For this week's blog, I want your opinion on the President's decision to become involved in Libya. Your opinion must be backed up by evidence. Answer this question in 1-3 paragraphs.
Do you think the President made the right decision in becoming involved in the conflict in Libya? Why? or Why not?
Thank you and I expect your name, date, and class period to be signed at the bottom of your posting.
-Ms. Stoller
I think that it Obama’s choice to intervene the conflict in Libya was the right decision. I think that if it were any other circumstance, not concerning other people outside of the country, it would be wrong to intervene. However, since Gaddafi has killed thousands of people, including journalists- from different countries- it is the right thing to do for the U.S. to help stop what is going on.
ReplyDeleteWhen we watched the video in class today of Obama announcing that the U.S. was going to Libya, he listed many reasons for doing so; Gaddafi is killing thousands of people a day, bombing hospitals and ambulances, he’s cut off the country from all means of contacting other countries, the people of Libya are asking for help, he’s threatened to go to each house and kill the people one by one, he’s murdered and raped journalists, and he’s cut off the clean water supply. Just a couple of these reasons alone are enough to give another country the right to intervene, because what Gaddafi is doing to his own people is horrific. Also, Obama said his main reason for sending U.S. troops to Libya was to help prevent a massacre from happening. If the U.S. can help end this major conflict between Gaddafi and the people of Libya, with NATO, then the decision to intervene will inevitably be historical, and ultimately life changing.
Meena Rockney
Period 2- Civics
3/29/11
I agree with President Obama's decision to intervene in Libya, because it was done in order to protect the people of Libya who's lives were at risk. It would have wrong for the world to sit by and watch as innocent people were killed at the hands of Gaddafi. The reason Obama sent troops into Libya was to stop it from being a massacre. Obama faced this very difficult decision, because no matter what choice he made, people will criticize him, and since innocent lives were at stake he made a wise decision.
ReplyDeleteAlex Swanson
Period 2
Civics
I believe that is was the right choice by the president to intervene in Libya. I don't really understand why it took so long for him to make the decision he did, but he seemed hesitant. The only reason we should be there, is becuase the rebels have asked for our help. If they wouldn't have than I don't think that we should be there,Qudaffi is killing thousands of innocent people daily, and it has got to stop. Recently on fox news it was stated that there was no sign of him stepping down and resigning from his leadership.There were also accusations made that he had chemical weapons and would use them. Fortunately,they have been deactivated and are no longer within his control. I think that Qudaffi has the means and tools to continue hurting and killing people daily and he has got to be stopped.
ReplyDeleteI agree with President Obama's decision to become involved with the situation in Libya. If he chose not to involve ourselves, then the rebels would have been overrun eventually. Every man, women, and child who opposed Ghaddafi or even showed signs of support to the rebels would be killed, as said by Ghaddafi himself. Letting a massacre of that scale to occur is just not possible. Preventing it should be the first priority, since Ghaddafi is targeting innocent civilians, action had to be taken before any more people died. However, since Ghaddafi is the recognized ruler of Libya, and has been for the past forty years, some problems could occur during operations. Also, intervening in a civil war is also very unorthodox, as virtually all civil wars have been fought only by the warring parties within the country, America included. In conclusion, I believe that it was the correct decision to intervene in Libya, if no action was taken, many more innocent people would die.
ReplyDeleteJimmy Jia
3/30/11
Period 5
I disagree that we need to get our selves involved because of the fact that we keep complaining about the recessions and how they affect our lives back home. I think we need to slow down the weapons building and switch our tactics on making our people's lives batter. I feel Obama needs to bail out of Bushes airplane and into his own plane and concentrate on the welfare of our nations people because instead of improving our lives we try to help others in making them have a life. Should we really spend money on things that we naturally can do by improving our situations. I believe that once we set our train on track we can use all our resources to help countries change and get back on track. helping a civil war might be a way to make us look good but it might make us look bad. I find it unorthodox that we need to intervene without being asked. Also I find it especially not a good idea to arm people who we do not know the true intentions. its like giving a murderer a weapon without knowing who they are. I think we should find alternatives and not get involved in to anything else since this will take more money away from our nations and provide money for Libya.
ReplyDeleteAfter watching Obama's speech to the nation about the ocnflict in Lybia, I agree with what he had to say. He has decided that we will intervene in Lybia, and I agree.
