Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Metacomet who wrote (71384)	3/1/2011 8:59:56 PM
From: Cogito Ergo Sum	2 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217542

Tough call that... suppose.. home invasion ... I am tied up... wife and daughter raped.. I manage to free myself and shoot one culprit as they leave... I guess I should simply suck it up.. because chances are I'll go to jail...... or culprit is free to engage again... Countries are not barbaric.. people are.. IMO... Edit: in Canada.. (Ontario) murders are down... gun crime significantly up.. an imbalance..

To: Metacomet who wrote (71384)	3/1/2011 10:07:49 PM
From: carranza2	Respond to of 217542

To live in a country that employs the death penalty on its own citizens, practices torture directly, or by proxy, refuses medical care to its citizens and channels the vast majority of its wealth to a fraction of its population, in the 21st century, no less, gives any thinking person pause. Which petrocratic country are you referring to? Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Libya? PS: You forgot the bit about women and stoning.

To: Metacomet who wrote (71384)	3/3/2011 4:56:39 AM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217542

defense cuts threat? flash points appear. See munitions ship. in Angola Message 27207647 As you can see the military want to prove that defense cuts are not good. See all those flash points! Global powers weigh cost of military response By Roula Khalaf and James Blitz in London Published: March 2 2011 18:50 \| Last updated: March 2 2011 18:50 ELMAT: Libyan oil will pay for the intervention as Saudi oil paid for 1991 Desert Storm. Anti-regime protesters in the Arab world have been particularly proud of their ability to make history without resorting to violence and, as importantly, without soliciting foreign help. But the young masses are now confronting a complex Libyan crisis and a dictator in Tripoli determined to transform these perceptions and shatter the image of the revolutions. As Muammer Gaddafi goes on the offensive in a standoff that risks developing into a protracted civil war, his opponents in the liberated east of the country have turned into armed rebels. They are calling for international air strikes against regime military bases and for a no-fly zone to prevent the colonel from deploying his jets and helicopter gunships. So far, however, world powers appear more willing to issue threats than commit military might to help unseat Col Gaddafi. In a show of force, the US has deployed ships in the Mediterranean and emphasised its active “consideration” of a no-fly zone. But, in spite of calls for such a step from figures including John McCain, the Republican senator, US commanders with forces already stretched in Afghanistan and the Gulf are wary of further engagement. Western officials say governments are trying to strike a balance between ensuring sufficient humanitarian support in the event of thousands of more Libyan deaths and avoiding being dragged into a conflict that could once again raise the spectre of heavy-handed US intervention in the Middle East. There is no doubt that in terms of capabilities, the US and Europe have a variety of options for intervention in a country on the southern shores of the Mediterranean. A no-fly zone, for example, is a practical possibility given Libya’s proximity to Nato and US bases across southern Europe. Yet Libya is also a vast territory and that makes policing its airspace both financially and strategically challenging. Western officials say a no-fly zone would first require offensive military action against the regime’s air defences – Libya retains about 216 surface-to-air missiles – which could result in civilian deaths. Air strikes could play into the hands of the Libyan dictator, who thrived for decades on confronting the west. “It [air strikes] would have the effect of galvanising Gaddafi, allowing him to portray himself instantly as victim of US and western aggression, rather than an internal revolt. That is precisely the outcome we don’t want,” says one UK official. The option of arming the opposition in the east – a proposal raised by the UK’s David Cameron this week – is also fraught with risk. “The problem here is that you have to ask yourself who would you be arming,” says James Hackett of the International Institute for Strategic Studies. “You are probably dealing with a range of different tribes and communities that have very different agendas once Gaddafi goes.” The political ramifications of intervention are also significant, particularly as the memory of the US invasion of Iraq is still fresh in both American and Arab minds. The Arab League on Wednesday insisted on the rejection of “any foreign military intervention” in Libya. Russia’s opposition to a no-fly zone means it would not be covered by a United Nations Security Council resolution. The opposition of France and Turkey, meanwhile, leaves the US and UK leading and policing the no-fly zone, rather than Nato. “A US-led intervention would transform perceptions,” says the British official. “It would once again make the upheaval in the Middle East into a story of US intervention, akin to the Iraq debacle.” Shashank Joshi, analyst at London’s Royal United Services Institute, says the US and UK might have to fall back on covert operations to support anti-regime forces, including through reconnaissance flights and communications assistance. “Those cautioning against western intervention have good points?.?.?.?but the key is to keep it low key,” he says. “Even if the rebels are not a cohesive force, there are pockets of organisation at a local level that can be points of interface for western [special] operations.” Other analysts say the US and UK could be forced into more robust military action if Col Gaddafi inflicts heavy casualties on the ground, provoking international outrage and putting pressure on governments to act. Additional reporting by Daniel Dombey in Washington