EPTRegardless of what happened, in the end Libya has now the historical chance to form a better, less oppressive government, and call me naive, but I think these people can do it. All that is left for others to do now is to support them in this endeavour. Why miss Gaddafi and his clan?
Libyan Uprising - Page 124
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Off topic discussion and argumentative back and forth will not be tolerated. | ||
|
Maenander
Germany4923 Posts
Regardless of what happened, in the end Libya has now the historical chance to form a better, less oppressive government, and call me naive, but I think these people can do it. All that is left for others to do now is to support them in this endeavour. Why miss Gaddafi and his clan? | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10596 Posts
IIRC: Posting a death toll article from the 15. February is as helpful as... I don't know. It's just totally useless. Posting an article that is titled with: "How many Children did Obama and Sarcozy kill today" is questionable at best (oh, and it's also not a really recent article). Posting an article over the bombing of the pipefactory for the manmade river, when it IN THIS SAME ARTICLE (which is, you guessed it probably by now, also over a month old) says that Nato did it because there were loyalists in this factory that fired at them/rebels AND that it is investigated is also pretty much pointless. I didn't watch the video and honestly, why should I bother after these other articles that did not really prove a single arguments you made? Seriously, you claim bias/brainwashing on the points other make and at the same time you try to prove your points like that?... Ugh... | ||
|
anarkandi
Sweden48 Posts
Gaddafi was together with other african and arabian nations discussing having a national currency aside from the dollar and euro. This wouldn't kill the dollar, but it would harm the dollars stance in the world. Thus, a couple of years ago Libya was among the US top priorities for new interventions, but this changed a year or so ago due to Libya backing the US stance in israel. Obama sold weapons for about 100 million dollars or so and made oil deals, and everything was well. Until the rebellions, where different groups of people banded together to abolish Gaddafis 42 year old rule. The weapons from NATO and western countries made it hard for the rebels to advance, but NATO and the UN decided to help out. The rebellion went on for 6 months, during which Libya was split in half. Now, the NATO bombings, and the conflicts between the rebels and the dictator Gaddafi has put Libya in a horrible spot. The country is demolished, and needs time to rebuild. It also needs to find grounds to build democracy on. We need to give them aid for the destruction we have caused by post-war arms sale and by the destruction we caused during the conflict. The most important part of conflict resolution is not only during the immidiate conflict, it is the work before the conflict and the work done after the conflict. For example, NATO has bombed universities, hospitals and several non-military complexes during the conflict. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6190 Posts
On August 23 2011 19:54 Saji wrote: I cant give you a definitive answer i wish i could: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/24/world/europe/24italy.html (that estimates of more than 1,000 Libyan civilians killed in clashes ) and that's before the heavy bombardment that took place in Tripoli these last few day. Which the Libyan government official claims 1300 dead and 5000 injured (have no other sources for this so for now lets assume its speculation) Furthermore: NATO bombs great man made river: related information : http://humanrightsinvestigations.org/2011/07/27/great-man-made-river-nato-bombs/ NATO bombs farm with children http://www.michelcollon.info/Obama-Sarkozy-how-many-children.html?lang=fr >_> how is that protecting people tell me Ps you say the following: " Indeed there will be some deaths involved with the bombings that is unavoidable but obviously NATO thought there would have been a lot more deaths if they didn´t. " If you recognize this fact how can you claim we are there to protect people???? also your statement reveals how you do not understand the seriousness of bombing..... (try saying this to someone who just lost one of the loved one by bombs) hey sorry were here to protect you but we shit happens... riiight do you think a person would accept this blatant bullshit?? Also in your wording you say as if you know for a fact what would happened if NATO wasn't there.. I sure a hell cant and i'm not even being bombed You're right bad things happen and there are things NATO did wrong ( I don't deny that ). I just think that what NATO does what is the best for the country and will ultimately result in the least amount of casualties. And you talk about how I would explain the bombing to someone who lost someone by bombs, you can't but then I ask you try explaining why Gadaffi would stay against someone who lost a loved one because of Gadaffi. I think we should agree to disagree because we're not going to convince eachother. | ||
