Thursday, March 17, 2011
THURSDAY HOMEWORK: FOREIGN POLICY IN LIBYA
Considering today's discussion in class regarding foreign policy approaches, players and tools, what foreign policy strategy do you support using to address the current conflict in Libya? Be specific and think out potential consequences in defending your choice.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I believe that containing Libyans, restricting air space would be the best Foriegn Policy tool to be utilized. Since the United States still has it's "big guy" reputation, Muammar Gaddafi will be less likely to disregard the restricted air space. He may be crazy, but probably not crazy enough to start a war with the United States. This is, because he knows if he disrespects the restriction, the United States will have no other choice but to go to war, and Gaddafi knows that he will not win. Other Foreign Policy tools would not be as effective because Gaddafi seems to be willing to sacrifice almost anything in order to do what he wants. Such as threatening to not trade will does not scare him, considering what the media has revealed about him.
ReplyDeletecontrolling the air space in Libya is a great way to help save the people and protect the oil fields. The possibility of Gaddafi flying his planes is likely which would bring up the question on whether or not the u.s. would have to take military force. I am also thinking that.. will he be daring enough to send up fighters even if we say no flying? he might be intimidated because we haven't lost an f-16 in 30 years.
ReplyDeleteI think we should just pull out with all the money we are spending on Iraq. We would spend even more money and that is not a good thing since we are spending more than we have already. They should handle this by themselves because we are already in trouble. If we do anything at the most I think that supplying them with weapons would not be that bad. That can get back to us and then we would have a bad economic and government ties with them because we helped them out. If most the people want us to come and get the President out of there then give weapons but do not sacrifice Americans.
ReplyDeleteI would be in favor of taking no action at all. If the United States decides to take any individual action ( meaning an action that was an independent decision not an action that was part of a U.N. intervention) every possible option would turn out poorly for the United States. If the U.S. decides to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya, it could be seen as an act of war by the Gaddafi-led government, leading to a potential conflict between Libya and the United States should the pro-government forces emerge victorious over the rebels. Giving material aid to the rebels would also be unwise, for two reasons. The first reason would be that the U.S. does not have the money to handle outfitting an entire rebel army. Secondly,funding and supplying the rebel group could end up backfiring as it did during the 1980s in Afghanistan during the Soviet conflict.The same weapons supplied to the Taliban to fight the Soviets are now being used against our own soldiers. And even if the U.S. supported the rebels and they happened to win, angry Gaddafi supporters resentful about America's interference in their affairs could lead to another angry militant resistance group looking to attack America and its citizens.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Justin. My view is that the United States shouldn't even get involved in this conflict. It would be best to design our foreign policy to keep us out of Libya. In class today we talked about how the United States is in way over their head both economically and politically. This is another scenario that has come about in which the United States may once again take on. We keep saying when is the U.S going to take care of itself and this would be a good time to start. The U.S can not take on another thing from another country because we simply don't have the money nor the time to be involved in these conflicts. As much as we would like to help the citizens, I believe that it would benefit everyone in the world for the U.S to stay out of this business in Libya
ReplyDeleteSeeing the current problems, such as with our massive gas price spikes, with Libya, I believe it is time to set this no-fly-zone restriction down. If Kadafi and the other Libyans cannot comply to these rules, we should go in there, and start shooting them down, until they listen. It's not the civilians that we should be after, it's Kadafi and his little "senate" of people, such as his sons and many wives... We already killed one of his sons a while ago, why not kill his other ones? Once we accomplish this, we should have him either furious, or ready to back down... So, the foreign policy that I am striking down as I believe would work is to go to war with this country. Now, with this tactic, we have to think about the money we would be spending for this... We have to see what kind of military we need to send out there. Do we need to send in the Army? Marines? Special Forces? I believe these questions should be put forth before we decide to do all of this. Although, I believe putting down this no fly zone restriction, and sending in squads of Special Forces to go in, and take down Kadafi's sons, and possibly Kadafi, himself.. would be a good thing, with the help of air support and such, as well.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Brian about containment being the top option when it comes to Libya. Giving the rebel forces military aid would help them to fight back and prevent from anyone else being killed, but I think it would come down to taking down Qaddafi himself that would improve the situation. Being able to contain the area would cause it to have no help from the outside world, and it would restrict airspace so no more bombings could take place. Of course, though, there is the problem that Qaddafi won't abide by the restricted air space and continue to bomb his people. If that does come to happen, we can't back out, or else things will get continually worse than they are, and something could go even more wrong and cause the whole country to collapse on itself.