ReplyDeleteGadaffi has been killing tons of people in Libya, and resuses to step down until he himself dies. There have also been stories of women getting abused, mistreated, and raped by his men. I would not think it is necessary for America to step in if people's lives weren't being threated, and as we can see, many of them have already been taken. If we were to not intervene and just watch and wait for everything to end in Libya, we would be as Obama said, "betrtaying our country." We have made this type of mistake before, waiting for years to intervene in the Holocaust and other massacre events. I think we can all consider this the beginnings of a huge massacre if we don't intervene now. I don't think we would be following our duties as a country if we didn't step in and help the people of Lybia.
Sophia Levenson
Period 5
I agree with President Obama's decision with interfering in Libya's conflict. Obama's speech to the nation on CNN clearly explained that he is worried for the Libyans, due to Gahafi killing his people. If Obama did not decide to intervene in Libya he would've either been criticized either way. Meaning if Obama did not decide to intervene then the citizens would have criticized him for not caring or that he intervened in another countries business. Obama intervened for a good reason he didn't want another massacre to happen like Bosnia had, he wanted to stop the conflict before anything huge happened. Clearly, Obama made a great decision to interfere in Libya, his intentions were to save the people of Libya.
ReplyDeleteDiane Kim
Period 5
I agree with Obama's decision. If Obama hadn't done what he did then the Lybian government would have been without threat of the consequenses of killing their own citizens. When a government fails to represent it's people then it stops being a government and becomes an enemy. The U.S. did right in asisting the Lybians since we have the ability to do so while they do not.
ReplyDeleteSpike Madden
Period 5
I agree with Obama's decision. I would bet that if we had not gone into Libya then in several months we would be hearing horror stories and seeing gruesome pictures of some things that Gaddafi has done. this has happened in Bosnia, Rwanda, and various other countries. I would hate to see this happen to one more if we can prevent it. It is also true that there is oil there and we have a large investment in it. Although it may be selfish to think of it this way, there is no denying the importance of having low prices on oil. If there we lost our tie to the oil in Libya prices of gas would go up. Because of this, anything that would need to be transported a number of miles would have its price skyrocketed.
ReplyDeleteCorey Friedman
Period 5
Civics
I think Obama's decision was the right one. Obviously, there are a number of cons, the most prominent being our current debt and the fact that we already have a military presence in other countries, but I think the scale of the problem in Libya calls for action on the part of other countries.
ReplyDeleteAs Obama said when he defended his decicion, it sends a message about our position. We're showing that we don't approve of Ghadaffi's horrific actions, and also when the rebels inevitably take over, hopfully our countries assistance will be remembered.
It also cannot be ignored that the U.S. has a large investment in Libya, and does not want oil prices to rise. While some may say that putting military money into helping Libya is wrong given the state of our economy, if oil prices shot up that would be bad too.
Hallie Blashfield
Period 5
I agree with Obama's decision to become involved with the conflict in Libya. At first, I was confused as to why we would want to become involved with an issue that is seemingly irrelevant, but after listening to his speech and talking to a few people, I changed my mind.
ReplyDeleteGadhafi is creating chaos and committing horrible crimes on his own citizens. I have heard plenty of stories of men, women, and children being abused, raped, and brutally killed all because of the actions of Gadhafi. Being one of the big five countries, it is more of our responsibility to become involved and try to help Libya obtain peace.
When considering why we involved ourselves with the affairs of Libya, I realized that we want to keep good relations with Libya, mainly because they provide a good source for oil. When one country becomes positively involved with another country, the country that is benefitting is almost expected to reciprocate. This leaves relations between America and Libya good, which is what we want.
Anu Deodhar
Period 5
Civics
March 31, 2011
I think that what Obama did was right. He went there for the purpose of giving aid to the Libyan people and that is exactly what he did because he did not stay there long. Also, all the responsibility is going to be given to NATO now. Our country is deep in debt right now and the fact that we spent another few hundred million dollars is perhaps one of the negative aspects to Obama's decision. We were taking part in a greater good. As I stated before, we were there for a short period of time and that also made out intent clear, that we wanted simply to help the innocent civilians and not necessarily take Gadaffi from power.
ReplyDeleteAs was stated in the recent meeting which took place in London with all the representatives from countries around the world, and it was stated that, that task should be left to the Libyan people and to the Libyan people only.
