...
This was people, mostly Libyans asking NATO to intervene.
They were asking UN. NATO just
formed a coordination and command body for a coalition of 19 countries which had some interests in Libya.
By the way, IIRC Gadaffi even wrote the letter to Obama saying something like "Son, let`s fight terrorism together!" and generally was ready for the negotiations. Some more agressive diplomacy would have been enough to topple the regime without a drop of blood hitting the ground, but instead of this NATO chose the violent way again. If I use logic of my opponents, I can say NATO is responsible for every death in this war, not only for collateral civilian losses.
Russia didn`t give veto because Russian president is a childish idiot. Russian ambassador in Libya called him "traitor" when the resolution hadn`t been vetoed.
...
You do it when you pick those innocents over the lives the targets would have taken out in the collateral damageThere are some international standarts for this. You should (re)read UN regulations about combatants and non-combatants. There is a difference between "our bomb will with 90% probability hit the target, continue" and "our bomb will with 10% probability kill a civilian, let`s cancel this operation and try diplomacy" approaches.
How many US soldiers should die to avoid a single civilian casualty 1:1, everywhere. This means that you should choose the lesser losses. In case of equal possible losses situation (lose one soldier or one civilian) the soldier is sacrificed, because it`s his job to die for other people.
We are now unsuitable in reducing the efforts of the drug cartels to increase their profitsDrug cartels are mostly your internal problem, and your people delegate the state the right to stop them.
Nobody delegated you the right to solve the world`s problems.
Fun fact: since US entered Afghanistan, production of opiates in this country is only increasing. Police? Cartels?
Absolutely laughable, you say?
Okay, we are now unsuitable in telling governments they are not allowed to wholesale slaughter their citizensYou are perfectly suitable for
telling. But usually you just appear and bomb said government with half of the country and citizens.
So do we hold our fire until we have magic bullets that stop everyone without a single person dying?Yes. If you spend less money on constant wars, this "magic bullets" will not sound like a fairytale very soon. As I said, you
do have technological potential.
As for other "world police" stuff - how can you explain that all EVIL DICTATORSHIPS you are fighting are sitting on oil deposits? And other dictatorships who support America exist for decades,
executeing, raping, and slaughtering vast amounts of their own citizens like any other dictatorship?
I can't help but note that you haven't expressed what country has your support.Every country that does not start wars.
Americans were dragged kicking and screaming into this role from World War 2I`d better not mention WW2, because during it you have set
a record in your "minor collateral damage".And like Il Palazzo mentioned, I`d like to hear your version of history.
No other country could do itA lot can, when acting together. This is what UN exists for.
no matter how much I dislike little idiots out there screaming how badly they hate us, and trying to kill my children because my nation is good at it's jobYou are distinguishing your people from other peoples again, also showing some signs of xenophobia. Not an attack, just stating the fact.
Edit: kind of missed the last two posts.
It was America's policy entering the war to finish it and go home, leaving Europe to the Europeans. Actually you just started to supply Soviet Union after they stopped German war machine near Moscow. And showed up in Europe when it was clear that the Reich was done, to grab some of its legacy - technologies, specialists etc.
It`s pretty much clear that you sincerelly believe what your education and mass-media tell you. I cannot help.