Anders Fogh Rasmussen "We have destroyed some 5,000 civilian targets with no loss"
he said military targets
this is the reason why no one wants to listen to people like you except other people like you, you are so transparently propagandistic and wedded to your philosophy that you'll say anything and use any source to push your view which is fueled by hatred.
you'll talk on and on and on about how people are being killed by the rebels you dont say anything about the people killed by qaddafi for 40 years
no one would be rebels if he hadnt bent the country over for 4 decades
you'll say we're handing the country over to alqaeda as if qaddafi wasnt an enemy too
e-warrior business must be getting lucrative these days if even moammar qaddafi has strident and dedicated propagandists for him
well that last sentence isnt serious you arent pro-qaddafi you're just radically anti-west
yap he said military targets.
anyway whats the problem of being anti-west imperialism?
To be anti-X, X has to exist, in this case, it really doesn't...
If the west was after Libya's resources then they should have helped Gaddafi crush the rebellion as fast as possible because he was more than happy to sell shit to us cheaply these days.
me being german, i thought it was funny to come to TL and read all the US opinions on what is going on in the world... you guys are so much more uncritical of your leaders than anything i've ever read or heard.
seriously, i was surprised to see how many people are actually liking what your/our governments are doing. i thought there would be quite a few people being critical, but nope. not really. USA loving their governments!
in germany, so much more people are critical of what our leaders are doing, it's not even funny. literally everyone will say they are disappointed in the government and thinks they are lying to us on a regular basis.
DeepElemBlues, Anders Fogh Rasmussen shamelessly lied, saying that there is no civilian casualties.
"Gaddafi had bent the country over for 4 decades" is another shameless lie. There is already a lot of information in the topic, links etc. If you insist, please find what was economically wrong with the country from pre-17feb source.
Gaddafi fighting with islamists all the time and no doubt he killed some. But could you please say something about the people killed by qaddafi for 40 years? Again, better without post revolution propaganda, but from a neutral source.
BTW, Libya prison population rate is 207(many of them are radical islamists, considered terrorists before and political prisoners now) per 100000, USA - 738. Libya was a very low crime level country.
Anders Fogh Rasmussen "We have destroyed some 5,000 civilian targets with no loss"
he said military targets
this is the reason why no one wants to listen to people like you except other people like you, you are so transparently propagandistic and wedded to your philosophy that you'll say anything and use any source to push your view which is fueled by hatred.
you'll talk on and on and on about how people are being killed by the rebels you dont say anything about the people killed by qaddafi for 40 years
no one would be rebels if he hadnt bent the country over for 4 decades
you'll say we're handing the country over to alqaeda as if qaddafi wasnt an enemy too
e-warrior business must be getting lucrative these days if even moammar qaddafi has strident and dedicated propagandists for him
well that last sentence isnt serious you arent pro-qaddafi you're just radically anti-west
yap he said military targets.
anyway whats the problem of being anti-west imperialism?
To be anti-X, X has to exist, in this case, it really doesn't...
If the west was after Libya's resources then they should have helped Gaddafi crush the rebellion as fast as possible because he was more than happy to sell shit to us cheaply these days.
Your argument doesn't hold first of all Libya was selling oil through Italy, secondly Libya was going to let Russia dig for some more by using Eni America wasn't too happy about this. It seems by your question that you can't seem to put in perspective what is happening.
Thirdly America and the UK never had much of a Pie of Libya's oil (compared to Italy and what Russia was going to have)
Do you know the notion of Geopolitics? you should look it op maybe that could give you the ability to look at these event differently, when you want to talk about oil, benefits, foreign policies and multinationals.
On August 29 2011 09:25 GeyzeR wrote: DeepElemBlues, Anders Fogh Rasmussen shamelessly lied, saying that there is no civilian casualties.
"Gaddafi had bent the country over for 4 decades" is another shameless lie. There is already a lot of information in the topic, links etc. If you insist, please find what was economically wrong with the country from pre-17feb source.
