Gadhafi is now in Algeria.

[Craig234]

The message topic should refer to the family.

 

[Doppel]

...said by Khadafi at the begenning of this unrest.

Rather than listen to the propagandas, just google about
lybia s (former) standard of life....

Ironic. Condemn those listening to propaganda while endorsing something said by a dictator.

The real shock is why the F did we let Gadhafi stay in power as long as we did. He should have been taken out many years ago. The tolerance for people like him has gone down internationally and that's a good thing. Hell, even China and Russia didn't veto the UN resolution despite 100% knowing what it would lead to (despite claims about NATO mis-interpreting, we all knew what they were going to do once the resolution was passed). The West has a lot of failings but giving a world-class air kicking from the air is not one of them.

 

[Abwx]

Ironic.

Hell, even China and Russia didn't veto the UN resolution despite 100% knowing what it would lead to (despite claims about NATO mis-interpreting, we all knew what they were going to do once the resolution was passed). The West has a lot of failings but giving a world-class air kicking from the air is not one of them.

That s wishfull thoughts , as these country didnt expect NATO
to breach the resolution in a so savage way.

What is ironic is in fact the unability of the western countries
to respect internationnal laws , then blaming those who oppose
such criminal behaviours...

Ironic also your comments , since you originate from a country that
did perform an illegal war some years ago using false pretenses ,
hence , Bush was a real criminal , yet, you just justify his crimes
because he was your president..

Really pitifull usual double standardized view...

 

[Doppel]

That s wishfull thoughts , as these country didnt expect NATO
to breach the resolution in a so savage way.

Everyone knew that NATO would act militarily once the thing was signed and would serve as a de facto air force for the rebels.

What is ironic is in fact the unability of the western countries
to respect internationnal laws

Was a UN resolution. That is international law.

Bush was a real criminal , yet, you just justify his crimes
because he was your president..

I did, really? You don't realize millions of people in the US think Bush was the worst president ever? Or are you so silly as to think all people from a country think the same way in which case tell me where you're from, I'll find some murderer in its history and then scold you for justifying his crimes.

 

[Craig234]

The real shock is why the F did we let Gadhafi stay in power as long as we did. He should have been taken out many years ago. The tolerance for people like him has gone down internationally and that's a good thing. Hell, even China and Russia didn't veto the UN resolution despite 100% knowing what it would lead to (despite claims about NATO mis-interpreting, we all knew what they were going to do once the resolution was passed). The West has a lot of failings but giving a world-class air kicking from the air is not one of them.

Running around the world deciding who we think should be removed from power is quite the easily corrupted process. There's a reason for rules against it.

Do you need to be reminded how people who not only passed the 'ok' test, but many of whom we put or helped stay in power, include the Shah, Batista, Marcos, the Duvaliers, d'Aubisson, Pinochet, Diem, countless military juntas and forgotten dictators, Mubarak, Trujillo, the Somozas, Saddam, Noriega, and, well, Qadafi, who got equipment for pursuing dissidents from the US.

People who we helped remove, in contrast to the great leaders above though we did also remove some of them after they were no longer useful, were any variety of of people not right-wing enough for our tastes, who represented their people's interests over US corporate interests - Mossadagh, Allende, Ortega, Chavez, Roldos (Panama), Lumumba, Torrijos - achieving largely the opposite of what you say you want with this 'why do we let them stay in power' policy.

When we remove (or place) people for the wrong reasons, it's always *sold* as doing what you say you want.

Daniel Ortega was a major threat to the United States justifying our launching a terrorism war to remove him (by the way, he's the current President of Nicaragua, sorry if that keeps you up tonight in fear), while the terrorist army - former Somoza thugs and criminals - were infamously said by Reagan to be "the moral equivalent of our founding fathers".

Diem, who was a terribly repressive leader to the point he couldn't govern with the opposition, was called by LBJ "the Winston Churchill of Southeast Asia".

You are the type of person who naively invites corruption and disaster with casual calls for us to determine who is in power around the world.