|
zalz
Netherlands3704 Posts
On August 23 2011 21:03 anarkandi wrote: Oil is a too simple answer. Libya has about 2% of the worlds total oil, sure, a considerable amount. But it's also about oil - oil, infrastructure and logistics. Gaddafi was together with other african and arabian nations discussing having a national currency aside from the dollar and euro. This wouldn't kill the dollar, but it would harm the dollars stance in the world. Thus, a couple of years ago Libya was among the US top priorities for new interventions, but this changed a year or so ago due to Libya backing the US stance in israel. Obama sold weapons for about 100 million dollars or so and made oil deals, and everything was well. Until the rebellions, where different groups of people banded together to abolish Gaddafis 42 year old rule. The weapons from NATO and western countries made it hard for the rebels to advance, but NATO and the UN decided to help out. The rebellion went on for 6 months, during which Libya was split in half. Now, the NATO bombings, and the conflicts between the rebels and the dictator Gaddafi has put Libya in a horrible spot. The country is demolished, and needs time to rebuild. It also needs to find grounds to build democracy on. We need to give them aid for the destruction we have caused by post-war arms sale and by the destruction we caused during the conflict. The most important part of conflict resolution is not only during the immidiate conflict, it is the work before the conflict and the work done after the conflict. For example, NATO has bombed universities, hospitals and several non-military complexes during the conflict. Same reason the US invaded Europe for trying to create the Euro. Ooh wait. Your understanding is flawed for two large reasons: 1) Such a currency wouldn't affect the Dollar, the Euro hardly affected the Dolar and that is composed of real countries. A single US state has a bigger economy then those regions combined 2) This currency was never ever actually discussed and never even hit the planning phase. Gaddaffi always envisioned a unified middle-east region with himself in a top position. The problem with this however is the fact that except for him, nobody gave a fuck. Gaddaffi picked up on this attitude and later shifted his attention towards North-Africa and then began an identical concept but rather then the middle-east, he and Libya would be the center of some North-Africa union. Same deal however, nobody gave a fuck about Gaddaffi and his stupid plans and ambitions. This new currency was never realistic, just one of Gaddaffi's grand plans that only he actually cared for. Even if it was realistic, the US probably wouldn't give a fuck because those regions have a laughable economy. Even the middle-east is little more then Africa with oil. Once that money pit runs out the middle-east will be as poor as most of Africa. | ||
|
GeyzeR
250 Posts
On August 23 2011 21:19 zalz wrote: 1) Such a currency wouldn't affect the Dollar, the Euro hardly affected the Dolar and that is composed of real countries. A single US state has a bigger economy then those regions combined Euro is just a replacement for different European currencies. It is still a fiat currency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money), i.e with no real value. Still it damaged US dollar because it represents a good alternative for foreign exchange reserves. US dollar is down to 60% from 70%. But what is much more important - the current monetary system was under threat. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_monetary_systems) I would say that the money is the most important topic in the world. The current Washington Consensus system is not the best system that naturally evolved. Even more, now we can see the sad consequences of this system. But it give a huge advantage to the side that issue the money. And this side will protect the privilege at all costs. A real value money, like gold dinar, eventually beats virtual fiat money. What would you prefer to keep your reserves in, the money that are stable and linked to gold or oil or whatever, or virtual money, when you do not know how much you need for 1 ton of oil, 100, 200, or maybe 1000 in the future? Well, Libya is not that huge with its 2% of world oil reserves, but it could create a dangerous precedent. Do you think the other countries are happy to sell the oil for virtual USD? About big GDP of USA states... I'll give you an example. A teddy bear was made in China for 20 cents and sold to USA for 3 USD, then finished in the hands of a customer of Wal-Mart for 20 USD. +3 USD to China GDP, +17 to USA GDP. If we imagine just teddy bears economy, USA would be 5 times bigger the Chinese without producing something real. Actually, USA GDP share of services is huge 76.9%. 