Gaddafi fighting with islamists all the time and no doubt he killed some. But could you please say something about the people killed by qaddafi for 40 years? Again, better without post revolution propaganda, but from a neutral source.
BTW, Libya prison population rate is 207(many of them are radical islamists, considered terrorists before and political prisoners now) per 100000, USA - 738. Libya was a very low crime level country.
Facts don't matter, look at how american politics is driven by deceit lies and propaganda. I don't know but it seems the average american can't see the different s between facts and lies. (I`m generalizing now). It`s embedded in their culture.
On August 29 2011 08:46 jello_biafra wrote: GeyzeR do you just read news reports then presume that the exact opposite of what the reports say is what's actually happening? Seems that way to me...
People at my work were talking about Libya a lot today, some of them know people from the region and are muslims who follow events in the whole muslim world very closely and they seem to have legitimate reasons for supporting the rebels.
I just don't know what to say to people who genuinely believe that Gaddafi has any credibility whatsoever.
How can these so called rebels, who are practically led by former minister of justice and others that served for a long time during Gaddafi, have any credibility?
On August 29 2011 17:22 Ghad wrote: Pika Chu: Khadafi has been leading the country for 40 years. How many Libyans do you think have not been affiliated with the old regime, at all?
If Libya can't reconciliate with those that were a part of the old regime, they are going to end up like Iraq.
Also, if all allegations against Khadafi is only western propaganda, how come al jazeera is basically writing the same stuff?
A justice minister is more than affiliated. He's not some random worker in a ministry. He's the justice minister, a man who, if there were indeed so many unfair trials and oppression in the old regime, was directly involved in it.
I'm not saying libya shouldn't reconciliate with the old regime, but just as they can reconciliate with gaddafi or anyone else.
What i see is this was nothing more than an elaborated coup d'etat, which attracted the interests of many powerful countries, in which a part of the regime took down another.
This war between the two factions lasted for almost 8 months, thew the country to chaos, destroyed the lives of many innocents.
Right after, the western countries will give a big loan to Libya for reconstruction, and in exchange they will get all oil and whatever they need from Libya.
Israel suspended diplomatic relations with Qatar. Official version - support of HAMAS. But Qatar and other arab countries always supported HAMAS. Unofficial - the big role Qatar played in turning Libya into al-Qaeda state.
On August 29 2011 17:59 GeyzeR wrote: Israel suspended diplomatic relations with Qatar. Official version - support of HAMAS. But Qatar and other arab countries always supported HAMAS. Unofficial - the big role Qatar played in turning Libya into al-Qaeda state.
oh god, is this finally a conspiracy where Mossad isn't a part of?
and I must have missed the ceremony where they raised the al-Qaeda flag in Tripoli... really now, cut the crap..
On August 29 2011 17:56 Pika Chu wrote: Right after, the western countries will give a big loan to Libya for reconstruction, and in exchange they will get all oil and whatever they need from Libya.
I am not saying that there is no element of realpolitik in the intervention, and Al Jazeera is writing page up and page down about this side of the whole ordeal. The simple fact remains that Khadafi in february unleashed his military on peaceful demonstrations, using artillery and fighterbombers on unarmed civilians, and that started the uprising in full.
I talked to Israeli and they are not happy with what is going on in Libya. They have already enough problems with islamists groups and Gaddafi was predictable and never a threat. Once there was anti Jew violence in Libya and Gaddafi organized a safe return for them to Israel and later compensated for the lost property.
There was a conspiracy that Mossad secretly was helping Gaddafi. So no, there is no conspiracy without Mossad as a part of it
---------------------------------------------
Human rights organisations have cast doubt on claims of mass rape and other abuses perpetrated by forces loyal to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, which have been widely used to justify Nato's war in Libya.
It's funny how you people sometimes quote 'western' sources which are deemed propaganda by you when they have anything that is anti NATO and every time they have something which is against Gadaffi or your views you disqualify them as 'western media'.