Arena Morillo
2nd Period
Personally, I do not agree with Obama’s decision to enter into the conflict in Libya because I don’t think the United States should be involved in any conflict that doesn’t pose a direct threat to our country. I understand that Ghadaffi has threatened to kill citizens and that many massacres have occurred, but I feel that if any country were to get involved in this it should be a country that either borders Libya or is close allies with them.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I believe that it is somewhat hypocritical for Obama to enter into this conflict because I think that he would not have gotten involved in this conflict if Libya were not a country that provided the US with a great deal of oil. In addition, Obama claimed that he got involved in the Libyan conflict for “humanitarian purposes.” There is conflict all along the Ivory Coast and in many other countries in which the same humanitarian needs currently exist and yet the United States isn’t helping these people. Perhaps Obama should spend his time focusing on how we could get oil stores from our own country, of which there are many, so that we are no longer dependent on other countries for oil. There are, reportedly, rich oil stores in Colorado beneath the Rocky Mountains as well as oil in the form of shale.
Perhaps it is time for the US to sit quietly aside and wait. We need to believe in our own country and focus on it’s strengths rather than trying to be the country that tries to solve everyone’s problems.
Spencer Rotenberg
Per. 2
March 31
I think it was the right decision by Obama to interfere in Libya. He said himself that althought we shouldnt have to police the world, the situation in Libya is unique, and since there is a massacre occurring at the moment, and Obama beleives that we have the materials to help stop it, it would be wrong of us not to help out. And i agree with him, especially since Gadaffi said that he doesnt care about killing citizens, he will not step down, and once it came to that point, you knew that they needed help.
ReplyDeleteAlso i agree with his decision to only send in air troops. I think this was a good idea because although it can be a big help to the Libyan people because it can helo stop air bombings from Gadaffi, it also puts American soldiers at less risk than if Obama had sent in ground troops. So overall I agree with all the decisions Obama has made regarding out involvement in Libya so far, but if it turns in to another Iraq or Afghanistan I dont think i will be able to support him any longer
Alyssa Crooke
3/31/11
Civics per 5
I agree with Obama's decision to intervene in the conflict in Libya right now. I think if Gaddafi didn't take such drastic measures that it would not be a good idea to intervene, but since he has killed many people, it is our duty to go and help.
ReplyDeleteI think being one of the countries that is always there to provide help, that this case should be no different. People are dying, being raped, and abused in Libya, and so far no one has done anything.
I feel that if we as a country, do not assist Libya, a bad light will shine over the U.S.
I agree with Obama's decision to intervene in the conflict in Libya right now. I think if Gaddafi didn't take such drastic measures that it would not be a good idea to intervene, but since he has killed many people, it is our duty to go and help.
ReplyDeleteI think being one of the countries that is always there to provide help, that this case should be no different. People are dying, being raped, and abused in Libya, and so far no one has done anything.
I feel that if we as a country, do not assist Libya, a bad light will shine over the U.S.
Hans Lee
Period 5
3.31.11
Myself, I agree with President Obama's decision. As Libyans are fellow humans, we should all look out for each other as citizens of the world. The disruption in the global economy would be significant, since Libya has a rich oil supply, which would affect America too.
ReplyDeleteEvery rose has its thorns, and this is no exception. The money that would go into this campaign would be no small amount, and that money could go to helping us fix our own problems first. Also, it's hard to justify helping Libya without helping the other countries whose citizens are dying for simple civil liberties, that we take for granted as Americans.
Finally, it should be noted that America is taking a very limited approach to helping the rebels--they aren't directly attacking the Libyan army, rather destroying their supplies, for example. I think it was a good decision to take this approach.
Joshua M. Gillis
Periodo Cinco
I think President Obama has done the right thing by getting involved because Libya is experiencing human rights issues. Being a part of the UN, and one of it's big five, we have a responsibility to get involved in issues like this.
ReplyDeleteI think he is trying to handle it well in the fact that he is not trying to make the US the leader. He knows that a lot of Americans are upset by our involvement since we are in an economic crisis, so I think he has tried to address many American concerns in the way that he has gone about getting involved.
If we did not get involved, I think far more problems would arise not only from angry Americans, but also from the rest of the world. Time and time again, the world has said "never again". The developed world has made a promise that they will do everything they can to stop humanitarian atrocities. I think this is one of the first times we have gotten involved without much hesitation so I think this is a step in the right direction. Then again, this is coming from someone who cares about upholding human rights.
