United Nation Ended the Ivory Coast Conflict, How About Libya

Since the United Nations doesn't have a formal military, the country of France put on the United Nation Sticker and ended the carnage in the Ivory Coast. Therefore, why couldn't the United Nation put ground forces and end the Libyan conflict? If NATO can't do it under their flag, let the UN have a shot at it. Remember, the 28 countries that comprises NATO are also members of the 113 countries that comprises the United Nation. It only makes sense. It will stop further bloodshed and wasted expense to this stupid Libyan war. Go in and get Gaddafi. How hard is that?

(Reuters) - Ivory Coast's Laurent Gbagbo was arrested on Monday after French armoured vehicles closed in on the compound where the self-proclaimed president had been holed up in a bunker.

A column of more than 30 French armoured vehicles moved in on Gbagbo's residence in Abidjan after helicopter gunships attacked the compound overnight in bid to end a months-long political standoff that had descended into civil war.

Gbagbo refused to step down when Alassane Ouattara won last November's presidential election, according to results certified by the United Nations, reigniting a civil war that has claimed more than a thousand lives and uprooted a million people.

"Yes, he has been arrested," Affoussy Bamba, a spokeswoman for Ouattara, told Reuters.

Gbagbo's spokesman in Ivory Coast, Ahoua Don Mello, told Reuters: "President Laurent Gbagbo came out of his bunker and surrendered to the French without offering resistance."

French officials said Gbagbo had been arrested by Ouattara's forces backed by the United Nations and the French military.

A French Defence Ministry official said: "It's not French forces who arrested Laurent Gbagbo ... It was Ouattara forces supported by UNOCI (the U.N. mission) and Licorne (French forces)."

Lets Start Another War with Rebels in the Ivory Coast

Since NATO can't do anything right in Libya, they should move their operation and investigate the massacre of 1000 people at the Ivory Coast in Africa. There is a striking similiarity with Libya. The Ivory Coast president refuse to step down after losing public support. NATO forces were presence in the region, but didn't notice the apparent massacre. No one can determine who is the actual enemy. Also, it is a very small nation. I think it would be a cake-walk than taking on Gaddafi. I think it would be more of a vital interest since Obama was born in Africa.

(The Telegraph) Charity workers who reached Duekoue said it appeared the killings had taken place in a single day, shortly after the town fell to troops loyal to Alassane Ouattara, the man internationally-recognised as having won last year’s presidential election.

The apparent massacre came despite the presence of United Nations troops and - if confirmed - will cast a shadow over Mr Outtara’s assumption of the Ivory Coast’s presidency after a four-month battle to oust Lawrence Gbagbo, the former president who lost the November election but refused to step down.

William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, said he was “gravely concerned” by the violence and loss of life in Ivory Coast and added: “I am determined that all alleged human rights abuses... must be investigated and those responsible held to account.

The International Committee for the Red Cross said its staff discovered more than 800 bodies of people who were clearly local civilians. They were mainly men who had been shot and left where they fell, the organisation said, either alone or in small groups dotted around the town, which lies at the heart of Ivory Coast’s economically crucial cocoa producing region.

Patrick Nicholson, a spokesman for the Catholic charity Caritas, said his team had counted 1,000 bodies, adding that some had been hacked with machetes. The UN said that it already logged 430 killed in Duekoue and was still investigating reports of more dead in the town.

Obama Following the Bush Doctrine

Please tell me the difference between Bush and the Iraq/Afghanistan War and Obama and the Afghanistan/Libya war? Why is the liberals not condemning Obama? It just shows that Liberals will politicize the war and disregard the men and women who died while serving the military. Obama's quote is very similar to what Bush said in 2003. Yes Liberals, believe it or not, Obama is leading the war against Libya!


MARCH 19, 2011
OBAMA: 'Today we are part of a broad coalition. We are answering the calls of a threatened people. And we are acting in the interests of the United States and the world'...


MARCH 19, 2003
BUSH: 'American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger'...

United Nations Give the Okay to Attack Libya, Awaiting for US to Lead

The war is going to begin very soon. Since Nato forces is mostly supported by the US military, the United Nations is waiting for the United States to lead the attack. The United Nations gave their blessing to stop Gaddafi by military force. Doesn't this sound familiar when Bush went to the UN to stop Saddam Hussein? What is the difference? Why did Bush get criticize and not with Obama? Hypocrites!

(Reuters) - The United Nations authorised military action to curb Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi on Thursday, hours after he threatened to storm the rebel bastion of Benghazi overnight, showing "no mercy, no pity."

"We will come, zenga, zenga. House by house, room by room," he said in a radio address to the eastern city.

