A fine mess that MI6, CIA, and Brits/American Admin got us into.

[emilyek]

Surely our new puppets over there will work out for awhile, seeming initially to validate the Neocon notion that those people were just starving for "democracy" (i.e., controlled media and bought political parties and a central bank run by the usual suspects).

There will be a backlash; we'll see a repeat of the deposition of the Shah and the rise of Islamist governments.

Islamist governments are then fair game; the all-or-nothing play for the ME will be on, and it won't be pretty.

 

[Craig234]

You respect people's right to choose only so far as they make all the same choices you do.

You're a liar.

It's offensive.

 

[RabidMongoose]

You're a liar.

It's offensive.

Craig, in some places, people can't even lie. They'll get killed for lying. Think about that...we should spend time about people dying from lying instead of pointing out a lie.

 

[Craig234]

Craig, in some places, people can't even lie. They'll get killed for lying. Think about that...we should spend time about people dying from lying instead of pointing out a lie.

The two are not mutually exclusive. There is NO reason not to point out lying.

But then again, you are for torture, as you have said, so you probably don't agree.

 

[RabidMongoose]

The two are not mutually exclusive. There is NO reason not to point out lying.

But then again, you are for torture, as you have said, so you probably don't agree.

I'm not for torture. Not sure where you got that from. Though you're for supporting a caste system, racism, and gender discrimination.

I'm just using your own logic. You shouldn't be pointing out lying when people are being killed in the world. There are much worse things happening that we need to look at.

 

[Craig234]

I'm not for torture. Not sure where you got that from.

I thought lies weren't worth pointing out? I guess it's different when it's about you.

That's the point that statement was making, I'm surprised you didn't notice.

 

[RabidMongoose]

I thought lies weren't worth pointing out? I guess it's different when it's about you.

That's the point that statement was making, I'm surprised you didn't notice.

I agree. Think about it. There are people starving to death right now. Even children are starving to death. So let's focus on that instead. I've been trying to get you to agree with me, and I've been using your own logic, but you keep talking about less important things. Look at the big picture, Craig, and use your own logic. Don't be a hypocrite. Let's talk about the big issues instead.

 

[Nebor]

I agree. Think about it. There are people starving to death right now. Even children are starving to death. So let's focus on that instead. I've been trying to get you to agree with me, and I've been using your own logic, but you keep talking about less important things. Look at the big picture, Craig, and use your own logic. Don't be a hypocrite. Let's talk about the big issues instead.

Children are starving while some 20 royal residences are maintained on the taxpayer's pound in the UK?!

 

[BarneyFife]

I just made a thread asking why exactly the rebels were so great. Not many people wanted to address the question.

Yeah I said the same thing a few weeks ago. The US's new trick

Supply group of disgruntled people weapons.
Have them try to take over said country
When they get slaughtered by established government, accuse leader of slaughter and human rights issues
Use Nato to bomb them under the guise of "Human Right issues"
Put in disgruntled group as government (No voting allowed)
Then get fucked over in a couple years when they become hard line radicals
Rinse and repeat in 10 years

 

[Veliko]

I just made a thread asking why exactly the rebels were so great. Not many people wanted to address the question.

It's a meaningless question.

 

[Craig234]

I agree.

You make a wrongheaded argument that lies should not be responded to, immediately followed by you responding to a lie, and when your hypocrisy is pointed out - much less the larger issue that your position is wrongheaded - you "agree", and then attack me for hypocrisy, when nothing I said was 'hypocritical?

Ya, nutty.

Think about it. There are people starving to death right now. Even children are starving to death. So let's focus on that instead. I've been trying to get you to agree with me, and I've been using your own logic, but you keep talking about less important things. Look at the big picture, Craig, and use your own logic. Don't be a hypocrite. Let's talk about the big issues instead.

Really, you have? I must have missed that, all I saw was you criticizing responding to lies and chanting about people starving to seem to try to use it for something.

What are you suggesting and asking for agreement on? I'm generally in favor of less starvation, not surprisingly.

Not in the sense of trollish positions of "therefore we should make the royals dress in cheap clothes and sell off their fancy dresses to pay for food for the poor!"

I'd like to give you the benefit of the doubt that there's some sincere point you are trying to get across, but so far it looks like bad trolling, using starving people.