Natalie Ancona
Period 5
4/1/11
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think that Obama did the right thing by bombing Qaddafi's military. There were many accounts of denial of liberties and mistreatment of women. It was largely a human rights issue. However, I think he needs to take care when ordering air strikes. First and foremost, he needs to make sure that the air is clear of enemies because this is not a case that warrants loss of American lives. He also needs to take care to insure that he is not harming civilians with the air strikes, unlike what has been done in Afghanistan and Iraq.
ReplyDeleteBen Davis
Period 2
4/1/2011
I think this poses a question of whether helping the rebels is in the interest of America. I believe that as a country we have no place interferring with this country. It may be more justifiable if there was some kind of congressional approval. I would even agree with UN troops helping the rebels. It is not my opinion that the rebels should fail, but rather that president Obamas means of help were a little rash.
ReplyDeleteSam Hunter
Period 2
Civics
I agree with Obama's decision of becoming involved in Libya. However, I completely understand the critisism he is recieving since their are many events such as this going on around the wolrd. Luckily, Obama will recieve much less critism since he passed the responsibility onto NATO as well as there will not be any troops on the ground and only missle strikes agains Gaddafi. Although we started the global aid in Libya, we do not have the financial capacity to involve ourselves in another war such as this. We will only fall farther into debt which will only decrease Obama's popularity.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the president made a good decision to become involved in Libya. Gaddafi was and still has been killing civilians. If Obama didn't take action and create a no fly zone, im sure many more civilians would have died. Also, the bombings i believe are also a good idea. Although we are putting quite a bit of money into it, we are not risking American lives.
ReplyDeleteJack Edwards
Period 5
4/1/11
I have mixed feelings about Obama's decision to become involved with what is going on in Libya. On one hand you need to think about all of the innocent people he is potentially saving by becoming involved. By becoming involved he is definitely helping to stop, or at least lessen Gadafi's killings.
ReplyDeleteHowever, on the other hand you need to think about how much money might be going into this. It is safe to say that the US has plenty of our own problems. The money that is being used to help out Libya could just as easily be used to make the US better in many ways. That's is why I am unsure.
McKenna Jones
Period 2
4/1/11
I believe that President Obama made the right decision in becoming involved in the Libyan conflict. I think that as fellow humans it is important to help others who are in danger of their lives. Gaddafi was and is killing innocent people and will continue to do so until he is stopped. However, I also believe that we should continue our involvement by supplying arms because if the rebels do not win what we have already done would be a complete waste.
ReplyDeleteFrancie Smith-Korn
Period 2
4/1/11
I am happy there is now an actual plan of how to help with the situation in Libya. Even though waiting three weeks to intervene is a little slow, I am glad the way Obama is handling everything. Like some reporters have said, this will be an easy war to win, I am concerned about not only the lives of the Libyan's that will be lost, but also the American soldiers whose lives will be lost. Obama was able to tell the nation why going in to Libya was necessary.
ReplyDeleteI liked how President Obama has the idea to use the 33 billion dollars that has been frozen from Gaddafi, and not use it, but to give it back to the Libyan people who deserve it. However, I do not recall him mentioning how much money will be used to have this intervention. Overall, I believe President Obama had an overall good, progressive speech.
Malia Naman
Period 5
4/1/11
I understand the need for intervention since many people are being hurt and attacked by Gaddafi's forces. However, why is the US one of the few countries who behave like international police? Why are we one of the only countries helping Libya? This seems to be an ideal situation to involve the UN. The UN can help make decisions to help other countries such as Libya. Why is the US going in to Libya without consulting others first? We are already viewed as being "bullies" to the world, the US doesn't need to continue to prove it. If the UN decides to help Libya, then the US can lend a hand. There are numerous reasons for the US to invade, such as helping others, but there could also be some underlying motives. For example the US might be going in for oil, which would only be helping our economic gains. I think the US needs to focus on problems in our own country, such as our deteriorating economy.
ReplyDeleteMariko Hunter
Period 2
Civics
I cannot settle on whether I agree or not with President Obama's decision to intervene in Libya. I will talk about the arguments that have come up on both sides which makes it difficult for me to choose.
