|
Off topic discussion and argumentative back and forth will not be tolerated. |
On September 03 2011 07:51 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2011 07:48 DeepElemBlues wrote:As I said before, if someone offers help, whoever they are, are you going to reject it? A lot of people are a bit suspicious of banks. But if you're going to get a loan from the bank to start up a business, you're going to thank them. Again, how does this support your opinion  Being a bit suspicious of someone does not mean what you think it means I do not believe That said, you still have no substantiated anything at all other than saying that because there was a sign rebels holding up thanking NATO for helping them overthrow the government, they apparently completely love and trust NATO. That is about the most absurd stretch I've heard. You're basically saying since the gangsta who has a crackhouse and robs from time to time helped an old lady load some things into her car and the old lady thanks him, then conclusively, the old lady loves and trusts him completely. I hope you realize how absurd that is. I never said any such thing about either side completely trusting the other one, where are you getting this from So apparently you demand evidence, and then when evidence is presented, you just disregard it. Are you sure you're not biased, just a little bit maybe? I hope you realize how what you are saying has little if any connection to the situation and how absurd it is. You've made it very clear that you view NATO as the crack dealer and that's the way Libyans do/should view them too, and any suggestion that they don't/shouldn't pisses you off, and any evidence that they do like NATO means nothing to you. So unless you've gone to Libya and you've asked tens of thousands of people if they like US, UK, France, Italy, etc. and their regimes and policies, your claim is completely unsubstantiated. Keep staring at the crystal ball . If you wish to go on, you may. Comedy's great. Oh so now you've stolen my line, and apparently you don't understand that you are no one to speak for Libya either under your standard, so all of your huffing and puffing even according to you means nil I don't understand why you are trolling in this juvenile and amateurish fashion, do you really think you telling me repeatedly that I am amusingly stupid to you is going to accomplish something? Sorry my english in not perfect, what do you mean exactly? Are you present at the meeting in Paris? Are you privy to all the discussions going on there? Then if you now claim that you do not hold the ludicrous myth that the Libyans apparently totally trust and love NATO, why were you disagreeing with me earlier? Do you love arguing and trolling for the sake of doing so?
Stop using a strawman. He's saying hey are grateful to NATO and that they helped them get rid of gadaffi nowhere did he say they totally love and trust NATO.
What you people don't get is that something that benefits countries like France and the US doesn't have to be bad for lybia. They want a reliable trading partner where they can establish companies. Those companies can create jobs and invest in Lybia. You see how it benefits both countries like this?
And to fabled integrity you're right and that's why I doubt oil is the reason they are there. It doesn't make sense the civil war only increased oil prices if they wanted they oil they would have let gadaffi take a swift victory and just buy from him again. On top of that high oil prices is only bad for NATO countries since they import it it's only bad for the economy.
|
Are you present at the meeting in Paris? Are you privy to all the discussions going on there?
Oh ok, thanks a lot for explaination, i was expecting some kind of irony, instead of just the real sense of words, sorry for that :D
I'm not present, i dunno what the discutions look like, i'm just gessing according to all wars "for freedom" that never append...
|
On September 03 2011 08:00 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2011 07:15 Agathon wrote:On September 03 2011 05:50 DeepElemBlues wrote:
I find it interesting that there has been no Libyan opposition to NATO except from Qaddafi forces - very understandably - yet people like Hugo Chavez and many posters here presume to speak for them and assume that they are opposed to NATO.
At best, they will tell us we don't know, not even understanding that that position undermines their own expressed opinions as to what the Libyan people really think.
Let's consider the evidence:
Libyans revolted against Qaddafi.
When NATO intervened, there were street demonstrations in support of NATO.
All pro-Qaddafi street demonstration locations, particularly Tripoli, witnessed huge outpourings of common people into the streets celebrating the rebels taking control.
It is well-documented that Qaddafi, like most dictators, pays and/or bullies people to show up as "demonstrators" supporting the regime.