Things have gotten better lately. We don't need to return to the days of the US government launching and hiding or defending tyranny.

It's a tricky issue. Isn't it better, some would say, to assassinate one man than for many to lose their lives in war? But that's short-sighted as well.

A case can easily be made for Hitler to be assassinated - as an imperative in fact, if possible. But when it's allowed and more generally practiced, that changes.

There may be a cyclical effect, between support for removing bad leaders until that gets out of hand, to resistance to it leading to bad leaders remaining in power.

But it's a dangerous thing to say your nation has the right to go around the world removing leaders, as the lists above show.

When a best case scenario is used - like the ticking time bomb to justify torture - it can look justified, as dictators deny rights and self-determination to people.

That's hardly the result, though.

The above why it's bad for the US to do this applies as much or more pretty much to any other country doing the same. Do we want any others doing it?

Qadafi was arguably a target for removal based on his support of terrorism decades ago; admittedly Reagan's hostility to him and the fall of the Soviet Union backed him off of that and while there's much to criticize, he seems to have done much better at efforts with the west, including giving his weapons program to the US. It wasn't until the Arab Spring led to masses of civilians facing slaughter he again 'crossed a line' with the west.

Save234

 

[Craig234]

Everyone knew that NATO would act militarily once the thing was signed and would serve as a de facto air force for the rebels.

One Russian article suggests Russian has concerns that NATO has gone beyond the UN resolution, because the west wants to take Libya for itself outside the UN:

Russians oppose the use of force and consider the West’s intervention an overt aggression, particularly since UN Security Council Resolution 1973 did not authorize coalition forces to bomb cities or take part in ground operations.

You don't realize millions of people in the US think Bush was the worst president ever? Or are you so silly as to think all people from a country think the same way in which case tell me where you're from, I'll find some murderer in its history and then scold you for justifying his crimes.

The lack of any legal action against the previous administration condones its actions. Public opinion having many who criticize Bush is no substitute for the law.

The Obama administration is widely criticized by liberals as responsible for failing to uphold the law for the Bush administration's crimes.

 

[EagleKeeper]

That s wishfull thoughts , as these country didnt expect NATO
to breach the resolution in a so savage way.

What is ironic is in fact the unability of the western countries
to respect internationnal laws , then blaming those who oppose
such criminal behaviours...

Ironic also your comments , since you originate from a country that
did perform an illegal war some years ago using false pretenses ,
hence , Bush was a real criminal , yet, you just justify his crimes
because he was your president..

Really pitifull usual double standardized view...

France was the one that was pushing for NATO to get involved.
Pot calling the kettle black.

 

[Abwx]

Everyone knew that NATO would act militarily once the thing was signed and would serve as a de facto air force for the rebels.Was a UN resolution. That is international law.I did, really? You don't realize millions of people in the US think Bush was the worst president ever? Or are you so silly as to think all people from a country think the same way in which case tell me where you're from, I'll find some murderer in its history and then scold you for justifying his crimes.

You re spreading NATO propaganda...

Nothing in this resolution says that NATO is allowed to bomb a side ,
neither to intervene with ground forces nor to deliver weapons to a side.

Neither russia nor china would have signed this resolution
if they have known that the western countries were to
cynically instrumentalize it...

You are speaking without even knowing what you are talking
about since you re ignoring the UNO resolution text..

NATO in this affair is a criminal lawfull party, nothing else , but it
happens that your country is involved , so your reflex is a false
patriotism, the same one that made you support war crimes in Iraq,
so when it comes to justifying crimes, you re a perfect auto
demonstrative exemple...

 

[Abwx]

France was the one that was pushing for NATO to get involved.

That s right , along with the UK , since both of these nations
are not strong enough militarly speaking , so they had to beg
other s nations means to perform their colonialist war..

The US , though , for fear of being left on the road once
these two criminals claim their prize , has followed the move...