ReplyDeleteThere have been many humanitarian conflicts that have occurred in recently history where the US did not step in. Just to name a few, the child soldiers in Uganda, the genocide in Darfur, Israel bombing Gaza and killing 1,100 Palestinian civilians--and on none of these, the US did not intervene even though civilians were being killed in the masses. In Libya, civilians are being killed by snipers--not in the masses. This is not a grand humanitarian crisis in comparison to what occurred in the past, so I believe it is a lame argument on Obama's behalf to deem it such as. Nonetheless, ever since NATO intervened in Libya, 40 civilians have been killed. What kind of humanitarian mission is this if in order to achieve this "stability" innocent lives have to be sacrificed? The only reason why NATO and the US are interested in intervening is because of oil. The US isn't being a police, they're just doing what they do best, fighting for "their" resources.
And then on the other side--Libya needs a new leader. The last Shah of Iran who was ousted in 1979 was the first person to call Qaddafi "deevuneh". Crazy. He is not Mubarak, he's no someone you can negotiate with. He's not Gbagbo, isolated, alone, calling the elections a fraud. He's just crazy. The rebels do need help. They need military training, weapons, and most importantly, organization. The 40 civilians being killed will only perpetuate the anti-West sentiment in the US. Give the rebels the means to protect their own country. I appreciate that the US is stepping out, and working on an exile plan for Qaddafi as well as sending in generals to help the rebels organize.
Dina Yazdani
Period 5
Civics
I think President Obama made the correct decision to intervene in Libya. He was kind of in a Catch 22 with this decision; people would criticize him if he did intervene and people would criticize him if he didn't. Hopefully the intervention of the United States and NATO contributes to a better future for Libya. If it does, President Obama's decision will appear to be even better.
ReplyDeleteI think the best reason for the US getting involved in Libya is to help end the atrocities Gadhafi is perpetrating. We should focus on helping the people of Libya. But, being America, we must hold our own interests highest. This is another reason Obama gave for intervening: America's interests. It makes sense that we (America) would want to be friends with whatever new government forms from this crisis. Also, a major consideration is the oil we are so dependent upon. As of 2007, Libya has the ninth largest oil reserves in the world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_Libya).
I agree with Obama's decision to intervene. In the weeks leading up to our involvement it had been becoming increasingly evident that more and more rebels in Libya were going to be killed by the government. It is the responsibility of the world to not allow acts of genocide to occur. As countries we should always have each others' backs in time if need.
ReplyDeleteI only wish that our involvement could have been focused in other areas less related to and less expensive as a military crackdown on Libyan airspace. Yes somebody had to and has to do it but it shouldn't always have to be US. We are already spread so thin as a country, the last thing we need into be a major player in another middle eastern conflict. We could be dropping (more) food rather than bombs or missiles. But it had to be done so we did.
Jordan Portlock
Per 2
4/1/11
I think the President made the right decision by becoming involved in the conflict in Libya. I believe he made the right decision because he helped stop a massive massacre from occurring. Though it is true than thousands upon thousands of people were killed, however, even more blood could have been shed had the US not intervened. However, I have to say at first I was a little skeptical of Obama intervening in Libya because of the fact that the US is already in a huge debt and has already stuck their nose in most countries business. I thought that it would be the worst if the US intervened, the risk really was big, but in the end, I have to agree with Obama’s decision.
ReplyDeleteNot only has the US stopped more people from being killed, but the US has also made another strong ally. The new government that arises from this revolution will not likely forget all the efforts and aid the US has given them to help them achieve their goal. Therefore, they are likely to become allies with the US and will help us in our time of need. Also with the oil in Libya, I can also understand why Obama intervened. Therefore, though at first I was against the US intervening in Libya’s affairs, however now I believe that the President made the right decision.
Athena Tanada
Period 5
4/1/11
I think the President made the right choice in intervening with the issues in Libya. The U.S. may be an outside country and appear to be "invading" but rebels in Libya along with many Libyans currently living here asked for aid. Although even if we weren't asked for any help I think it'd still be appropriate considering Gadaffi had his men attack civilians, including reporters from outside countries, and their captures and assults. This automatically makes the issues international and of course it should be reasonable to try to stop the power of someone who is causing harm to the innocent, especially if the ones being harmed are Americans.
