by a UN resolution?
sascha 1 | 826
18 Apr 2011 #142
You can better call that 'resolution' green light order for US to go in another war for pure self interest.

That so called 'humnitarian action' was based on lies and falsifications from the beginning.

Now that EU has to face possible trains of refugees, they are accusing one another and don't want to accept the consequences of their actions. Poor.

Mods, sorry for putting it here, but it seems that there is a conection to the topic, 'cause it raises the question of a 'false' war and as a consequence there are no 'refugees'. ;)

False pretense for war in Libya?

EVIDENCE IS now in that President Barack Obama grossly exaggerated the humanitarian threat to justify military action in Libya. The president claimed that intervention was necessary to prevent a "bloodbath'' in Benghazi, Libya's second-largest city and last rebel stronghold.

Here is the link: articles.boston.com/2011-04-14/bostonglobe/29418371_1_rebel-stronghold-civilians-rebel-positions
chichimera 1 | 186
18 Apr 2011 #143
False pretense for war in Libya?

Why am I not surprised?
grubas 12 | 1,391
22 Apr 2011 #144
No fugees of any kind in Poland.Period.The country is already broke and there is more than enough Polish people in need of ***************** fugees only want free housing and ********* them.I want to be a fugee too and live of somone's else money.Where do I need to apply?
convex 20 | 3,978
22 Apr 2011 #145
You can better call that 'resolution' green light order for US to go in another war for pure self interest.

Might want to talk to France and the UK as to why they were so gung-ho about going in.

No fugees of any kind in Poland.Period.The country is already broke and there is more than enough Polish people in need of ***************** fugees only want free housing and ********* them.I want to be a fugee too and live of somone's else money.Where do I need to apply?

First you'd need to get shot at, then, you flee to another country for the safety of your family. At that point, you stick around in a camp for a year, then you get on the "lite" version of the welfare system that so many worthless people here are exploiting (see my ex-neighbors upstairs).
dtaylor5632 18 | 2,007
22 Apr 2011 #146
Uk owes gaddafi some pay back for lockerbie ;)
convex 20 | 3,978
22 Apr 2011 #147
Kind of odd considering the whole "lets let Megrahi go home" deal that was worked out not too long ago...
JonnyM 11 | 2,621
22 Apr 2011 #148
Presented as a fait accomplis, planned without the people's knowledge, on the pretext of a medical report by a (Polish) doctor whose reputation is now in tatters and brokered by a government who were removed from office straight after.
Harry
22 Apr 2011 #149
Kind of odd considering the whole "lets let Megrahi go home" deal that was worked out not too long ago...

Not as odd as him being properly fitted up in the first place.
jarnowa 4 | 499
23 Apr 2011 #150
This is a picture of these "Lybians". It is clear that most of them are from other parts of Africa.
Even if they lived in Lybia before the trouble started and now face serious risks there, most of them only went to Lybia for economic reasons (as opposed to fleeing their country for safety reasons) so most of them can safely return to their own countries.

Most of them are just economic migrants that use the trouble in Lybia as an excuse to claim asylum in Europe.

Let's hope they don't come to Poland or other slavic countries.





Home / News / Poland ready to receive Libyan refugees
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.