Libya Declares War on Turkey

originally posted by: RAY1990
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

To be fair rules of engagement were followed mostly in WWI and WWII, with WWII things got desperate, war crimes were uncovered and opposing armies happily negated rules when those rules had been violated against them.

With all that being said The Hague only seems to convict losers to war crimes so I'm not sure why any of it even matters, these institutions are a joke upon the foundations of why they were built... Which is a bloody shame considering the state of the world today, we could use some justice. We're being failed as a race by our leaders.

Hence my statements about the rules of engagement to begin with. Everyone starts by playing fairly...until they start to lose (or there's a risk of losing). Then all bets are off. A quick trip through the history books will show us millions of examples.

I have to agree with Worldstar's assessment. Nobody will field millions of soldiers in a combat scenario ever again imho yet the OP is absolutely bang on about how a handful of people can achieve what it would take massive military assets to do only 70 years ago... We've learnt a lot from the rise of special forces during WWII.

Agreed. However, these conflicts can't be described in the same context as a "World Wars" like WWI and WWII. And frankly, no war after 6 August 1945 really can either. They might seem like "World War" to the participants, but to humanity as a whole they really aren't close at all. That was really my only point.

War never changes, how we fight will. And the world is in conflict in various forms, with globalisation in full effect it means very few people are not involved directly or indirectly, whether they know it or not.

Hell I could argue that the world is at war with terrorism but that's mainly a side show of the actual things in play.

Nobody declares war anymore. We've got superpowers sanctioning others, trade wars even between allies... And you want to wait till nukes fall to declare this a global conflict? Whilst questioning why nations like Iceland haven't fielded 1000's of soldiers?

I don't want to "wait" for anything to name a conflict something. My whole point is, again, conventional "war" on a global scale is not possible in the shadow of nuclear weapons. So, I guess we agree that all wars will just be proxy wars (to sell weapons or whatever), and the real 'wars' will be fought on paper through policies and money.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Hence my statements about the rules of engagement to begin with. Everyone starts by playing fairly...until they start to lose (or there's a risk of losing). Then all bets are off. A quick trip through the history books will show us millions of examples. 

The problem is it's difficult to teach morality especially when individuals feel they've been wronged somehow or have seen injustice, I've never been to war so I can only imagine the despair it entails. Yet at the same time we've got ex military men on ATS who talk like they'd happily commit war crimes to vanquish their perceived enemies. I've talked to these extremists in real life too.

Point being the world is full of double standards and stereotyping of others, very few die in conflict with honour because instinct will often override it, the will to survive is strong in everyone.

Agreed. However, these conflicts can't be described in the same context as a "World Wars" like WWI and WWII. And frankly, no war after 6 August 1945 really can either. They might seem like "World War" to the participants, but to humanity as a whole they really aren't close at all. That was really my only point. 

That's somewhat my point also. I can't stress enough though that with globalism we are all involved with this fight, it's impossible not to be unless you live under a rock and have no concept of money. We all play a part in this well oiled machine... In WWII how many conscientious objectors still fed the war machines?

Today we live in a world of ignorance. I could make many comparisons to the major wars but I'll just say that not many people died during them, however their was plenty of destruction. Today there's plenty of death and destruction too, not to mention the degradation of society and infrastructure whilst we busy ourselves with technology.

I could argue today's conflicts are more dangerous than the world wars, they no longer need to convince nations to destroy other nations and the risks are much much higher.

I don't want to "wait" for anything to name a conflict something. My whole point is, again, conventional "war" on a global scale is not possible in the shadow of nuclear weapons. So, I guess we agree that all wars will just be proxy wars (to sell weapons or whatever), and the real 'wars' will be fought on paper through policies and money.

My nation was bankrupt and destitute after WWII, though I can't compare the struggles some suffer today with percentages of the past I'd be wholly ignorant to say the suffering isn't comparable. WWII was at the backend of the great depression... Our big difference is that the majority of people have slipped into poverty and crisis over a longer period of time and maybe hardly noticed it.

and the real 'wars' will be fought on paper through policies and money.

I had to quote this again because for me this is a real issue... We're paying for these wars, we ordinary folks suffer from them. We might not be fighting these wars for them but we damn sure are paying for them and it shows. It's a global conflict, we probably should have a new name though because I have to agree that WWIII doesn't quite cut it.

Those days are gone, perpetual warfare will ruin humanity though. Suffering makes beasts of people and the concept that is evil is most definitely infectious.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

What we're missing is the mass involvement of the major military powers in direct fighting against each other. Let's not forget, there are plenty of countries that didn't see WW1 and 2 as "world wars" because there were large parts of the world that were mostly unaffected. What made them world wars in the way we call them is that the major military powers were engaged in massive fighting against each other directly, and the theater of major combat operations included the Atlantic, Pacific, Europe, western Asia, northern Africa, and east Asia.

The major power involvement, direct action against each other, and the area of major combat operations just isn't at the scale it was in WW1 and 2. The criteria you've used, like x many countries being involved and the major powers at least in a contributing role; if those things defined a world war this would be something like World War 5.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I tend to agree with you its unlikely world war 3 would be fought without the use of nuclear weapons. But the reason ww2 was a world war is fighting was taking place on every continent between the top 20 militaries in the world with multiple others assisting.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

Hey, really appreciate your thoughts. Glad you got 'worked up' .

a reply to: tinner07

I'm sure it was profound, but I can't see anything.

Just sayin'.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

When I looked at the last/bottom pic of the OP where the dude on the left appears to be reading the instructions. I questioned what language they were in.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

Humh!

Far from WW3 thats for sure.