Since the NATO intervention, there has been no discernible opposition expressed by the Libyan people to that intervention.
All the evidence of the Libyan people's own actions points to the conclusion that the people of Libya are happy with the NATO intervention precisely because NATO did not try to free the Libyans as if the Libyans couldn't possibly do it themselves; the Libyans asked for help, we provided it, and it was a joint effort to win their freedom. "To win their freedom" and to increase our self interests...We have to be objective : we need lybian's oil for our economies. USA provided aircraft carriers from US mediterranean fleet, France and UK provided combat aircrafts, each government taking a part in lybian oil. Wasn't Gaddafi gladly giving us oil in the first place? When did we ever have problems securing oil from Libya? Legit question, I was always under the impression it was never an issue.
It's not just about oil, it's about all the business line of oil (drilling, transport, etc). You're american, i'm sure you know about the firm from UK named BP (Mexican gulf, Louisiana, west Florida and south-est Texas polution), in France oil is leaded by Total who use to pay African dictators with diamants for oil...
These two country are not in lybia just for random reasons. And it's not for freedom.
|
So, there's a different person managing the oil fields. Yay, I guess.
I love political discussions amongst people who don't actually study geopolitics or know anyone who is in government. It's like watching a debate what kind of soda we should be served when we're all in a forced labour camp.
|
On September 03 2011 08:00 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2011 07:15 Agathon wrote:On September 03 2011 05:50 DeepElemBlues wrote:
I find it interesting that there has been no Libyan opposition to NATO except from Qaddafi forces - very understandably - yet people like Hugo Chavez and many posters here presume to speak for them and assume that they are opposed to NATO.
At best, they will tell us we don't know, not even understanding that that position undermines their own expressed opinions as to what the Libyan people really think.
Let's consider the evidence:
Libyans revolted against Qaddafi.
When NATO intervened, there were street demonstrations in support of NATO.
All pro-Qaddafi street demonstration locations, particularly Tripoli, witnessed huge outpourings of common people into the streets celebrating the rebels taking control.
It is well-documented that Qaddafi, like most dictators, pays and/or bullies people to show up as "demonstrators" supporting the regime.
Since the NATO intervention, there has been no discernible opposition expressed by the Libyan people to that intervention.
All the evidence of the Libyan people's own actions points to the conclusion that the people of Libya are happy with the NATO intervention precisely because NATO did not try to free the Libyans as if the Libyans couldn't possibly do it themselves; the Libyans asked for help, we provided it, and it was a joint effort to win their freedom. "To win their freedom" and to increase our self interests...We have to be objective : we need lybian's oil for our economies. USA provided aircraft carriers from US mediterranean fleet, France and UK provided combat aircrafts, each government taking a part in lybian oil. Wasn't Gaddafi gladly giving us oil in the first place? When did we ever have problems securing oil from Libya? Legit question, I was always under the impression it was never an issue.
He was indeed.
|
On September 03 2011 08:33 jello_biafra wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2011 08:00 FabledIntegral wrote:On September 03 2011 07:15 Agathon wrote:On September 03 2011 05:50 DeepElemBlues wrote:
I find it interesting that there has been no Libyan opposition to NATO except from Qaddafi forces - very understandably - yet people like Hugo Chavez and many posters here presume to speak for them and assume that they are opposed to NATO.
At best, they will tell us we don't know, not even understanding that that position undermines their own expressed opinions as to what the Libyan people really think.
Let's consider the evidence:
Libyans revolted against Qaddafi.
When NATO intervened, there were street demonstrations in support of NATO.
All pro-Qaddafi street demonstration locations, particularly Tripoli, witnessed huge outpourings of common people into the streets celebrating the rebels taking control.
It is well-documented that Qaddafi, like most dictators, pays and/or bullies people to show up as "demonstrators" supporting the regime.