ReplyDeleteI understand that the United States always feels the need to be the parent in situations like these, but it looks like Libya needs some help, or else our own economy could get worse. It's all a matter of stability in the countries we reside with and our own government stability. If we were to back out, I wouldn't be able to guess who the runner up for aid would be, because we have come accustomed to doing everything ourselves.
I think that the US should just stay out of the conflictin Lybia. There are times to get involved in other countries fights but this is not one. The US is in a huge economic depression one that can't be matched unless you look at the Great Depression. So if the US was to get involve and inforce a No-Fly policy doesnt mean that the Lybian Government will follow it and at this time we dont have the cash to send any planes or anti aircraft to rebels to inforce it. But if we inforce it and they don't follow it and we are unable to back our policy up then we would look like a dog thats all bark and no bight (to use a metaphor) and will be taken less serious in future conflicts.
ReplyDeleteI think that we should become alliances with surrounding countries that we can count on them for support if the no-fly zone idea doesn't work. I do believe that the no fly zone is a good idea but if Libya decides to disregard our wishes than we will need help from supporting countries to keep them under control. If we have the support of other countries than we can also slowly add in our military without any controversy. Also I believe that in the worst case scenario then we would need to move in troops or join forces with other countries and their troops to shoot down the planes, but it could make us come off as a more violent country. I believe that if we cut off our trades that it would hurt us more because we rely on them too it is not just a one way street.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Brian S, that the restricting air space would be the best approach so far, because by doing this we are not risking the lives of Americans to help out Libya but it will be helping the people of Libya overall by providing them a guaranteed protection from air attacks. Although many say that Qaddafi is crazy, he is one man who knows that his rule is about to come to an end so I doubt that he will start a war if the U.S decides to do a no fly-zone policy.
ReplyDeleteBut as a secondary option I would say it would be best for the U.S to just stay away from the conflict in Libya to save our troops and resources for ourselves rather than use them in a situation that could turn into a war.
I believe that the U.S. should stay out of the current conflict in Libya. We need to start becoming "Loners" and stop getting involved all around the world spending money we do not have. As we discussed in class, we have the threat of Japan wanting money from us to worry about. The last thing we need to do right now is get into another war...and we can not be sure that if we get involved with Libya that we will not be entangled in one. Also, even if we got involved without war that would still require spending money that we do not have. This is a good chance for us to show the world that we are putting our needs over helping other countries. For once, we need to start helping ourselves and if that requires leaving Libya to resolve its own conflict, then that is what shall be done.
ReplyDeleteAfter discussing the problems that the United States clearly already has, I think that the U.S. should just stay out of the current conflict in Libya. I think it is time that we actually start worrying about ourselves rather than putting others first, especially since we have our own issues to worry about such as the war in Iraq. The one that thing could come out of trying to assist the issue in Libya is a possibility of another war arising, and this country does not need that at the moment. Like Janelle said, the United States needs to become "Loners" for a little while and soon or else we will just keep getting into more trouble with more countries even though we are trying to help. Leaving Libya alone should be a part of the process of becoming "Loners" in order to resolve our own issues first. We don't even know if they want us there, and maybe us going there will causes even more problems.
ReplyDeleteI think that the United States need to become more independent and pay back all the countries we have "borrowed" money from. We have in debt trillion of dollars, doesn't the government officials such as, the president and vice president, secretary of state, secretary of defense, and national security advisor. They all have a role to be played and they need to make sure we don't borrow or spend money if it is not necessary. We need to be selfish until we are on track again. We should be "Loners," at a time like this, this is what we need. We need to think about our nation and economy. We need to stay out of conflicts that do not involve us and maybe help out with equipment, but not giving/borrowing money.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the United States should just stay out of the disaster that is going on in Libya. If the United States does go into Libya they will be risking getting in even more debt then they original were in to start. Like most other countries that we have helped, Libya will not be able to pay us back for our services if we can even get Qaddafi out of power. Also if Qaddafi decides that he is going to go against any means that we want him to meet it will just lead to another war that will end up just as the Iraqi war did. In Libya the United Nations also just got involved so that means that the United States does not need to aid as much. The UN joining is very helpful for the United States because now if we back out then there are still multiple countries that are helping the rebels.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Brian Sousa. I think that the containment foreign policy should be used and airspace should be controlled. This will help with the risk of attacks. Gaddafi is crazy so we don't really know what he will do, but like Brian said, he's going to do whatever he wants.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I agree with Zack because going into Libya can possibly result in the United States spending far more money then what we have, and putting ourselves in a never ending hole we cant climb out of. Also, by going into Libya and acting all "big" we may even start a war with Libya, which will result in us spending even more money. i can really see this happening because I cant see Gaddafi just surrenduring to the United States because if hes gone this far, he might as well keep going.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I believe some other country should step in and "help" out because honestly, the United States really can't afford it and if people blame us for not stepping in I really don't care.