 

[EagleKeeper]

Yet you are hiding out in France

 

[Abwx]

Yet you are hiding out in France

Yet, since you have no argument, you re attacking me as person
rather than attacking my arguments...

Indeed, i ve got a house in Algeria where i go several months a year..:biggrin:

 

[EagleKeeper]

Yet, since you have no argument, you re attacking me as person
rather than attacking my arguments...

Indeed, i ve got a house in Algeria where i go several months a year..:biggrin:

No one can attack your arguments - they make no sense:thumbsdown:

 

[Abwx]

No one can attack your arguments - they make no sense:thumbsdown:

You fail to understand that the only thing you know about the world
is through your biaised medias..

Move a little in the world and you ll understand , although it must
be said that thanks to the Bushes the US passeport that once was
the warranty to be well received anywhere in the world , including
in any muslim state is now a dangeourous item...

That said, i wish i can invite some US people i know very well
in my house in north africa , hoppefully very soon.

 

[werepossum]

Yet, since you have no argument, you re attacking me as person
rather than attacking my arguments...

Indeed, i ve got a house in Algeria where i go several months a year..:biggrin:

You should be golden then; now you can invite Khaddafi over for some good old-fashioned socialism, freedom bashing, and oppression.

 

[Abwx]

You should be golden then; now you can invite Khaddafi over for some good old-fashioned socialism, freedom bashing, and oppression.

Lybian had a very decent standard of life...
Let s wait for the outcome of the current colonialist crusade that
is entitling thugs to govern this country.
I guess that nothing will goes as expected...

As for freedom bashing , you should have known that Khadafi
was no real dictator in his country and that the real power
inside the country was in tribe s hands that he has continuously
to deal with.

Now NATO is supporting the worst people that are in Lybia,
people who are criminals and racists as proved by their crimes..

About freedom, do you think that this bunch of lazy dogs
that call themselves rebels would have seized the opportunity
to go abroad in good universities ?. (as the lybian govenment grant
any student about 2000$/month to perform their studies abroad).

No they prefered to live from trafficking, arms and drug dealings
and spent the rest of the time drinking and hanging around places
where they unrelentlessly look at passing women...

No wonder that there was 30% of the worforce that were foreign people...

LIBYA: Rebels execute black immigrants while forces kidnap others

Comments (109)
ADDIS ABABA — While much of the world’s attention is focusing on crude oil prices and the Libyan pipelines in the east of the country– human right groups say rebels are committing crimes against humanity.
In east Libya, African hunt began as towns and cities began fall under the control of Libyan rebels, mobs and gangs. They started to detain, insult, rape and even executing black immigrants, students and refugees.
In the past two weeks, more than 100 Africans from various Sub-Sahara states are believed to have been killed by Libyan rebels and their supporters.
According to Somali refugees in Libya, at least five Somalis from Somaliland and Somalia were executed in Tripoli and Benghazi by anti-Gaddafi mobs. Dozens of refugees and immigrants workers from Ethiopia, Eritrea, Ghana, Nigeria, Chad, Mali and Niger have been killed, some of them were led into the desert and stabbed to death. Black Libyan men receiving medical care in hospitals in Benghazi were reportedly abducted by armed rebels. They are part of more than 200 African immigrants held in secret locations by the rebels.

http://somalilandpress.com/libya-rebels-execute-black-immigrants-while-forces-kidnap-others-20586

 

[AMDZen]

And if they dont turn him over? Then what?

War!!

War I say!!

War!!

 

[Lemon law]

As the last page or so of this thread seems to blame Nato for causing the civil war in Libya?

What bullshit.

After what Gadhifi did to his own civilian population as the civil war started, should leave no doubt in anyone;s mind that Gadhifi had to go.

After that, we can ask the future question of are the Libyan people just jumping from the frying pan and into the fire? Especially when we have considerable hope the new winners will be better and lead to a better Libyan democracy.

But when you are in the frying pan and certain to die, you don't ask if the fire will be worse or better when getting rid of Gadhify is the only option.