2) This currency was never ever actually discussed and never even hit the planning phase. This is not true. Maybe it was not discussed in the western media, but in AU it was. I hear it was planned to be launched in 1, max 2 years. Nickola Sarkozi: "libyan people caused a threat for financial security of mankind". Actually not mankind, but the western part of it. I guess Gaddafi was absolutely OK with that  But how stupid he could be to believe that it can become a reality... Gaddaffi always envisioned a unified middle-east region with himself in a top position. The problem with this however is the fact that except for him, nobody gave a fuck. It is not like nobody gave a fuck, but no one wants to share or even give up his power. He had however some support and respect in AU, but I dkn honestly for the moment if it was possible to make a union at least with 1 country... Yes Gaddafi dreamed about african-arab union with common currency, army, economy etc. Once he lost a connection with the reality and open Libyan borders to all African countries. Poor Africans immediately flooded the prosperous by African standards country and he has to close it. Actually I believe that it could be really good for Africans but still I do not see the world let it happen. | ||
|
Xivsa
United States1009 Posts
On August 23 2011 22:38 GeyzeR wrote: You are wrong, zalz Euro is just a replacement for different European currencies. It is still a fiat currency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money), i.e with no real value. Still it damaged US dollar because it represents a good alternative for foreign exchange reserves. US dollar is down to 60% from 70%. But what is much more important - the current monetary system was under threat. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_monetary_systems) I would say that the money is the most important topic in the world. The current Washington Consensus system is not the best system that naturally evolved. Even more, now we can see the sad consequences of this system. But it give a huge advantage to the side that issue the money. And this side will protect the privilege at all costs. A real value money, like gold dinar, eventually beats virtual fiat money. What would you prefer to keep your reserves in, the money that are stable and linked to gold or oil or whatever, or virtual money, when you do not know how much you need for 1 ton of oil, 100, 200, or maybe 1000 in the future? Well, Libya is not that huge with its 2% of world oil reserves, but it could create a dangerous precedent. Do you think the other countries are happy to sell the oil for virtual USD? About big GDP of USA states... I'll give you an example. A teddy bear was made in China for 20 cents and sold to USA for 3 USD, then finished in the hands of a customer of Wal-Mart for 20 USD. +3 USD to China GDP, +17 to USA GDP. If we imagine just teddy bears economy, USA would be 5 times bigger the Chinese without producing something real. Actually, USA GDP share of services is huge 76.9%. Wow, GeyzeR, a little focus if you please. Arguing that some sort of pan-Arab currency that might have included Libya would have been, by default, as important a currency as the dollar, euro, or even renminbi is not accurate at all. In the first place, what Arab nations were supposed to join up? Only ones with over 1m b/day output? 300k b/day? North Africa and the Middle East? How far south in Africa would it have gone (considering countries like Mali or Sudan have large Muslim populations)? How far east would it have gone? Saudi Arabia? Oman? Tying even 5 Arab nations together into one currency is pretty foolhardy from the start, not to mention the fact that (relatively) well-off nations like a Saudi Arabia would be more than cautious before even considering the notion. Secondly, the Washington Consensus has its problems. The loss of value of the dollar has less to do with the euro than simply a weak American economy in the 21st century. The dollar's days of being the only international currency of note are clearly over, but that does not mean that Washington DC is actively trying to damage the euro's value or the renminbi's value. In point of fact, American exporters can use the strength of the euro and other currencies to better sell their products overseas (most effective, obviously, if we actually had anything to export [like Germany] but services > manufacture). Thirdly, you quickly recalibrated your argument over an AU currency into one of fiat money vs. gold-backed (or hard) currencies. This is completely separate from an AU currency. Yes, hard currencies are theoretically more stable than fiat ones, what will all the opportunities for arbitrage, exchange rate changes, devaluations, bail-outs, etc. that fiats can entail. But having a currency backed by gold backed by oil is not a solution as it itself is subject to similar value fluctuations in the global