I'm quite in favor of major agendas to try to raise the standard of living for the majority of people - the terrible condition of the majority of the human race.

I think that means we have to give up some advantages based on exploitation - but not that we have to drag the wealthy nations down to be poor nations.

That seems to be the approach of the wealthy people in the wealthy nations - to use the poor in the world to reduce labor costs and the public wealth, taking it for themselves in the form of increased ownership of the assets of society. You seem furious I don't want to put the royals in t-shirts, but I'm opposing the real problem of the real royals in the world - the economic royals - to have economic tyranny.

If you have a sincere point, try to make it clearer. If not, I'm disgusted by trolling.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

Right-wing creeps could care less about the rights of the people to democracy; their only concern is 'which tyrant can we put in place that's best for us'.

You can't really be so naive to think that Obama doesn't have a long-term agenda for Libya. Can you? He's not ordering bombing strikes to promote democracy; he's doing it to gain American influence in that part of the world.

 

[Craig234]

You can't really be so naive to think that Obama doesn't have a long-term agenda for Libya. Can you? He's not ordering bombing strikes to promote democracy; he's doing it to gain American influence in that part of the world.

Sometimes, humanitarian and selfish agendas overlap.

Just humanitarian can get you things like our non-intervention in central Africa.

Just selfish can get you harmful policies like the Shah of Iran and other dictators.

Libya seems to be one with both a humanitarian agenda and 'opportunity'. Do I think Obama has a ruthless plan to influence the new governance to benefit us?

Not like 'the old days' at least, it seems. We seem to be less harmful currently, though the recently discovered documents how the CIA helped Qadafi are telling.

We won't know for a while what's being done. Nothing wrong with constructive help in the interest of a self-governing country, hopefully not towards a US puppet.

 

[Genx87]

Gadahifi was a human Turd and a total monster who belongs at the Hague as an international war criminal.

As for the Rebels, they are a diverse group. We are hoping the Rebels will be better because its almost certain they can't be worse.

According to the Brits, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and the whole motley crew were terrorists too. Sometimes the world guesses right, sometimes we do worse, no crystal balls in the mess.

You can replace what you wrote with Saddam Hussein and the govt we installed in Iraq.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

You can replace what you wrote with Saddam Hussein and the govt we installed in Iraq.

At least in this case, we aren't committed to running around in the desert trying to fix what we broke. It's a far superior situation than Iraq although it might or might not have been a bad move.

 

[werepossum]

My commute is significantly shorter than when I worked for the private sector.

LOL!

Anyone who romanticized the revolts in the Arab world and thought that the people who would be left standing in leadership are the Girl Scouts is a fucking idiot. Obviously, those who will rule are the one with the guns.

We will miss Qadaffi and Mubarak. Mark my words.

Mubarak, certainly. It's difficult to see how we'll miss Qadaffi, other than the inherent humorous spelling possibilities. He was a supporter of terrorism, and he'll likely be followed by another supporter of terrorism. It'll be like he never even left. But in either case, at least the people will (hopefully) have self-determination. If that leads to Western bombs dropping on them, at least they'll have the satisfaction of having helped earn those bombs.

 

[crownjules]

You can replace what you wrote with Saddam Hussein and the govt we installed in Iraq.

Except in Iraq, the US was the rebellion. There was no concerted effort by local Iraqis to overthrow Saddam. It was entirely done by external forces, led by the US under false pretenses of WMDs in the making or in storage, and the local government shoehorned into place. Then we said "Voila! A nation we have built!"

At least in Libya, the locals were already in the midst of revolt indicating a desire for change. What that change is the world will have to wait and see.

 

[SammyJr]

You can't really be so naive to think that Obama doesn't have a long-term agenda for Libya. Can you? He's not ordering bombing strikes to promote democracy; he's doing it to gain American influence in that part of the world.

Obama is a right wing creep.

 

[rudder]

Except in Iraq, the US was the rebellion. There was no concerted effort by local Iraqis to overthrow Saddam. It was entirely done by external forces, led by the US under false pretenses of WMDs in the making or in storage, and the local government shoehorned into place. Then we said "Voila! A nation we have built!"