 

[Abwx]

What bullshit.

After what Gadhifi did to his own civilian population as the civil war started, should leave no doubt in anyone;s mind that Gadhifi had to go.

Was repression of armed people a move against people ?..

You ll learn soon that the main civilians slaughters in this war
is not khadafi, but mainly NATO and these so called rebels
that did hide in urban densely inhabited area as a shield to
say that the loyalist troops where targeting civilians...


Indeed, it seems that few are aware of the thousands
civilians killed simply by NATO s criminal bombings..

At least 15 civilians, including three children, have been killed after NATO warplanes bombed a residential area near the Libyan capital, Tripoli.

http://realisticbird.wordpress.com/...illed-gaddafi-forces-still-attacking-misrata/

At least 85 civilians have been killed in the latest NATO airstrikes in Libya near the western city of Zlitan, a Libyan official says.

The attacks took place in the village of Majer, south of Zlitan, which is located 160 km (100 miles) east of the capital, Tripoli, late on Monday, Libyan government spokesman Mussa Ibrahim said, AFP reported.

Thirty three children, 32 women and 20 men from 12 families were killed in the "massacre," Ibrahim added.

http://weeklyintercept.blogspot.com/2011/08/fresh-nato-raids-kill-85-civilians-in.html

 

[Doppel]

One Russian article suggests Russian has concerns that NATO has gone beyond the UN resolution

I think a LOT of this is Russia just saying that. I remember the mood before the resolution. Nobody was doing anything and once it was signed the expectation, and the reality that came, was that jets would take to the skies and sh*t would get real. And there was never any point in an drawn out stale mate, so the resolution would buy the rebels a state of the art air force, and it did.

Technically maybe the resolution has been breached, but I don't think too many people are terribly surprised at it, including russia and china.

Neither russia nor china would have signed this resolution
if they have known that the western countries were to
cynically instrumentalize it...

You don't pay them enough credit, they are not run by idiots. These people knew exactly what would happen.

the same one that made you support war crimes in Iraq

We already went over this.

Lybian had a very decent standard of life...
Let s wait for the outcome of the current colonialist crusade that
is entitling thugs to govern this country.

How was this woman's standard of living? http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/3...ecutioner-a-war-criminal-or-victim/?hpt=hp_t2

No they prefered to live from trafficking, arms and drug dealings
and spent the rest of the time drinking and hanging around places
where they unrelentlessly look at passing women...

I guess they were trying to emulate their leader perhaps. But really, nobody here knows if the rebels are good or bad. I have no idea.

At least 85 civilians have been killed in the latest NATO airstrikes in Libya near the western city of Zlitan, a Libyan official says.

A Libyan official? Well, that settles it then. Trustworthy.

 

[Abwx]

A Libyan official? Well, that settles it then. Trustworthy.

Yeah , the US is known to be the only one that can be trusted,
particularly when accusing some nations to have WMDs...

 

[Abwx]

I think a LOT of this is Russia just saying that. I remember the mood before the resolution. Nobody was doing anything and once it was signed the expectation, and the reality that came, was that jets would take to the skies and sh*t would get real. And there was never any point in an drawn out stale mate, so the resolution would buy the rebels a state of the art air force, and it did.

Technically maybe the resolution has been breached, but I don't think too many people are terribly surprised at it, including russia and china.You don't pay them enough credit, they are not run by idiots. These people knew exactly what would happen.We already went over this.How was this woman's standard of living? http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/3...ecutioner-a-war-criminal-or-victim/?hpt=hp_t2I guess they were trying to emulate their leader perhaps. But really, nobody here knows if the rebels are good or bad. I have no idea.A Libyan official? Well, that settles it then. Trustworthy.

The post as a whole is totally nonsensical..

You should really return to school since like most of the right wingers
that did highjack this forum you have trouble aligning two sentences
without the latter onecontradicting the former one.
Worse, when reading the whole of your posts, a balanced reader would find the "opinions" to looklike some kind of white noise , i.e, some sort of "logic" built entirelyon random dogmas if it werent for the underlying nazi and supremacist ideology that is common to all people that support zionism...