Since the NATO intervention, there has been no discernible opposition expressed by the Libyan people to that intervention.
All the evidence of the Libyan people's own actions points to the conclusion that the people of Libya are happy with the NATO intervention precisely because NATO did not try to free the Libyans as if the Libyans couldn't possibly do it themselves; the Libyans asked for help, we provided it, and it was a joint effort to win their freedom. "To win their freedom" and to increase our self interests...We have to be objective : we need lybian's oil for our economies. USA provided aircraft carriers from US mediterranean fleet, France and UK provided combat aircrafts, each government taking a part in lybian oil. Wasn't Gaddafi gladly giving us oil in the first place? When did we ever have problems securing oil from Libya? Legit question, I was always under the impression it was never an issue. He was indeed.
Why keep buying milk if you can bomb the fuck out of the farmer until the cows agree to give it up for free?
|
On September 03 2011 09:31 NSGrendel wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2011 08:33 jello_biafra wrote:On September 03 2011 08:00 FabledIntegral wrote:On September 03 2011 07:15 Agathon wrote:On September 03 2011 05:50 DeepElemBlues wrote:
I find it interesting that there has been no Libyan opposition to NATO except from Qaddafi forces - very understandably - yet people like Hugo Chavez and many posters here presume to speak for them and assume that they are opposed to NATO.
At best, they will tell us we don't know, not even understanding that that position undermines their own expressed opinions as to what the Libyan people really think.
Let's consider the evidence:
Libyans revolted against Qaddafi.
When NATO intervened, there were street demonstrations in support of NATO.
All pro-Qaddafi street demonstration locations, particularly Tripoli, witnessed huge outpourings of common people into the streets celebrating the rebels taking control.
It is well-documented that Qaddafi, like most dictators, pays and/or bullies people to show up as "demonstrators" supporting the regime.
Since the NATO intervention, there has been no discernible opposition expressed by the Libyan people to that intervention.
All the evidence of the Libyan people's own actions points to the conclusion that the people of Libya are happy with the NATO intervention precisely because NATO did not try to free the Libyans as if the Libyans couldn't possibly do it themselves; the Libyans asked for help, we provided it, and it was a joint effort to win their freedom. "To win their freedom" and to increase our self interests...We have to be objective : we need lybian's oil for our economies. USA provided aircraft carriers from US mediterranean fleet, France and UK provided combat aircrafts, each government taking a part in lybian oil. Wasn't Gaddafi gladly giving us oil in the first place? When did we ever have problems securing oil from Libya? Legit question, I was always under the impression it was never an issue. He was indeed. Why keep buying milk if you can bomb the fuck out of the farmer until the cows agree to give it up for free?
Because bombs cost more than milk?
|
Then if you now claim that you do not hold the ludicrous myth that the Libyans apparently totally trust and love NATO, why were you disagreeing with me earlier? Do you love arguing and trolling for the sake of doing so?
Because you never responded to my actual opinion...
|
The propagandist western media strike again:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/03/world/africa/03libya.html?_r=1&hp
Obviously they bring the dirty business of the CIA and MI-6 to light to further the strategic interests of the west. Oh wait ...
edit:
It is clear that Gaddafi, Mubarak & Co. were major contributors to the western intelligence network in the arab world and their downfall gives western intelligence services more than just a headache
|
On September 03 2011 19:49 Maenander wrote:The propagandist western media strike again: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/03/world/africa/03libya.html?_r=1&hpObviously they bring the dirty business of the CIA and MI-6 to light to further the strategic interests of the west. Oh wait ... edit: It is clear that Gaddafi, Mubarak & Co. were major contributors to the western intelligence network in the arab world and their downfall gives western intelligence services more than just a headache
They have their hands in everything : )
I dont forget the civil war in Angola, the people are awaken now, if the dirty imperialists try something similar again we will kick their asses :D
|
Arab spring, saving the world economy.
|
Obviously they bring the dirty business of the CIA and MI-6 to light
What dirty business
It is clear that Gaddafi, Mubarak & Co. were major contributors to the western intelligence network in the arab world and their downfall gives western intelligence services more than just a headache
Of course they were, decades-old networks aren't something to just ignore.