At least in Libya, the locals were already in the midst of revolt indicating a desire for change. What that change is the world will have to wait and see.

wait wha? I would say mass surrender was a concerted local effort. Judging from the news reports at the time, the Iraqis appeared to be glad Saddam was removed from power. The Iraqi's trying to overthrow Saddam after GWI got burned by the U.S. pretty badly so it is no wonder they did not make their intentions know.

Besides not having enough troops for security, one of the faults of the Bush war plan was letting Bremer fire the Iraqi army. Unlike Libya, Iraq's muslims are more splintered. So you have this religious divide that was controlled under Saddam, then create a situation where a lot of men with military training and suddenly unemployed and you have problems. Iraq could be totally different today.. who knows.

With Libya, obama knew the writing was on the wall for Qadaffi. Military intervention is one way to try to ensure that some influence remains after the regime change.

 

[Veliko]

You can replace what you wrote with Saddam Hussein and the govt we installed in Iraq.

No you can't because Libya is nothing like Iraq at all. People who keep comparing the two situations are being ridiculous.

 

[werepossum]

At least in this case, we aren't committed to running around in the desert trying to fix what we broke. It's a far superior situation than Iraq although it might or might not have been a bad move.

Maybe. Iraq is now a Western-type democracy; Libya will be at best a sharia-based democracy where one's choices are limited entirely by what parties and principles are acceptable under sharia. About the best thing we can say for Libya is that it fits our pocketbook. Iraq represents a huge expense of time and blood, a sacrifice of our best that may or may not pay off in the end. Libya by contrast represents a much smaller risk; if the new leaders turn out to be no better (or even worse) than the old, we haven't lost all that much, just a billion or two and some accelerated obsolescence as air frame and systems life hours are expended. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad the West is doing this on the cheap. But just as we are investing much less, so too is the potential pay off much less.

 

[iGas]

Anyone who romanticized the revolts in the Arab world and thought that the people who would be left standing in leadership are the Girl Scouts is a fucking idiot. Obviously, those who will rule are the one with the guns.

We will miss Qadaffi and Mubarak. Mark my words.

Perhaps, you Tony Blair, Bush & Co will miss them but it is difficult for American to forget that Qadaffi supported the Lockerbie bomber. IMHO, this is a huge fiasco, because it seems as if the West only preach democracy but not practice it, or know how to support democracy in countries that we have interests in.

MICHAEL BURLEIGH: This saga of moral squalor shames Britain

They say that when supping with the Devil, you should bring a long spoon.
The discovery of secret correspondence between the Labour government and the Gaddafi regime in the abandoned British ambassador’s residence in Tripoli reveals dining arrangements akin to snouts grubbing greedily together in one stinking trough.
The tone is occasionally risible. ‘Dear Muammar’, Blair begins a letter to Gaddafi on December 28, 2006, adding the Arabic New Year salutation ‘Eid mubarak’ with a toe-curling desperation to please. Maybe Gaddafi had already wished Tony ‘Happy Christmas’? I somehow doubt it.

Prime Minister Tony Blair embraces Colonel Moammar Gaddafi in Sirte, Libya in 2007

In the following March, Blair was at it again, writing with gushing insincerity to ‘Engineer Saif’ – Gaddafi’s playboy son Saif al-Islam – thanking him for sending him a copy of his ‘interesting’ LSE thesis.
That will be the plagiarised thesis Saif concocted with the help of Tony Blair’s favourite academics at the London School of Economics, an institution whose once-proud reputation has been dragged through the mud after it accepted Gaddafi’s tainted cash...

Home the 'hero': A supposedly dying Megrahi is saluted in Tripoli by Colonel Gaddafi son

Tortured: Abdel Hakim Belhadj said he was hung from a wall and kept in isolation

Tony Blair meets Gaddafi in Sirte, Libya in 2007 at the start of an African tour

 

[GrGr]

I think we know better than to cut off aid to Israel, unless we want another helping of USS Liberty style ass kickin'.

You mean we should bow to Israeli terrorism?

 

[Macamus Prime]

We just replaced a dictator with an ex leader of Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, which was deemed a terror group by the United States.

This is nothing new, or even unexpected.

And, it's shit like this that bites us in the ass years later.

 

[Nebor]

You mean we should bow to Israeli terrorism?

In the same way that the Philippines bow to US terrorism.