Libya: Qaddhafi Violates Ceasefire, Foreign Forces Mount Attack

[luckyyy]

thats a horses rear argument and you know that . It implies by voting along with 10 others ! it meant Indian forces would have to be gearing up- and that not true. it would have been the right thing to vote yes ...

you want a UNSC seat, you wanted to be respected in the world stage? then act like you have the fortitude to stand up for what's right. I don't know why Brazil abstained but I know why the others besides India did...they are in Gaddafi's pocket and had investments in there. India did not have anything and yet pfft. disappointing.

it's never clear what's UNSC is all about.....to my view , it's just a tool to justify militry actions of US/west..

 

[KS]

thats a horses rear argument and you know that . It implies by voting along with 10 others ! it meant Indian forces would have to be gearing up- and that not true. it would have been the right thing to vote yes ...

I dont think so - As many members said this conflict had a wide inter-tribal rivalry as its undercurrent as a promising investment destination for energy in the future it is imperative on India's side not to take any sides explicitly especially when the tide of the civil war had turned and Qadaffi's forces are re-taking one town after another.

And frankly I don't think this has so much to do with 'humanitarian' concerns as it is made out to be. Call me a 'skeptic'. I dont care.

"This resolution calls for far-reaching measures but we never got answers to very basic questions," Indian envoy to UN Hardeep Singh Puri said. "This entire exercise has been based on less than complete information."

you want a UNSC seat, you wanted to be respected in the world stage? then act like you have the fortitude to stand up for what's right. I don't know why Brazil abstained but I know why the others besides India did...they are in Gaddafi's pocket and had investments in there. India did not have anything and yet pfft. disappointing.

BS - so you are saying China,Russia,Germany etc are not world powers ? And for the sake of UN Seat we cant do everything at the West' bidding. The seat will come to us whether we vote against or for Libyan resolutions. Dont worry. And BTW who knows India too might aspire for some investment over there and that is why they are waiting for the fog to settle and hitch their wagons with the strongest horse.
I'll say India played perfectly well here.

 

[AstanoshKhan]

...and the New World Order implementation is in it's final stages. Welcome aboard Libya!

 

[Jigs]

“A no-fly zone requires certain actions taken to protect the planes and the pilots, including bombing targets like the Libyan defense systems.… Qaddafi must go. [He is] a ruthless dictator that has no conscience and will destroy anyone or anything in his way. If Qaddafi does not go, he will just make trouble. That is just his nature. There are some creatures that are like that.”- Clinton

 

[KS]

Hardeep singh puri is an idiot then--- 10 other countries got it. He needs to be replaced if he can't be in the top 3 of " comprehension level". Come on that's the biggest fluff line from him and you know it...

Yes we know it and that is why we say there is some motive behind this 'fluff line' from Mr.Puri.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

I'll say India played perfectly well here.

Agreed. I think that abstaining from the vote was definitely the right move.

 

[StingRoy]

Well if one is not voting in Favour then it clearly signifies that you don't agree with it and yeah there is neutral/political angel too but did you saw what was the reason given by H.S Puri and his statement in UN?? You need to listen it again

It is a diplomatic answer/explanation ... nothing else.

Under these circumstances, it is really hard for foreign nations (read UN members) to give credible evidence to answer all the questions and doubts. Did Puri explain what specific answers he was looking for in regards to details of the operation? and When was the last time India voted for military actions against other countries?

 

[Bang Galore]

this is not a question of showing power- It is a question of humanity . leaders don't wait and watch and this was not a vote to hold a rercruitment office to have a countries army go in... US and France/ nato were to handle it. This was a damn vote that India acted weak just like the commi's. Btw-The arab league gave its go ahead...