They have their hands in everything : )
Just like Portugal and every other country...
I dont forget the civil war in Angola, the people are awaken now, if the dirty imperialists try something similar again we will kick their asses :D
Do you mean that civil war in Angola that the dirty Communist imperialists lost
Try to go kick some NATO. Go grab an AK and try it, make sure you let us know how to contact your next of kin first
|
On September 04 2011 02:48 DeepElemBlues wrote:What dirty business Show nested quote +It is clear that Gaddafi, Mubarak & Co. were major contributors to the western intelligence network in the arab world and their downfall gives western intelligence services more than just a headache Of course they were, decades-old networks aren't something to just ignore. Just like Portugal and every other country... Show nested quote +I dont forget the civil war in Angola, the people are awaken now, if the dirty imperialists try something similar again we will kick their asses :D Do you mean that civil war in Angola that the dirty Communist imperialists lost Try to go kick some NATO. Go grab an AK and try it, make sure you let us know how to contact your next of kin first
My family fought in that War and i would gladly fight against the invaders again if needed be we are not afraid of fighting for what we believe and for our countries.
In the end the Angolan people won the right to chose its own future, even though the dirty Imperialists (USA, RUSS etc) wanted otherwise.
|
On September 04 2011 04:50 ImFromPortugal wrote:
My family fought in that War and i would gladly fight against the invaders again if needed be we are not afraid of fighting for what we believe and for our countries.
In the end the Angolan people won the right to chose its own future, even though the dirty Imperialists (USA, RUSS etc) wanted otherwise.
Do you even know anything of your own history? Angola was a proxy conflict in the Cold War, like Vietnam.
It wasn't an imperialist invasion; both the MPLA and UNITA deliberately portrayed themselves as Marxist-Leninist and anti-communist (despite both being socialist), in order to win the support of the superpowers. Each side invited foreign powers in to back them up; what kind of proganda have you been smoking to think it was an imperialist invasion?
The Angolan people didn't "win the right to choose its own future"; they killed hundreds of thousands of each other, displaced one-third of their own population, lowered the national life expectancy under 40, and didn't stop until UNITA's leadership was killed/captured in battle. I'm not saying that the Western powers don't have a long history of imperialism, but a civil war ≠ fight against imperialists.
|
On September 04 2011 05:06 sunprince wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2011 04:50 ImFromPortugal wrote:
My family fought in that War and i would gladly fight against the invaders again if needed be we are not afraid of fighting for what we believe and for our countries.
In the end the Angolan people won the right to chose its own future, even though the dirty Imperialists (USA, RUSS etc) wanted otherwise. Do you even know anything of your own history? Angola was a proxy conflict in the Cold War, like Vietnam. It wasn't an imperialist invasion; both the MPLA and UNITA deliberately portrayed themselves as Marxist-Leninist and anti-communist (despite both being socialist), in order to win the support of the superpowers. Each side invited foreign powers in to back them up; what kind of proganda have you been smoking to think it was an imperialist invasion? The Angolan people didn't "win the right to choose its own future"; they killed hundreds of thousands of each other, displaced one-third of their own population, lowered the national life expectancy under 40, and didn't stop until UNITA's leadership was killed/captured in battle. I'm not saying that the Western powers don't have a long history of imperialism, but a civil war ≠ fight against imperialists.
It wasnt an imperialist invasion even though South Africa invaded Angola, but i wasnt talking about that i was talking about an invasion of ideologies and western interests, i know it was a proxy war between the usa and the soviets. The civil war was brutal and was brutal and many western powers made a profit of it, but now is over and Angola is in peace and for good or bad the Angolans are now making their own future : )
|
Libya rebels say talks to end standoff around besieged Gadhafi town failed
There has been speculation from NTC officials that members of the Gadhafi family, even the former Libyan leader himself, may be hiding in the town.
