Comments on: New Libya Policy: Bomb Both Sides

By: Chuck

Chuck — Mon, 04 Apr 2011 16:10:25 +0000

Obviously the policy in Libya is to drop bombs at random and see if they hit any one.

By: Roger Branning

Roger Branning — Sun, 03 Apr 2011 02:41:09 +0000

Bombing Kills civilians, it has in the past and will continue to. Bombing is the worse type of war fair. And US military stratagee has been to bomb
It is a chance for the military to test their new toys at the expense of the inasent. tax payers and the otherside.

By: Joe Carter

Joe Carter — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 20:17:35 +0000

…it doesn’t seem inconsistent to make it quite clear to the rebels that if they start targeting civilians…

The rebels themselves are mostly civilians. So what happens if they are attacked by other civilians who are loyal to Gaddafi? Do we bomb the pro-Gaddafi civilians or the anti-Gaddafi civilians?

My point is that we are getting ourselves into a big mess that we don’t even understand. The idea of “humanitarian bombing” is problematic enough since any bombs dropped are likely to “endanger civilians.” But when we start saying we are going to bomb one group of civilians for attacking another group of civilians (all while endangering other civilians) it makes one wonder what we are trying to achieve.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 20:11:56 +0000

As the goal of the intervention in Libya appears to be to block a Gaddafi massacre of civilians, it doesn’t seem inconsistent to make it quite clear to the rebels that if they start targeting civilians, engaging in war crimes against the civilian population, etc., they will be prevented from doing so to the extent that our military presence there allows.