Libya

[WDWBlue]

Holly, you and I think the same way about this sort of thing.



Now we're standing by and watching OTHER people be killed, by a busybody group that doesn't live there. We're messing with things, AGAIN, that I feel shouldn't be messed with.

I have felt the same since the first Gulf War...when my stepdad, who worked for the CIA (career, since the Vietnam War era), told me a few weeks before it started that it WAS going to start. I hated it then and I hate it now.

So, you recommend we become isolationist?

And really, a CIA officer was sharing national secrets with his family? I think that;s a problem.

 

[Art 1]

Despite that they make up stories and get their "facts" wrong just to serve their purposes?

What proof do you have of that?

 

[bicker]

Bicker, it can always be worse.

But it isn't worse. It's better for them. That was the point you seem to have missed. People aren't machines; they don't just care about themselves all the time.

I agree that it's a matter of perspective and I wonder if the following scenario would change yours:

Not at all, because you made up a story to support your perspective, nothing more. There are cases in history to support all manner of outcome from all manner of approaches taken. The future is not predetermined by your fears and concerns.

 

[bicker]

There actually is genocide happening in the world now, and yet we're not running out and doing anything about it.

Many of us are doing what we can to contribute to solutions, and the same approaches don't always always work best in all situations, especially because people are different from one to another. You're talking like you expect everything to be cut-and-dried and easy. That's unreasonable. We can't do everything all at once, with perfectly reliable results that please your preference for tidiness.

People who want to talk about their moral obligations might want to think about why that is.

Because human beings are intelligent life forms, who have formed civilizations and moral perspectives.

 

[Mrs. Darcy]

Not to insult anyone but I think Bicker is the smartest person on the Dis! Whether I agree with him or not, his argument is always sound and airtight! But I admit that sometimes I have to read his posts twice to get it, since he likes loooooog sentences. LOL

 

[bicker]

Here we are 8 years later, and now it's Libya. I just hope this is handled better than Iraq was.

It is always better to do better than before. That should go without saying. One thing that would be better would be if we can get the Arab League to handle all ground operations in this case (and maybe that'll happen - unlike what has happened before, this administration apparently has ensured that the Arab League was on-board before going into this operation). American and European forces shouldn't be need to be involved beyond air strikes and such.

 

[MoniqueU]

And don't watch CNN or read the NYtimes if you wan't unbiased news either.

 

[bicker]

Even being there and seeing the current events first-hand doesn't safeguard you from bias - indeed the observations eyewitnesses are radically affected by their own personal pre-conceived notions and prejudices. The big concern is not so much the pattern of bias that any certain news source may exhibit, but rather what is very dangerous is the pattern of what can best be described as blindness to the bias that patrons of a specific news source tend to exhibit. For balance, Huff Post is a good example of something on the left analogous to Fox News on the right. CNN and NY Times are not good examples because, even though those sources, themselves, may or may not tend toward a specific bias, their patrons are much more often skeptical of those news sources as they would be of any other.

 

[Mrs. Sojourner]

Bicker, it can always be worse.

I agree that it's a matter of perspective and I wonder if the following scenario would change yours:

Using what's happened when we meddled in these things in recent years, here's a prediction: we'll go there, a bunch of people will die and Gadhafi will be overthrown. Then the rebel factions we helped to overthrow Gadhafi and other groups will start killing each other and there will be a civil war. The net result could very well be that far more people will die than would have died under Gadhafi if we had just stayed out of Libya's business.

Would the behavior of the U.N. be morally indefensible then or does our moral accountability start over from scratch?

As we've also seen, any gains made by groups in these countries are always seen as illegitimate if they're attained with the help of the west.
Going there and helping seems like a great idea until you take the time to look at the culture and realize that we may be doing more harm than good.

The first part is true. It is Africa and the cycle here.

BUT, Gadahfi has been throwing money around Africa (mostly poorer and easily influenced countries like the one I live in) and to do nothing would have, most likely, ended up in a bigger mess in the long run.

And, holy cow Fox haters you have EVERY OTHER news network showing the same side, why does it urk you so to have ONE network who shows the other side?! I am pretty sure this is why we love the U.S. because people are allowed to hear different opionions instead of just one! So, don't watch Fox news if you don't want to but don't get all bent out of shape for those of us who want to hear more then one side of the story and form our own opinions.

 

[Mrs. Sojourner]

Weighing in as a conservative and I think you're absolutely right. I watch all the major news networks as well as read from other sources - and I make up my own mind. Its really tough to get an unbiased news report from any one source - it seems that all of the major news sources (television) are skewed to a certain side.

On a side note, you sound way more intelligent than someone who dismisses Fox completely. They have coverage that is from another angle - and its not always conservative (often though) - sometimes its just a different part of the story that another network didn't cover.