It's not cut & dry unlike in other Arab countries. This is a full blown civil war between an armed militia on the one side and an army of a dictator on the other. There are no peaceful protesters, who it can be argued require protecting (Btw, Bahrain would be a good example of that). While one can argue that anti - Gaddafi forces need to be supported, it is difficult to see how this is any different from the countless armed conflicts/civil wars that afflict so many countries. The character of the Libyan protests changed dramatically and not for the better when armed rebels took over from unarmed protesters. Who knows whether this bunch of armed men are any better than the bunch already ruling Libya? One must be careful taking sides if there is no real certainty of achieving the outcome desired. I feel that this is all a bit too little and has come too late. The momentum is now clearly with the pro -Gaddafi forces & I don't think that anything short of decisive intervention (not this no-fly zone)by some outside force will stop Gaddafi's forces from taking full control of the area held by the rebels.

 

[luckyyy]

It is a diplomatic answer/explanation ... nothing else.

Under these circumstances, it is really hard for foreign nations (read UN members) to give credible evidence to answer all the questions and doubts. Did Puri explain what specific answers he was looking for in regards to details of the operation? and When was the last time India voted for military actions against other countries?

i think one of the question gone unanswered was " does these rebles are civilian or a group of militry personals ?

 

[Nair saab]

If u think On humanitarian basis India should have voted in favour of no fly zone...cozz that dam gadaffi guy is a crazy feak...& even if we think on diplomatic basis we should have voted in favor, as even the major Arab countries are supporting the resolution & even participating in bombing...so even if we vote in support our oil interest are safe...voting will also bring confidence within the US that India will support any such resolution putforward by them...thus we will see US lobbying more aggressively for Indias permanent seat...i will say this as an Indian diplomatic failure...

 

[luckyyy]

i think it was all planed , first they manage few army personal toward their side to implement a revolt , then passed a UN resolution....it was all planed..

 

[Tractor]

“A no-fly zone requires certain actions taken to protect the planes and the pilots, including bombing targets like the Libyan defense systems.… Qaddafi must go. [He is] a ruthless dictator that has no conscience and will destroy anyone or anything in his way. If Qaddafi does not go, he will just make trouble. That is just his nature. There are some creatures that are like that.”- Clinton

Clinton's ten years leadership much shorter than Qaddafi ,he must say something express his jealousy.

 

[KS]

It's not cut & dry unlike in other Arab countries. This is a full blown civil war between an armed militia on the one side and an army of a dictator on the other. There are no peaceful protesters, who it can be argued require protecting (Btw, Bahrain would be a good example of that). While one can argue that anti - Gaddafi forces need to be supported, it is difficult to see how this is any different from the countless armed conflicts/civil wars that afflict so many countries. The character of the Libyan protests changed dramatically and not for the better when armed rebels took over from unarmed protesters. Who knows whether this bunch of armed men are any better than the bunch already ruling Libya? One must be careful taking sides if there is no real certainty of achieving the outcome desired. I feel that this is all a bit too little and has come too late. The momentum is now clearly with the pro -Gaddafi forces & I don't think that anything short of decisive intervention (not this no-fly zone)by some outside force will stop Gaddafi's forces from taking full control of the area held by the rebels.

+1.

This is not a case of clear cut good vs bad. The rebels till now have no proclaimed leader and who knows their winning may be the seed for another war for power. Who knows maybe another radical Islamist group may hijack this movement for its own purpose.

As of now nothing is clear and it is too early to venture into the mist.

 

[StingRoy]

i think one of the question gone unanswered was " does these rebles are civilian or a group of militry personals ?

What proof did the countries who voted for the no-fly zone have on this question. I have seen both the rebel forces and Gadhafi supporters celebrate in various news reports... who do I believe? There is definite ambiguity who are in majority, but that certainly does not discount the fact that the civilians are being killed on the streets on a daily basis.

India did have concerns about the details of the military options, since these plans are almost never shared in detail. It is the commander (the US) who is primarily in charge. So there are a lot of grey areas in the logistical and tactical details which are missing at the time of the vote. Best to stay out of this.

 

[below_freezing]

Hardeep singh puri is an idiot then--- 10 other countries got it. He needs to be replaced if he can't be in the top 3 of " comprehension level". Come on that's the biggest fluff line from him and you know it...

I wo't even bother replying to chinese highlighted quote. You expect this kind of rubbish from them- the entire expects it...

Well, you're an American, and have nothing to do with India. It's natural that you'll consider what's best for American interests, and not Indian interests.