Talks to end a standoff around the besieged Libyan town of Bani Walid broke down on Sunday, said a negotiator for fighters hunting Muammar Gadhafi.
"As chief negotiator, I have nothing to offer right now. From my side, negotiations are finished," Abdallah Kanshil told reporters at the site of earlier talks with tribal elders from the town, one of the last bastions of support for Gadhafi.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/libya-rebels-say-talks-to-end-standoff-around-besieged-gadhafi-town-failed-1.382523
|
Libyan Islamist says interim council should quit
http://af.reuters.com/article/topNews/idAFJOE78308520110904?pageNumber=3&virtualBrandChannel=0&sp=true
It was not hard to predict. My guess is that it is OK for West Libya becoming an islamistic state.
Khamis Gaddafi was killed for 5th time. They cut him in pieces and buried. My guess that it is a lie again. But he is on war and everything may happen of course.
It looks like the tribes elders starting to realize that they will lose power to islamists so decided to fight them. Warfalla tribe, that supported at least partially the rebels, now said no to them.
There are no more independent journalists in Libya, so it is hard to understand what is going on.
Rumors are that Beni Walid as attacked by rebels but with no success.
There are many different reports, including western sources, that rebels being cruel to population. NTC asks them to be nice with people. All prisoners were released and not all of them are nice people.
|
On September 04 2011 02:48 DeepElemBlues wrote:What dirty business Show nested quote +It is clear that Gaddafi, Mubarak & Co. were major contributors to the western intelligence network in the arab world and their downfall gives western intelligence services more than just a headache Of course they were, decades-old networks aren't something to just ignore. Just like Portugal and every other country... Show nested quote +I dont forget the civil war in Angola, the people are awaken now, if the dirty imperialists try something similar again we will kick their asses :D Do you mean that civil war in Angola that the dirty Communist imperialists lost Try to go kick some NATO. Go grab an AK and try it, make sure you let us know how to contact your next of kin first
By Communists, do you mean the Soviets or Soviet-friendly countries? If so, the Soviets were imperialists?
Of course, their espionage was involved in making coups and problems all over the world, and they waged quite a few invasions directed against unfriendly nations in order to expand their imperialist interests in Latin America and Asia... oh wait.
Or are you calling impoverished African countries imperialist? If you are, that's even more hilarious XD.
A tiny country like Portugal has their hands screwing around in everything? Are you being serious?
Because bombs cost more than milk?
But then when you're able to get it (that being oil or other resources obviously far more precious than milk) for free (or realistically at a significantly reduced price with other concessions), it quickly pays for the cost of the bombs? Suffering for a bit to gain a lot more sounds like a pretty good idea from a business standpoint.
|
Jihadists among the Libyan rebels revealed plans last week on the Internet to subvert the post-Moammar Gadhafi government and create an Islamist state, according to U.S. intelligence agencies.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/sep/4/jihadists-plot-to-take-over-libya/
Oh no! It cannot be. I thought the Jihadists are going to dissolve right after the revolution is over.
I thought Gaddafi lied about "Al Qaeda is behind the rebellion".
|
Some uncommon videos from Abkhazian network news agency
http://www.youtube.com/user/newsanna
You will be able to see the real recent rebels, not the staged nice looking you usually see on TV, normal Tripoli life (before the invasion of course), ruined by NATO school and houses, killed by bombs people including children (attention, graphic images!), very angry at NATO Libyans...
Try to match it with your understanding that 90% of Libyans support NATO rebels, and minor civil casualties are just a collateral damage when bombing military objects (like school, houses...) on the way to democracy (or sharia law, as it turned out, or who knows what will happen).
And maybe at least a tiny spark of doubt will arise in your mind, if we, the West, are doing the right thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