oil, namely the WTI, OPEC Reference Basket, and Dubai Crude. Pegging an AU currency to gold also wouldn't solve Libya's lack of development, rampant poverty, joblessness, and other ills as hard currencies in general do not offer the flexibility (duh) of fiat monies. Finally, Libya would have set 0 precedent even if it had done any of the things being mentioned. Creating a common currency with Algeria or Egypt would not have been easy, despite being its neighbors, because of the wars all 3 have fought with and against each other after WWII. Libya using its oil revenues to buy gold to then establish a hard currency would have simply hurt it further economically, and it is still depressingly underdeveloped even compared to nations like Egypt and Algeria. In regards to your other points, you 'hearing' that a currency was 1, tops 2, years away is complete hogwash, especially if you heard it from anyone in the Libyan government. And Gaddafi would have been a terrible 'Africa League' chief. Africa already has the African Union and other international bodies that try to help their own continent, granted with limited success and membership. | ||
|
zalz
Netherlands3704 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
GeyzeR
250 Posts
I did not say that Washington DC is actively trying to damage the euro's value or the renminbi's value. I am surprised that you say "The loss of value of the dollar has less to do with the euro than simply a weak American economy in the 21st century. " US dollar is not backed just by American economy. It is manly due to the fact that they freely "printed" it in huge amounts. And if the oil country would not sell oil for USD, if it were not reserve currency, nobody would need it in such amounts. The monetary system is another big topic, deserving a separate thread. I am not an expert in economy (yet), but I believe that the current "infinite debt" system is no good. Also why you give this disinformation about Libya?? "rampant poverty, joblessness, and other ills" joblessness - yes, and I guess the liberal economy may solve this problem. Instead of receiving high welfare for unemployment, the youth can take the low paid jobs of black immigrants, there were around 1 million there. Less money, but got a job! You are saying it like it is very easy to create millions of high level jobs in the desert... "rampant poverty" - is a lie, sorry. We are talking about Libyans, not the black immigrants in Libya. Who were still better in Libya then at home, by the way. "still depressingly underdeveloped even compared to nations like Egypt and Algeria" Another lie. I thought it was already closed topic. Libya was a country with high social standards. Higher then Egypt and Algeria. Check for example, PPP. There were immigrants from Egypt who came to Libya for better life. The general idea is that Gaddafi did not want to sell his oil for dollars, but for another not linked to any western currency. It could be the current Libyan dinar. It is one of few currencies in the world that is not under control of independent central bank, but the government. The central banks is yet another big topic... For example, the Russian ruble is not an independent currency and linked to USD. Did you know that? I cannot claim I know the hidden reason of NATO intervention. Just some thought, "what if...." etc. I suggest to come back to Libyan news. Economy is too big topic to be here. As you may already know, Saif and Khamis are sane and free and the past information was a part of media wars. There are still fights in Tripoli and it is not over yet. | ||
|
Xivsa
United States1009 Posts
The underdeveloped part is true insofar as poorer Egyptians, Algerians, probably even Tunisians would make their way to Libya hoping for work. Yes, Libya had jobs to offer and needed laborers before all this revolutionizing. But the fact that Libya offered poor, jobless migrants actual work from those places does not mean that Libya was some sort of 'desert' oasis (or jobs oasis?) of sorts for the region. On August 24 2011 00:15 GeyzeR wrote: The general idea is that Gaddafi did not want to sell his oil for dollars, but for another not linked to any western currency. It could be the current Libyan dinar. It is one of few currencies in the world that is not under control of independent central bank, but the government. The central banks is yet another big topic... For example, the Russian ruble is not an independent currency and linked to USD. Did you know that? Yep, even the Chinese currency is not allowed to actually 'float' like a true fiat. In both cases, the governments determined that it is more prudent to peg their currency to, I believe, a 'basket' of currencies. I don't know the specifics, but for both the ruble and the renminbi the value of the dollar affects their value. This is done in large part to prevent capital flight and to keep export and import prices somewhat stable and more predictable than would otherwise be possible. The wisdom behind these 'baskets' is debatable indeed. On August 24 2011 00:15 GeyzeR wrote: I suggest to come back to Libyan news. Economy is too big topic to be here. As you may already know, Saif and Khamis are sane and free and the past information was a part of media wars. There are still fights in Tripoli and it is not over yet. I agree wholeheartedly. My grasp on economics is more than incomplete and I've been factually incorrect on the state of Libyan demographics. As for ultimate victory or loss depending on one's point of view, I hope the bloodshed stops. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6190 Posts