ReplyDeleteI think he made the right decision, yes, but mostly as a quick remedy. I have a feeling that his solution will cause a larger uprise in conflict like what happened in Iraq.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHaving reread the transcript of President Obama's speech on March 28th regarding Libya, I believe that he was justified in becoming more involved in the conflict. Although we just now made the decision to become fully involved, we have been a part of the support from the beginning. We played a major role in freezing Qaddafi's assets and creating the much needed no-fly zone. As the rebels started to slip, it was eminent that we step in to lend a hand. Qaddafi has expressed the lengths at which he would go to to hold his power, and it would be irresponsible for us not to lend a hand.
ReplyDeleteThe only conflict I see with helping the rebels is their current state of disorganization. At this point in time, the rebels would not be able to set up a new government even if we assisted in taking down the current one. I don't believe we should simply fight this war for them, for then our ties would be too deeply entangled to exit easily once the conflict is resolved. We should help them out, but not run the show.
Cara Scalpone
April 1, 2011
Period 5
I think that President Obama made the right decision by becoming involved in Libya. The people of Libya were being murdered and massacred by their own dictator, Qaddafi. Though Libya has been in the news a lot lately, there hasn't been a lot done to help the rebels, and it was time that we stepped in, and did something about it. Libya needs a new leader, and we cannot stand by and watch rebels die. This is different than other times that the US has stepped into other countries, because we aren't actually in a war with Libya. Also, I agree that when Qaddafi is over taken, the new government in Libya will have good relations with the United States. I think that President Obama made the right decision in getting involved with Libya, because something had to be done to stop the rebels from being killed in Libya, and it this decision will save lives.
ReplyDeleteIsabella McVey
Period 5
Ms. Stoller, I'm sorry that the comment above says that "jonathan" wrote it, I am using my dad's computer, and it was signed into his email address! Sorry!
ReplyDeleteIsabella McVey
Period 5
I agree with the no fly zone and measures that we took to prevent extreme loss of civilian life, however I disagree with the air strikes on Qaddafi forces and further military aid because the rebel forces are so unorganized. -Steven Geringer period 5
ReplyDeleteMs. Stoeller, sorry this is so late but i had a bit of a family emergency last night.
ReplyDeleteI would have to say that I agree with President Obama's decision to intervene with what is going on in Libya right now. In his interview he infact called it a "unique" situation, and I think that we as the United States have an obligation to step up and defend citizens of other countries when in need. The only argument I believe that most people have with his decision is the fact that it will cost the United States a lot of money, when in fact the actual military operations cost nothing. It's the "nation-building" afterwards that is so expensive, and as of right now the Presiden hasn't said anything bout that.
Connor Hutchens
Period 2
civics
Sorry this is late Ms. Stoller.
ReplyDeleteI agree with president Obama's decision to get involved with the Libyan "conflict". This is because in the past when there have been genocides where no countries stepped in to stop the tens of thousands of people being killed. This event seems to be very similar to other genocides, only this hasn't become extremely out of control yet. As of March, 4th, 2011 there have been about 6,000 deaths of just civilians. This number has surely increased since then. But even still, this is much less than in other huge genocides and we have learned to step in early and fight to save thousands of lives.
In my opinion, and i'm sure much of the worlds, Gadhafi is infringing on the people's rights and is murdering thousands of his own people. This alone is reason enough for us to intervene with this battle. However, because this really is not our issue, i believe that the U.S. and NATO should draw a line somewhere and eventually stop helping the rebels. This is because it is extremely expensive to get into a "conflict" with another country and we quite frankly can't afford to get involved with yet another war. However, the U.S. is being much smarter about this "conflict" and not declaring war with Gadhafi and forcing us to stay in libya and rebuild the government. Because the U.S. and NATO has not yet declared war and we are helping save the lives of thousands being slaughtered, I think we are doing the right thing.
Peter Kessigner
April 2, 2011
Period 2
Sorry this is late!
ReplyDeleteOriginally I didn't think it was a good idea for the United States to get involved with the Libyan conflict. But as the death toll has escalated, I believe Obama is making the right decision. I think Obama has been careful in planning his attack in Libya. An article on March 28th from the New York Times reported that Obama has pledged to scale back the United States involvement in the conflict. He isn't putting ground troops into Libya, as the focus is on the front end of the operation and transferring responsibility to allies.
Overall I think it is a good idea that Obama has decided to put troops in Libya, as long as it doesn't turn into another Iraq (which Obama has been keeping in mind).