But hey people need hobbies, going to war for whatever reason is as good as any. And no doubt the US, Russia, and everybody else have plenty of outdated tech they can sell to both sides. In all nothing there is happening that has not been happening for the past century or so. There simply dying because they believe there fighting for something.

But hey if Turkey and Libya want to go at it. I am quite sure that Exon Mobil will be there to pick up the pieces and build there basses after the dust settles, along with many other such other corporate states just floating around on the outskirts of these sort of skirmishes. Circling like vultures really.

As you can see nothing new.

And also UN? You expect them to do something?

You may as well call in the military wing of the salvation army.

a reply to: galadofwarthethird
Another view of reprisal strikes.

a reply to: worldstarcountry
oh ya! Missiles will do that.

What are Turkey and Lybia fighting over again? Or is this just standard territorial disputes, or just more different sects of Muslims fights, how can you tell which is which, here in the west we simply have a color code, you know so we can tell, do the sunnis have blue turbans and the other guys a different color?

Confusing indeed. And also I dont understand what your implying?

Nations have been going at it since forever and over stupider reasons which when looked at, no matter there reason, political, religious this or that. Well if you follow the money you will get to the bottom of 99.9% of everything humans do, have done, and will do.

a reply to: galadofwarthethird
I am implying the UN is not really going to survive another decade as an institution. Maybe not even five years at this rate.

And that multiple Gulf Cooperation Council members and NATO members are competing against each other on the Libyan battlefield as well. Can you give me some recent precedent for that?? Because the closest I can think of was maybe the first Balkans conflict?

Paris branch of red shield seems to be in disagreement with London, Naples, and New York. Also, the Monarchs of the Middle East are competing against Qatar and Turkey. Seems to me like the old Ottoman dynasties managed to flip the royal families in that state. The 2020's are going to be quite a spectacle !

a reply to: worldstarcountry

Well ya! What did you expect. There just people after all. Because they wear a fancy hat or sit in a fancy seat. Does not mean they can change anything, most especially who they are.

And if you cant even change who your are. How in the hell are you going to supposedly make the world a better place? By magic? Presto spagetio you will legislate it into being? May as well wave a magic wand, as it will be equally as effective.

So ya, you have NATO members that are competing on the same battlefield for different causes and interests. Monkey see, monkey do, monkey poo poo, and throw do do.

Though why is everybody all interested in libya all of a sudden. Oh well doesn't matter. Maybe they US should join as well, seems there is alot of things to blow up there now, what with Turkey and others joining in, I suppose its only a matter of time.

But it would be more in favor then going to war with Iran. The only war I want to see there is a nuclear war, not between the US or Iran, but the countries around there, Iran vs Saudis vs Israel. Oh ya, way to many countries and nations and peoples there that are way to similar needs to be cut down to one country or nation soon.

Who wants to keep track of all those interests in that part. Thats just a waste of processing power and paper and time. Like a bad case of the Ivans...Ivan, meet Ivan, hes your great uncles Ivan son. At some point you got to start changing name around or you forget whos who and whats what.

But ya, why are they fighting in Libya again?

Ah like it matters, but if there itching for a fight, then Libya is likely less in distaste now a days. Most especially since the whole thing started because the US and some politicians decided to play at being war generals for whatever wacky reason they somehow got into there head.

And now we got this, because of that whole sour deal. Whatever it is there fighting about there, as nobody really cares.

a reply to: galadofwarthethird
Kind sir, I am just documenting the world. I am not sure why your being so dismissive, I am not pushing anything on you. I am not selling you a way to think or a line of thought. I did not say "imagine x,y,z and what would have happened if it were a,b,c!"

I am showing, documenting, and reporting to an online community that has a forum for these interests, that the UNSC states are fragrantly violating United Nations resolutions on import/export of arms to Libya. It is like Lord of War the movie, but we get to see it in real time thanks to the internet. Because intermediaries are involved, just like in the movie, these states can feign some kind of ignorance and shock at being caught.

Im not even a Christian, but this seems like it applies.

1Woe to Ariel, to Ariel, the city where David dwelt! add ye year to year; let them kill sacrifices.

2Yet I will distress Ariel, and there shall be heaviness and sorrow: and it shall be unto me as Ariel.

3And I will camp against thee round about, and will lay siege against thee with a mount, and I will raise forts against thee.

4And thou shalt be brought down, and shalt speak out of the ground, and thy speech shall be low out of the dust, and thy voice shall be, as of one that hath a familiar spirit, out of the ground, and thy speech shall whisper out of the dust.

5Moreover the multitude of thy strangers shall be like small dust, and the multitude of the terrible ones shall be as chaff that passeth away: yea, it shall be at an instant suddenly.

6Thou shalt be visited of the LORD of hosts with thunder, and with earthquake, and great noise, with storm and tempest, and the flame of devouring fire.

7And the multitude of all the nations that fight against Ariel, even all that fight against her and her munition, and that distress her, shall be as a dream of a night vision.

8It shall even be as when an hungry man dreameth, and, behold, he eateth; but he awaketh, and his soul is empty: or as when a thirsty man dreameth, and, behold, he drinketh; but he awaketh, and, behold, he is faint, and his soul hath appetite: so shall the multitude of all the nations be, that fight against mount Zion.

9Stay yourselves, and wonder; cry ye out, and cry: they are drunken, but not with wine; they stagger, but not with strong drink.

10For the LORD hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes: the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered.

11And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed: 12And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.

13Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

14Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous work among this people, even a marvellous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid.

15Woe unto them that seek deep to hide their counsel from the LORD, and their works are in the dark, and they say, Who seeth us? and who knoweth us?

16Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?