Apparently rebels broke into the gadaffi compound like already mentioned and met initial resistance which stopped later. All this comes from al jazeera can't link the source since I am on my iPhone so sorry for that. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
![[image loading]](http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg734/scaled.php?tn=0&server=734&filename=5i6dx.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640) | ||
|
EchoZ
Japan5041 Posts
| ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6190 Posts
On August 24 2011 01:58 EchoZ wrote: Why was this thread bumped? Can someone simplify the current events for me? Kinda confused here. Basically it was kind of a stalemate between the rebels and Gadaffi forces. But not so long ago the rebels started to make a lot of progression and actually held onto their advancements. Now they basically got most of the capital city ( Tripoli ) plus the main HQ from Gadaffi's forces. It's now just a matter of time before they win. | ||
|
GeyzeR
250 Posts
On August 24 2011 01:58 EchoZ wrote: Why was this thread bumped? Can someone simplify the current events for me? Kinda confused here. It is good you asked When you maybe already know the official news, I will try to summarize the alternative media news. It is an information bomb, especially the fake videos! Please do not blame me, I just highlight the information, and you decide, true or false. It contradicts the official story. For the moment the official one exposed more lies. Please do not pay attention to the websites, all the information comes from the few "alternative" Journalists and insiders. What has happened: http://weeklyintercept.blogspot.com/2011/08/nato-slaughter-in-tripoli-operation.html http://pakistancyberforce.blogspot.com/2011/08/qatari-hollywood-and-mercenary-invasion.html Summary: NATO troops in Tripoli It’s no longer a surprise that a media war is being waged against Gaddafi and Libya. In March, all news were breaking and highly contradictive towards each other. A month passed until Libyans finally learned to disprove the lies, but while the news themselves grew relatively neutral, a new wave of misinformation was being prepared. It arose in global media approximately on 15th of August, when a Saudi Arabia newspaper Asharq Alawsat told that Gaddafi is allegedly ill and ready to leave the country. Saudis, mortal enemies of Muammar Gaddafi, were, of course, such a reliable source, that all other papers followed. In the same time news channels were choking with new victories of the insurgency. It looked like it took rebels a couple of hours to occupy a city, making poor Moussa Ibrahim steam from his ears, proving to journalists that it is virtually impossible. All this show was a careful preparation for the main course – the taking of Tripoli. But in spite of mercenaries parachuted from Misurata to the south, despite attempts to cut the road from Tunisia, despite the insurgents’ zerg rush on all fronts, much of the rebel success remained on the screen. And cities cannot be taken by illusion. Therefore, NATO decided to pursue the most risky way: beginning the ground operation. To cover it up and in the same time spread chaos and panic among Libyans, a set of Tripoli’s Green Square, Bab al-Azizya and several streets was constructed in Doha, Qatar, and videos of successful uprising in Tripoli and its takeover by the rebels were being made. The directors used the same stratagem that their civilian counterparts in Vietnam War movies: to draw their supposed victories. On the 20th of August, Twitter, the major supplier of nonexistent witnesses came to life, like a shelled hornet nest. Rebels reported about fights in the city center - with smartphones in the free hand, no doubt. Some have gone further and managed alone to fully capture the west of the city. With the blessings of the almighty Photoshop pictures of rebels against Tripoli and Zawya were shown. Making sure that the February script goes according to plan, and the audience does not seem to mind, the forces of democracy gave a sign to the "moles", long located in the capital and waiting for this day. The saboteurs ran recorded sounds of battle through speakers of the mosques, to mislead the citizens and give reporters the reason to write about the "audible gunfights and