US: Libya v. AFG and Iraq

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderators: Community Team, Global Moderators

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

US: Libya v. AFG and Iraq

Postby BigBallinStalin on Tue Oct 30, 2012 10:27 pm

If you compare the consequences of Libya to Iraq and Afghanistan, then it's clear that the US intervention in Libya was less expensive* (so far) than in Iraq and Afghanistan.

*As in (1) the monetary price that US taxpayers pay/will pay, (2) loss of US lives, (3) loss of non-ISAF nationals' lives, etc.


Since it's clear that Libya is less costly than the other wars and their post-war reconstruction efforts, and if the US wants to intervene in a country, then is not the Libyan model the optimal approach?
User avatar
Colonel BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 4516
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: US: Libya v. AFG and Iraq

Postby Phatscotty on Tue Oct 30, 2012 10:38 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:If you compare the consequences of Libya to Iraq and Afghanistan, then it's clear that the US intervention in Libya was less expensive* (so far) than in Iraq and Afghanistan.

*As in (1) the monetary price that US taxpayers pay/will pay, (2) loss of US lives, (3) loss of non-ISAF nationals' lives, etc.


Since it's clear that Libya is less costly than the other wars and their post-war reconstruction efforts, and if the US wants to intervene in a country, then is not the Libyan model the optimal approach?


it would be awesome if in every war we could only use some airplanes and not have an actual invasion!

Or Congressional approval :(
"I want you to remember that, to remind you to stay out of my way. In all the years to come, in all your most private moments, I want you to remember my hand at your throat. I want you to remember the one man who beat you."
User avatar
Colonel Phatscotty
SoC Training Adviser
 
Posts: 2291
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm
Medals: 91
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (4) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (4) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (3) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (2) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (5)
General Achievement (2) Clan Achievement (10) Training Achievement (6) Challenge Achievement (1) Tournament Contribution (13)

Re: US: Libya v. AFG and Iraq

Postby BigBallinStalin on Tue Oct 30, 2012 11:05 pm

If you miss Congressional approvals, then I've got a nice used car--specially priced, just for you!
User avatar
Colonel BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 4516
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: US: Libya v. AFG and Iraq

Postby Baron Von PWN on Wed Oct 31, 2012 1:29 am

yeah if you can find a ton of locals willing to put their lives on the line to fight their own government then it is a very cheap and effective method of intervention. However that situation isin't exactly dime a dozen.

It's going on right now in syria. Likely with a libya style intervention assad wouldn't last much longer. However unlike Qadafi, Assad has got some friends willing to back him up. Its unclear how far those friends would go, but the risk make the potential costs a lot higher.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Baron Von PWN
 
Posts: 202
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:05 pm
Location: Capital region ,Canada
Medals: 19
Standard Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3)

Re: US: Libya v. AFG and Iraq

Postby BigBallinStalin on Wed Oct 31, 2012 11:14 am

Baron Von PWN wrote:yeah if you can find a ton of locals willing to put their lives on the line to fight their own government then it is a very cheap and effective method of intervention. However that situation isin't exactly dime a dozen.


Iran, 2010 or so during that row on the election.
The Arab Spring (so pretty much all of the middle east)
Syria (for the past year)
Afghanistan (1990s to early 2000s, with Northern Alliance fighting the Taliban---US did nothing significant)


But those (in my opinion) are more spontaneous as oppose to centrally planned (i.e. the result of foreign active measures). In the past 10-20 years, the US has had the opportunity to engage in the Libyan approach, so it can't be the case that these situations are a dime a dozen.

Besides, if the Libyan model proves most effective, then the US could gear up their hum int and implement active measures which would result in riots/etc. in the foreign country that they wish to change.


Baron Von PWN wrote:It's going on right now in syria. Likely with a libya style intervention assad wouldn't last much longer. However unlike Qadafi, Assad has got some friends willing to back him up. Its unclear how far those friends would go, but the risk make the potential costs a lot higher.


How do you know the risks and costs would be higher? Because Qadaffi had plenty of friends (who were apparently bought or were not agitated by a foreign occupation--e.g. Iraq and AFG).
User avatar
Colonel BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 4516
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham
Medals: 48
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (1)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4)
Tournament Achievement (5) General Achievement (1) Clan Achievement (10)

Re: US: Libya v. AFG and Iraq

Postby Baron Von PWN on Wed Oct 31, 2012 1:31 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:
Baron Von PWN wrote:yeah if you can find a ton of locals willing to put their lives on the line to fight their own government then it is a very cheap and effective method of intervention. However that situation isin't exactly dime a dozen.


Iran, 2010 or so during that row on the election.
The Arab Spring (so pretty much all of the middle east)
Syria (for the past year)
Afghanistan (1990s to early 2000s, with Northern Alliance fighting the Taliban---US did nothing significant)


But those (in my opinion) are more spontaneous as oppose to centrally planned (i.e. the result of foreign active measures). In the past 10-20 years, the US has had the opportunity to engage in the Libyan approach, so it can't be the case that these situations are a dime a dozen.

Besides, if the Libyan model proves most effective, then the US could gear up their hum int and implement active measures which would result in riots/etc. in the foreign country that they wish to change.


Baron Von PWN wrote:It's going on right now in syria. Likely with a libya style intervention assad wouldn't last much longer. However unlike Qadafi, Assad has got some friends willing to back him up. Its unclear how far those friends would go, but the risk make the potential costs a lot higher.


How do you know the risks and costs would be higher? Because Qadaffi had plenty of friends (who were apparently bought or were not agitated by a foreign occupation--e.g. Iraq and AFG).


Most of the Arab spring didn't require foreign intervention, or would not have been helped by foreign intervention. In places such as qatar where opposition was too weak. Iran was like that too, sure there were big protests and a lot of opposition. Were they willing to go all out to civil war? no. If a foreign power were to intervene there it would be more like Afghanistan.

US didn't do anything before 9/11 because frankly why bother? Even after 9/11 you have to wonder why the US decided to go the full out occupation route.

I'm suspicious of the ability of active measures to stir up serious discontent. The soviets tried it for decades, they never got anywhere other than in places were locals actually had grievances, even in those places the most trouble it caused were drawn out rebellions. These situations occur organically and cannot be manufactured. Once it occurs a foreign power can help it along significantly but it has to occur first.

as to why syria could potentially cost more.

Russia has been stepping up to bat for them in the UN. China is even stepping in somewhat. Russia is already selling arms to the Syrian government. Iran is no doubt keeping a close eye on things. Assad seems to have a lot more friends internationally than Qadafi did.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Baron Von PWN
 
Posts: 202
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:05 pm
Location: Capital region ,Canada
Medals: 19
Standard Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3)

Re: US: Libya v. AFG and Iraq

Postby Dukasaur on Fri Nov 02, 2012 4:36 am

Louis XI used to bribe the Flemish to rise up against the Burgundians, and future generations carried on the tradition, even after the Netherlands passed from Burgundy to Austria and from Austria to Spain.

Only took 350 years before it worked!
User avatar
Captain Dukasaur
Head Socialite
Head Socialite
 
Posts: 11156
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:49 pm
Location: Beautiful Niagara
Medals: 136
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (3)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (2) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (3)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (2) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (19)
General Achievement (15) Clan Achievement (9) Training Achievement (2) Challenge Achievement (5) Tournament Contribution (31)


Return to Babble-On Five

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jonesthecurl, tzor

Login