Most of the rebels are admittedly Al-Qaeda. So if al-qaeda blew up the twin towers on 9/11 and is the reason why USA is in war with 3 countries (Iraq, Afghan and Pakistan) how come USA supports Al-Qaeda in Libya and even officially announced them as official government?
Add to this the fact that it is now admitted that USA and British troops were in Libya even before the "official" NATO attack on the back of the UN resolution, supposedly a humanitarian action, that we now know has killed thousand of civilians and left just as many injured.
So all of you who still believe this hoax how NATO is in Libya for "humanitarian" purposes or whatever propaganda is spewed you better wake up and realize the lies you've been told. The evidence is overwhelming that this was a carefully planned operation even years before the official rebel attacks and air strikes.
Also if Al-Qaeda is now officially huge part of the rebels forces and they've been directly helped by USA and NATO forces, all this 9/11 was perpetrated by Al-Qaeda needs to be examined. Is Al-Qaeda an extended hand of the USA or not and why are they now supported and recognized as official government in Libya?
Most of the rebels are admittedly Al-Qaeda. So if al-qaeda blew up the twin towers on 9/11 and is the reason why USA is in war with 3 countries (Iraq, Afghan and Pakistan) how come USA supports Al-Qaeda in Libya and even officially announced them as official government?
so the article says that, a rebel leader admits that some of his fighters have al qaeda ties and the CIA guy says they are monitoring it and are not yet sure how many of the rebels are al qaeda / LIFG members.
and what you read is that "Most of the rebels are admittedly Al-Qaeda"?
Reporting from Baghdad— At least 28 worshipers, including a member of parliament, were killed Sunday by a suicide bomber who blew himself up inside Baghdad's largest Sunni mosque, violence that harked back to the sectarian warfare in Iraq after the 2003 U.S.-led invasion that ousted Saddam Hussein. ... As American forces prepare to complete their departure from Iraq at year's end, the incident provided the latest indicator that security in the country remains uncertain.
So, the democracy has finally reached its completion and kicked in Iraq. Now after Gadaffi's down Libyan people can have some too.
Most of the rebels are admittedly Al-Qaeda. So if al-qaeda blew up the twin towers on 9/11 and is the reason why USA is in war with 3 countries (Iraq, Afghan and Pakistan) how come USA supports Al-Qaeda in Libya and even officially announced them as official government?
so the article says that, a rebel leader admits that some of his fighters have al qaeda ties and the CIA guy says they are monitoring it and are not yet sure how many of the rebels are al qaeda / LIFG members.
and what you read is that "Most of the rebels are admittedly Al-Qaeda"?
well he also thinks the US is at war with Pakistan...
On August 29 2011 17:56 Pika Chu wrote: Right after, the western countries will give a big loan to Libya for reconstruction, and in exchange they will get all oil and whatever they need from Libya.
I am not saying that there is no element of realpolitik in the intervention, and Al Jazeera is writing page up and page down about this side of the whole ordeal. The simple fact remains that Khadafi in february unleashed his military on peaceful demonstrations, using artillery and fighterbombers on unarmed civilians, and that started the uprising in full.
Honestly, if Gaddafi would've really ordered his army to kill civilians with artillery and bombers, we would've have not tens of hundreds, but thousands or more deaths. Probably when the waters will cool down and this will be history, in 30 years we will find out how that really went.
But one thing i stated from the beginning. It was bad with Gaddafi from certain points of view, but it's much worse without him. Look at the chaos, look at how destroyed Libya is, look at the killings going on and the publication of the national rebel committee of a document which says they will get to democracy but everything will be in the limits of the sharia law (islamic law). I believe if Libya gets an islamist country this is going to be much worse for the rest of the world, not saying the people don't have the right to choose and if they choose to turn into an islamic state so be it, but for the rest of the world i'm sure it will be worse later on.