explosions". Simultaneously, dozens of armed people from Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt leaked to several areas of the city, shooting and threatening Libyans. Several Apaches flew in and bombed. The premier of the Qatari film failed at the box office, and the saboteurs were quickly dealt with, but they turned out to be a distraction. NATO marines and mercenaries were arriving from the sea in small fast boats. The slaughter began. Within 11 hours, 1300 innocent civilians were killed in Tripoli, and 5000 injured, as French Foreign Legion and Al Qaeda cut their way through. All this time, the bombings continued non-stop. Three Apaches flew over the city, firing their miniguns. The gangs of Al Qaeda were burning houses, looting shops and assaulting every woman in sight. Any prominent supporter of Gaddafi was targeted and their houses attacked first. The number of gangs is still increasing right now, coming in from the sea in the small NATO crafts, and directed by the Special Forces of all the aggressor nations. Right now, the situation is unclear due to power cuts and informational blockade. ------------------- Recently the Libyan state TV claimed that they have captured some rebels and mercenaries: -3 quataris -10 français -1 anglais -14 émiratis -9 tunisiens -2 algériens -45 égyptiens -5 grecques -2 italiens -750 benghaziens Thousandth of Libyans volunteered to protect Tripoli. ------------------ Now about the fake video. http://stopwarcrimes.wordpress.com/2011/08/22/al-jazeeras-fake-green-square/ foreknowledge of "Green Square, Bab al-Azizya and several streets was constructed in Doha, Qatar" Now YOU make the comparison. real in the night ![[image loading]](http://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/01/09/81/bb/square-is-full-of-people.jpg) Al jazeera, pause 1:23 Pay attention to the decoration above the arc and to the walls structure: the real one consist of small individual brick, while on AJ picture it is quite solid. More info can be found googling ""tripoli fake green square" etc... The analysis of the lights, people etc. Please do not hurry to say "bullshit!". I could not find any prove that the AJ picture is real. If you find one, please share. How that even possible you may ask? Well, something like this has already happened in the past. The Media Caught In Lies About The Real Situation In Libya, And A History Of Media Manipulation And Lies! http://northerntruthseeker.blogspot.com/2011/08/media-caught-in-lies-about-real.html If you go to http://www.youtube.com/user/AlJazeeraEnglish and check some comments to videos, for example this, you will find that a lot of people are not happy with the Hollywood news. The alternative sources I use are: http://leonorenlibia.blogspot.com/ http://www.mathaba.net/ http://whatreallyhappened.com/node/131195 and, of course, rt.com And remember - do not trust to anybody, including me, use your own judgment. I understand it is hard to doubt the main media news, but it is too much lies already said about the Libyan conflict from their side... so I just HAD to look for alternatives. Especially I was mad at this one: "Gaddafi soldiers given 'Viagra' and ordered to rape hundreds of women, says UN" Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2001283/Gaddafi-soldiers-WERE-given-Viagra-rape-innocent-women-civilians-says-UN.html#ixzz1VsyfapX7" It was like a personal assault, like calling me an idiot. Who on Earth can believe at this nonsense?? Later proved as hoax, no evidences found, of course. Gaddafi escapes, bombing Tripoli, black mercenaries... From the Gaddafi side I only suspect that his son and his children were not really killed during that bombardment, maybe it was made up to call sympathy... I understand that the media wars is an important part of the contemporary war. And the words may create bigger effects then tomahawks. But deep inside I am not OK with it... | ||
|
Hekisui
195 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
|
zalz
Netherlands3704 Posts
And i thought 9/11 truthers were idiotic. | ||
|
Joey Wheeler
Korea (North)276 Posts
Here's a video of a journalist stuck in a hotel protected by Gadhafi loyalists because NATO is trying to take over the hotel and capture or kill the foreign journalists staying there because they're reporting news that the media doesn't want to be made public. Gadhafi is caring about these journalists because it's his way of fighting against western propaganda. Just look at the report of rebels who supposedly "captured Gadhafi's son". It's Iraq all over again, watch this documentary. | ||
|
Hekisui
195 Posts
What NATO did is obvious. But how does that justify conspiracy theory. Russians need to get real. They didn't veto so NATO did it's thing and Gaddafi lost. Some of the most independent media we have have people on the ground. BBC and Al Jazeera are probably best tv media. BBC may have a bit of an unintentional imperial/western bias, but together they give a good picture. | ||
| ||