Lauren Caffee
April 3rd, 2011
Period 5
In the beginning I was not completely sure that this was the right decision as I still am now but quite less. The situation in Libya is getting worse and worse and for Gadhafi to murder his way back to power would be a catastrophy and that cannot happen. We cannot just sit and wait while this possible genocide could be happening in Libya and what Obama was saying in his speech was incredibly compelling and he made a great argument for why we did attack when we did. America, as the powerful country it is needs to stop things like this when a dictator is trying to continue ruling when the country is ready for change and I believe this was the right decision and this will be better in the end
ReplyDeleteJesse Ellison
April 3rd, 2011
Period 5
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAt the start off all of this i didnt think that obama would send in any troops to help out the rebels. then as Gadhafi started killing more and more doing airstrikes and just becoming a full ditator i was worried that the us wasnt going to help. I feel that Obama is doing the right thing to try and help stop Gadhafi what is happening is a terrible thing and i feel that the country is ready to be free and is ready for this change.
ReplyDeleteAndrew Abudakar
April 3 2011
period 2
When I first looked into Obama wanting to provide air support to the rebels in Libya i thought it was a terrible idea, because the United States has no business being in Libya. But looking at it again, i believe it is right for Obama to provide air support, but only that. If United States provided too much support for Libya other countries would also look for the United States for help. And also by only using air support, it is much cheaper than putting ground troops, and looks cooler because the AC130 gunship has flares that gives it the name angel of death.
ReplyDeleteEddy Wang-Chang
April 3 2011
period 2
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhen listening to Obamas speech i could tell he was very concerned about the conditions in Libya. He said that this was a Historic Revoulotion. He wants to be apart of this. We as Americans had to go through the same process of fighting for freedom and i think Obama has sympathy for that. He knows weve struggled and wants to hekp those struggling. He doesnt want this to lead to a massacre. This is an international issue that needs to be taken care of and the president has taken the action to do so. This has come to the point where as a person Obama just wants to stop the killing and help protect the Libyan Rebels. These are people who need protection and if our country is willing to give it we should be very proud. This is a crisis and the Rebels are doing something fantastic and it would be incredible to say we were part of that revoloution.
ReplyDeleteSymara Williams
Period 2
April 3rd
I would agree with the President’s decision. President Obama is making the right decision of stepping into the issue surrounding Libya. Obama seems have made a good decision on making Libya become a no-fly zone, and to take action. Though I don’t think the US should get involved into other countries’ issues, but Libya is out of control. Not only do the people have no rights, but these innocent people are getting killed by their own leader. Libya needs help and the rebels need help, because as we know, Qaddafi's troop have recently been over-taking some of the cities in Libya that the rebels had just won. Qaddafi has already killed thousands of people, and that number needs to stop increasing. Qaddafi’s killing has been out of control a long time and the people in Libya need help.
ReplyDeleteSorry this was late
Jeneva Kuhn
Period 2
When I first heard of President Obama's decision to go over to Libya I thought it was a terrible idea and that he could've come up with a better plan. After watching the news and seeing what was going on there I realized that the people of Libya need our help.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with President Obama's decision to get involved with Libya because Qaddafi needs to be stopped. He has been killing tons of innocent people and if Obama was to just sit there and let it all happen that would be wrong. No matter what Obama would've decided to do with this situation he would've been critized. The only reason he went there was because the rebels asked for our help. I'm honestly surprised about how long it took for Obama to go over and help the citizens of Libya, but I am happy that he did. Those people over there need our help and Qadaffi needs to be stopped.
Haley Dowell
Period 2
Before watching Obama's speech, I was opposed to the idea of being in three wars. I didn't like the fact that we were getting involved which another country, for reasons that probably include oil, and I was not a fan of fighting violence with more violence. The president made a good point though, that Qaddafi’s mission is to kill his own people, who in his mind, are "rats." There is no reason for a leader of their own country for want to kill their people, or anyone for that matter. I understand where Obama is coming from, although I still think it's unfortunate.
ReplyDeleteLyndsi Zapata
Period 2
I think President Obama has the right idea with interfering with Lybia. Although the idea of interfering with another country's conflict worries me, i think it would really help the rebels and civilians out. Because the civilians have been harassed, killed, and some raped by Qaddafi's men. Someone needs to step in and show Qaddafi that hes wrong and people are willing to do something about it. I see how Obama is making this decision and i think he should go through with it.
ReplyDeleteIsaac Ableidinger
Period 5