Indeed, you lack the necessary political knowledge to discuss these matters , and you re in the position of a monkey that would be given
a computer....

 

[werepossum]

I think a LOT of this is Russia just saying that. I remember the mood before the resolution. Nobody was doing anything and once it was signed the expectation, and the reality that came, was that jets would take to the skies and sh*t would get real. And there was never any point in an drawn out stale mate, so the resolution would buy the rebels a state of the art air force, and it did.

Technically maybe the resolution has been breached, but I don't think too many people are terribly surprised at it, including russia and china.You don't pay them enough credit, they are not run by idiots. These people knew exactly what would happen.We already went over this.How was this woman's standard of living? http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/3...ecutioner-a-war-criminal-or-victim/?hpt=hp_t2I guess they were trying to emulate their leader perhaps. But really, nobody here knows if the rebels are good or bad. I have no idea.A Libyan official? Well, that settles it then. Trustworthy.

Oh, we went far beyond the UN resolution. When it's all said and done, the UN is dominated by nations with dictators, and Russia and China are pretty hard-nosed about voting only for their own perceived interests. And you're spot-on about the rebels; none of us (including our leaders) know if they are good or bad. This may well turn out to be worse for the Libyan people. I greatly doubt it will be worse for the West, though.

And I hope that we continue the press to make the rebels hold free and fair elections so that whichever way it turns out for the Libyan people, it will be of their doing. Personally I'd prefer a free but ineffective democracy over a dictator providing free health care and a car allowance, but that's just me. Some people find a boot on the neck to be warm and cozy.

 

[Icepick]

Gadhafi is an asshole and not it appears a coward too. He needs to be brought to trial for the evil he caused and have capital punishment brought down upon him.

 

[EagleKeeper]

What bullshit.

After what Gadhifi did to his own civilian population as the civil war started, should leave no doubt in anyone;s mind that Gadhifi had to go.

Was repression of armed people a move against people ?..

You ll learn soon that the main civilians slaughters in this war
is not khadafi, but mainly NATO and these so called rebels
that did hide in urban densely inhabited area as a shield to
say that the loyalist troops where targeting civilians...


Indeed, it seems that few are aware of the thousands
civilians killed simply by NATO s criminal bombings..

At least 15 civilians, including three children, have been killed after NATO warplanes bombed a residential area near the Libyan capital, Tripoli.

http://realisticbird.wordpress.com/...illed-gaddafi-forces-still-attacking-misrata/

At least 85 civilians have been killed in the latest NATO airstrikes in Libya near the western city of Zlitan, a Libyan official says.

The attacks took place in the village of Majer, south of Zlitan, which is located 160 km (100 miles) east of the capital, Tripoli, late on Monday, Libyan government spokesman Mussa Ibrahim said, AFP reported.

Thirty three children, 32 women and 20 men from 12 families were killed in the "massacre," Ibrahim added.

http://weeklyintercept.blogspot.com/2011/08/fresh-nato-raids-kill-85-civilians-in.html

Considering that you are unable to add; most of your other claims seem to just be sour grapes.

You love to support the losing side and then find excuses for losing.
Ignoring the actual facts that lead up to the embarrassment

 

[Abwx]

Considering that you are unable to add; most of your other claims seem to just be sour grapes.

You love to support the losing side and then find excuses for losing.
Ignoring the actual facts that lead up to the embarrassment

So say the one that contradict himself sentences after sentences...

It s not that i support khadafi , but a pacific transition would have been
possible without blood spilling.

The way it was done, by illegally changing the regime and to put
a side of the country against the other one is just the worse way
to do a transistion as there will be inevitably an armed opposition ,
a warrant that troubles are to continue long after khadafi is removed...

I guess that western countries dont bother such subtilities provided
they can have their war spoils...