Al Jazeera television showed thousands of Benghazi residents in a central square celebrating the U.N. vote, waving anti-Gaddafi tricolour flags and chanting defiance of the man who has ruled for four decades. Fireworks burst over the city.

Gaddafi had warned that only those who lay down their arms would be spared vengeance to be exacted on 'rats and dogs'.

"It's over. The issue has been decided," Gaddafi said. "We are coming tonight...We will find you in your closets.

"We will have no mercy and no pity."

The U.N. Security Council passed a resolution endorsing a no-fly zone to halt government troops now around 100 km (60 miles) from Benghazi. It also authorised "all necessary measures" -- code for military action -- to protect civilians against Gaddafi's forces.

French diplomatic sources said military action could come within hours, and could include France, Britain and possibly the United States and one or more Arab states; but a U.S. military official said no immediate U.S. action was expected following the vote.

Ten of the Council's 15 member states voted in favour of the resolution, with Russia, China and Germany among the five that abstained. There were no votes against the resolution, which was co-sponsored by France, Britain, Lebanon and the United States.

We Are On a Verge to Declare War on Libya

I wonder where are the anti-war protester now? Obama is going to declare war with Libya as the UN resolutions soon to be passed. It will be a multi-national Nato force to end the carnage in Libya. This sounds like Bush going after Saddam Hussein. Since it is the same situation, why is Obama getting a pass?

(BBC) The United Nations seems on the brink of taking a momentous decision. After hanging back for days the Americans have now not only backed the British and French resolution on Libya but beefed it up. The fact that the French foreign minister, Alain Juppe, will be here in person is a sign of French confidence that the Russians and Chinese won't block the resolution.
The latest draft I have seen goes well beyond calling for a no-fly zone. It says that the Arab League, individual nations and organizations like Nato are authorized to "take all necessary measures...to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat...including Benghazi, while excluding an occupation force."

I am told the first strikes will be unilateral ones by British and French aircraft. They could be in the air within hours. It is likely five Arab air forces will take part. Hillary Clinton has said it will mean bombing Libyan air defences. Nato will step up if asked but could take a while.

Although there have been other recent UN operations this would be the most serious intervention in a crisis for a long time, a marked contrast to the division over Iraq. That does not ease the worries of some in the administration that this will still be labeled an American war and they will be dragged deeper and deeper into the affairs of another Arab nation.

Tea Party House Republicans Aiming to Defund the United Nation

It is time to dissolve the United Nations. Its usefulness is mired by corruption, deception, and unaccountability. Its intended goal is to help those countries affected by human rights issue. Instead, they turn a blind eye when human rights are being violated. An example are human rights issue in China and Iran not being addressed. There are UN resolutions against Israel. There is no transparencies to the billion of dollars given to the United Nations. What good have they done lately? Global warming??

(The Hill) A key House Republican is quickly pressing forward with her goals to scale back U.S. funding for the United Nations.

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told The Hill that oversight would be a key function of the panel, particularly funding to the U.N. Human Rights Council (HRC) that is "a waste of taxpayer dollars." "The fact that the U.S. continues to contribute billions of taxpayer dollars every year to an unaccountable, unreformed U.N. is no laughing matter," she said in a statement.

On Tuesday, Ros-Lehtinen will host a panel of U.N. critics and advocates that was originally scheduled for the week that the House suspended most activity in the wake of the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.).

U.N. critics set to appear include Claudia Rosett, who unveiled the oil-for-food scandal in 2004 and 2005 in The Wall Street Journal; Brett Schaefer, who regularly takes on the U.N. at the conservative Heritage Foundation; and Hillel Neuer, executive director of Geneva-based UN Watch, which monitors the controversial HRC.

Neuer told The Hill that UN Watch is going to release new data at the briefing on how the HRC has been run since then-U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan dissolved the Human Rights Commission in 2006. Annan called the commission "politicized" at the time, but the commission's replacement, the HRC, has attracted many critics as well.

Ros-Lehtinen, one of many lawmakers critical of Obama for that 2009 decision, led the charge against the United Nations in the 111th Congress, introducing bills urging transparency and accountability as well as the withholding of funding.

But the first bill in this Congress taking on the U.N., introduced on the first day the House was in session, came from a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, not from Ros-Lehtinen's panel.

Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) introduced a measure to ensure that no federal funds may be used for the "design, renovation, construction, or rental of any headquarters for the United Nations in any location in the United States" unless Obama "transmits to Congress a certification that the United Nations has adopted internationally recognized best practices in contracting and procurement."

“During the Bush administration, it was learned from internal U.N. auditors that 43 percent of $1.4 billion in procurement contracts investigated involved fraud," Stearns said in a statement to The Hill. Over the past five years, the council has produced about 45 resolutions, he said, 35 which are "one-sided measures against Israel."