I think that the no fly zone is the way to go in Libya. However the negative effects of this could be disastrous...What if Gaddafi over powers our troops and starts killing our soldiers?? We could lose control of the no fly zone and fail the initial mission. Then again what is the intial mission, are we trying to help Libya or are we going to get something in the end? I say a no fly zone would be the way to go but in the back of my head i am also saying that we really cant afford it and shouldnt even be involved in this situation right now as we have our own war and economic problems to deal with.
ReplyDeleteI think that Americans aren’t in the position to continue helping other countries until we help ourselves. It’s obvious that we have been spending beyond our means and going into Libya in anyway will only cost us more money. But, because America has paternal instincts we will of course not be able to stay away from the situation in Libya. If we have to do something I believe creating, and enforcing, a no fly zone would be most efficient. It would be best to contain the situation and try to get things back into a manageable state.
ReplyDeleteI think that we should let Libya or other countries do whatever it takes to stop Gadhafi. The United States currently has too many issues on their plate as it is, and we haven't even completely pulled out of our last war, we can't afford to possibly start another one. We already have war problems on top of our huge debt, and over poor economy, we can't risk the no fly zone failing, because if it does then we don't know what comes next. I think the best thing to do is to stay out of it, and let someone else handle it.
ReplyDeleteI think we should do nothing. It's there problem. We need to take a big step back and look at the big picture. Sure, it'd be nice if we could help everyone who needed it, but we have no money. It isn't really our problem anyways. People will never learn how to handle their own governments if we keep helping them. We went through wars before we got ours the way it is, and it still isn't perfect. If we try to prevent government related wars in other countires, we are hindering their learning process.
ReplyDeleteAs a country, I believe that America should take the Collective Security approach in this situation. America does not have the economic stability to be leaders in Libya. Instead, we can work with other countries to influence improvements in Libya. This way we still have a say in the world's problems but can take a step back and not be a main part of the conflict. Although the oil prices are affecting us as a country, I think it will not be beneficial to take an Internationalism or Imperialism role because this does not guarantee an improvement for America.
ReplyDeleteI think that America should think about our own situations rather than zoom in on Libya's. Yeah-it'd be nice to help out another country, but in order to do that we would need to feed our more money into services such as military forces, humanitarian aid, etc. to help the people & country as a whole. If we do that, debt will continue to pile onto the load we currently obtain, and the problems will get even worse. I think that before we decide to use any strategies to help other countries, we must help ourself.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Zack and Terry. I support isolationism because the national debt is already too big. At most, maybe we could send some humanitarian aid to the rebels like medical supplies. But we should mostly think about ourselves more until at least the national debt comes down. If we try to stay completely out of the situation, there are going to be a lot of people who start asking why not. That is why the most we should do is humanitarian aid, to satisfy those who call for assistance. But, since Moammar Gadhafi sounds like he may take medical supplies as siding with the rebels, we should be wary about how much aid we send in. I doubt that Obama or Biden could publicly make this decision because they would lose attention from those who wish to step into Libya. However, maybe the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, or the National Security Advisor could take the main blame. Again, I don't think we're ready yet to spend a lot of money on others' business.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I think that the concept of the "no fly-zone" will cause war and is not a good option. The option of "isolationism" or "lonerism" where we do not involve ourselves in the affairs of other nations is not the correct option at all. The nations need to work together in order to maintain peace and stability. We do not to focus on our country first but there are better approaches to that than isolating ourselves. I believe that the best idea is "collective security", and that we should work with other countries to influence world affairs. What made me realize that is when I read the reading and it said that even though we are not getting our gas directly from Libya, it still is affecting us and it is greatly affecting the global economics. This made me recognize that we need a collective security system because each nations economics depends on the rest of the globe so we need to negotiate with the other nations in order to decide what to do about these worldwide crisis's. I also think that economic aid is the best tool for foreign policy because we are not intervening we just are assisting in order to do what is right.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the best form of action is the no fly zone. Because libya is militarily active other peaceful options do not seam reasonable at this time. Creating the no fly zone will cripple the dictator into giving up. However if he decides to not listen and fly his planes anyway we would be forced into taking military action. We would have to go in and shoot down any planes that took off. That would force him to give up but might use more resources then we want to us.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Justin and Adam that we should simply stay out of this conflict with Libya. They raised great point in saying that we do not have the resources to deal with this country's issues.
ReplyDeleteFor example, say we set up this no-fly zone. Yeah, it will most likely scare him into backing down; but what if it doesn't? What if he sees this as a challenge? Then there we are in a war with a country that isn't even worth our time just because we feel as though we always need to be controlling everybody.