Comment Re:precedent (Score 1) 892
We are in Libya at the request of the Libyan people to prevent a humanitarian disaster. Obama may have slipped up on the technicalities, but the technicalities are only being brought up now because of politics. The cause is a just one.
The ignorance is driving you. Let's clear things up:
YOU (The U.S.A.) ARE IN LYBIA BECAUSE NOONE WANTS THE SOLE FRENCH TO CONTROL PETROLIUM
Just in case you didn't notice France has recently lose control of Tunisia, control that was being exerted through the local dictator. Sarkosy was also undermined in polls by the real political right. As soon as the situation for intervention in Libya was created ad hoc and contracts were signed for petrol with the insurgents France sent airforce into bombardments. In this way the "great" man hopes to gain access to petrol and you know there's nothing like war to keep the ass on the chair of command.
Nevermind this has come as great damage to my country, Italy, where despite the controversies our prime minister already signed some multimillion contracts with Queddafi to boost our declining economy.
In all of this scheme Italians and Germans called for NATO (and US) intervention because they didn't want France to get cheap petrol at our expenses, UK indeed cooperated from the start maybe because of some under the desk agreement. As most of the warmongers already found a new equilibrium for the income of the rape of Libya the operation goes on.... and it will still be going because despite the news you are feeded with the western population is actually with Queddafi and noone of the warmongers want a real intervenction (army, soldiers, tanks etc.) in a war situation.
Putin clearly defined the situation here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvP3BW21VWU - An I tend to agree. Ask yourself a question: how would American patriots feel if Mexico and Canada bombarded using the The Rodney King riots as a pretext?