 

[DisneyCruiser83]

And don't watch CNN or read the NYtimes if you wan't unbiased news either.

All the people I know that discredit FOX News have not ever actually watched any of the programming. I am not sure if that is the case with the people here, but I have not read any posts of people with any proof of misleading stories or actual legitimate reasons for not watching. I guess people just listen to outtakes from Jon Stewart or what CNN/MSNBC (their competitors) say about it. I have actually seen Red Eye break more news stories than any other network. I hear things on NBC and CNN days after I watched the story on Red Eye.

 

[bellebud]

for anyone who doesn't really care for CNN, this is so funny!

http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2009/10/stewart-slams-cnn-for-fact-checking-snl-but-not-gop/

 

[Jennasis]

I don't mind Fox for news coverage (and I am about as liberal as they get). I just refuse to watch any of the talking head or opinion shows on Fox. But for breaking news coverage and such I will check them out.

FWIW I don't watch talking-heads on CNN either, but I tend to turn into CNN for breaking news first.

 

[MoniqueU]

I am a conservative that won't watch Glenn Beck. 5 minutes of him and I am ready to hit the tv or off myself because he is so negative and depressing. Oreilly I like for exposing the red cross after 911 and going after Jesse Jackson and shedding light of the misuese of funds for the rainbow coalition. I can't stand huckabee (too folksy) and I used to watch Hannity and Colmes and still often watch hannity. I used to watch Greta Van Sustern every night. She used to do more crime stories and in depth compared to the other networks. She has gotten away from that but I still watch sometimes. The straight news news is very good and often skims over anything I wan't to know more about or dismisses things as beneath their coverage such as downplaying the tea party movement or when Larry King was around interviwing guests that he didn't have pertinent questions for the stories they told. There is alot more to fox then people realize and often people don't give it a chance or even know what propels someone to watch. Now if I could get SkyNews in the US I would probably get hooked on them too!

 

[akhenaten]

I am a conservative that won't watch Glenn Beck. 5 minutes of him and I am ready to hit the tv or off myself because he is so negative and depressing. Oreilly I like for exposing the red cross after 911 and going after Jesse Jackson and shedding light of the misuese of funds for the rainbow coalition. I can't stand huckabee (too folksy) and I used to watch Hannity and Colmes and still often watch hannity. I used to watch Greta Van Sustern every night. She used to do more crime stories and in depth compared to the other networks. She has gotten away from that but I still watch sometimes. The straight news news is very good and often skims over anything I wan't to know more about or dismisses things as beneath their coverage such as downplaying the tea party movement or when Larry King was around interviwing guests that he didn't have pertinent questions for the stories they told. There is alot more to fox then people realize and often people don't give it a chance or even know what propels someone to watch. Now if I could get SkyNews in the US I would probably get hooked on them too!

Thank you .. Monique for sharing how you feel about GB it is so nice to hear that others who may look at things differently than me also share my opinion of him.... All of that negativity is dividing our nation and that is not good for any one of us !!!! People of different viewpoints worked together to create our great nation and we need to work together now!!

 

[Art 1]

Thank you .. Monique for sharing how you feel about GB it is so nice to hear that others who may look at things differently than me also share my opinion of him.... All of that negativity is dividing our nation and that is not good for any one of us !!!! People of different viewpoints worked together to create our great nation and we need to work together now!!

What is your opinion on Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann?

 

[skater]

What is your opinion on Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann?

I was thinking the same thing.

 

[skater]

I don't mind Fox for news coverage (and I am about as liberal as they get). I just refuse to watch any of the talking head or opinion shows on Fox. But for breaking news coverage and such I will check them out.

FWIW I don't watch talking-heads on CNN either, but I tend to turn into CNN for breaking news first.

This makes lots of sense. I get tired of all the editorializing on both sides and wish all the news networks would stick to more news coverage. Surely there are enough news worthy items happening in the world to program more real news into their day .

 

[palavra]

This makes lots of sense. I get tired of all the editorializing on both sides and wish all the news networks would stick to more news coverage. Surely there are enough news worthy items happening in the world to program more real news into their day .

If you really want to be informed about what's going on in the world, getting the information from a variety of sources is the way to go.

Incidentally, the air bombing the U.S. and Great Britain is doing over Libya is much more like the air strikes Clinton called for in Libya in 1994 than it is the invasion of Iraq. It seems there are no current plans for ground forces in Libya.
I certainly hope, for the sake of the rebels in Libya, that Gadhafi will back down and leave the country. Libya has been an oppressed nation for far too long.

 

[Kimberly]

This seems to be happening a LOT lately.