I really believe that if truly the majority of people support the rebels, they will win even without foreign support. Just like how despite the fact KMT was support by the US. The people supported the communists and they overthrew KMT and took over the government
yes, and half of europe 60 years ago really supported communists ... organized army >> popular will, at least since they invented machine guns
and of course every word is just politics, every video just propaganda, every libian telling his story just irrelevant
also since some were mentioning foreign workers from libya, i remember one our tvs had an interview with a returning doctor from benghazi and she said "if you ask me what gaddafi is doing is simply genocide"
Actually, China, like Russian people initially did support communism. Why? Because they were tired of being exploited by the rich, hence why Russians initially supported communism so much, but then the communism they supported turned into something that did not represent what they wanted and in the end it was too late for change, because army > will.
Same thing for China, except that a lot of the Chinese supported Communism for a very long time, especially farmers since they make up majority of the Chinese population. But the Chinese communism is evolving with the people to accommodate their needs, abet at a slower pace.
As for the whole printing money, of course the U.S. does it and so does every other country, it just happens that the U.S. can do it more than other countries. While sure printing money is easy, it also has it's consequences. If you print too much money, the value of that money goes down because there is too much of it in circulation which can cause massive inflation. The goal behind so much printing money in the U.S. is to stimulate the economy out of the recession, but what happened was that money that was given to Banks to loan out and to companies to spend, they are not doing it. They are keeping that money atm, not loaning it out or spending it, but instead, investing it into treasury bonds. What could happen from this is later it could have severe consequences on the economy because there will be too much money in circulation. You can't just print as much money as you want without consequences. The Federal Reserve know's this but they took a gamble.
Anyway to get back on topic: This whole conflict is turning into something different form the initial goal, which was to make a no-fly zone so Gadaffi can't bomb civilians and so the conflict becomes even. But it's turning into a one sided fight with the U.N. bombing the Gadaffi forces back to stone ages and making it a one sided war, not to mention now talks of supplying the rebels with arms...
I am just waiting to see what the U.N. does for the situation in Yemen/Syria/Bahrain....but doubtful they would touch Yemen/Bahrain as it's U.S. close ally in "terror fighting"/holding their fleets.
Sure USA must give the arms to rebels. It will help to protect civilians, the just and only goal of USA. What is the second most organized political force in Libya, concentrated mostly on East? Libyan Islamic Movement. What do they want? To remove Gaddafi. Fine, this is a match with what we want, let's help them! What will happen next, are they going to establish democracy? No, they are going to establish Caliphate. Well, we can manage this problem later. But this bearded folk have no problem to kill people in order to reach their goal. With weapons we gave to them. Sp what, we will keep our brave troops to protect democracy in Libya. But who is going to pay for this military expenses? Libya has oil. Oil for democracy. But the country will be destabilized and we have to fight islamists all the time. Oil money will go to cover military expenses and to our corporation. And what about Libyans, what will they get? They will get freedom and democracy! You know, this is so cool, to have freedom and democracy. We will help them to gain it. Of cause, not for free, but this is a small price, you can give away your life for freedom and democracy. There is a country, full of freedom and democracy. It has expensive healthcare, not everyone has a medical insurance and may die because of it, but he will die knowing the he is free, this is what important. You have to take loan for your study and then work many years to pay it back. But you can choose your president (among 2 candidates), I think it worth it. Gaddafi tried to buy his people, free healthcare, free education, free house for a new family, big money allowance for each child, no taxes, but no, the freedom is the most valuable thing in the world, you cannot buy it so cheap. You better starve to death, but remain free.
I have a suggestion. Why we don't hit a nuclear strike? Gaddafi will die and it is momentary freedom for many Libyans.
Mr. Obama said Tuesday that he was keeping his options open on arming the rebels. “I’m not ruling it out, but I’m also not ruling it in,” Mr. Obama told NBC News.
They can't let Ghadaffi win anymore, and the shorter the conflict, the better (at least for Europe). It was clear from the start that the US and Europe were comitting to the departure of Ghadaffi!
On March 30 2011 22:28 Petruccio wrote: I do not need our credibility. I am asking to collect information from different sources and analyze it.
I really believe that if truly the majority of people support the rebels, they will win even without foreign support. Just like how despite the fact KMT was support by the US. The people supported the communists and they overthrew KMT and took over the government
yes, and half of europe 60 years ago really supported communists ... organized army >> popular will, at least since they invented machine guns
and of course every word is just politics, every video just propaganda, every libian telling his story just irrelevant
also since some were mentioning foreign workers from libya, i remember one our tvs had an interview with a returning doctor from benghazi and she said "if you ask me what gaddafi is doing is simply genocide"
Actually, China, like Russian people initially did support communism. Why? Because they were tired of being exploited by the rich, hence why Russians initially supported communism so much, but then the communism they supported turned into something that did not represent what they wanted and in the end it was too late for change, because army > will.
Same thing for China, except that a lot of the Chinese supported Communism for a very long time, especially farmers since they make up majority of the Chinese population. But the Chinese communism is evolving with the people to accommodate their needs, abet at a slower pace.
Regardless of whether what you're stating is true or not, that wasn't his point. He clearly referred to Europe, and thus was referring to the Eastern European countries that became part of the Soviet bloc and had Soviet puppet governments, despite the population being overwhelmingly against it.
If the populace wants it, fine, but that's irrelevant to his point.
meanwhile rebel forces still seem terribly unorganized. this is definitely going to take a while
also, from rebel sources (so feel free to treat as propaganda)
Wednesday’s chaotic retreat by rebel forces from a number of towns and villages they had seized in recent days came after they were confronted by thousands of Chadian Republican Guards, rebel spokesman Col Ahmed Bani told reporters in Benghazi.
Peaceful rebels in Benghazi, cellphone footage. Don't be shocked, you knew radical islamists like to cut heads, didn't you? Provide them with weapons, so they may reach with their knives many heads of Gaddafi supporters on the west and in Tripoli
These are some articles from Russian people living in Libya. It is addressed to Russians, it is not propaganda for western media. The most updated information about how it all started and regrets on Russian official neutral position, or better to say cowardice. Russia pretends to be a great country, but this case shows that it is afraid of America. China was always neutral if it is not about Tibet or Taiwan. I do not know how and who can stop the war. http://www.krasnoe.tv/node/9079 You may use Google translator. You will not find this in English at the moment, sorry. http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http://www.krasnoe.tv/node/9079
@Petruccio I think you need to provide obvious graphical warning on that video, seeing people mutilating the corpse and hanging it upside down with blood pouring off from the neck is not nice.
@Petruccio I translated the comments with google, and apparently quite many seemed to say that it was a mercenary that they hung, not a Gaddafi supporter.
Well, I wrote "cut heads"...I guess the video is going to be deleted shortly after...
I think does not matter who they hung. An enemy. I do not understand why these are called peaceful rebels and why West expect that these people are capable or willing to build democracy... Why are they better then Gaddafi and his supporters?
On March 31 2011 04:58 Petruccio wrote: Well, I wrote "cut heads"...I guess the video is going to be deleted shortly after...
I think does not matter who they hung. An enemy. I do not understand why these are called peaceful rebels and why West expect that these people are capable or willing to build democracy... Why are they better then Gaddafi and his supporters?
Because they're "the people". You even said that yourself. They may not be better but at least the have the chance to make something of it, and whatever they make of it will be their choosing, rather than Gaddafi and friend's.
On March 31 2011 04:58 Petruccio wrote: Well, I wrote "cut heads"...I guess the video is going to be deleted shortly after...
I think does not matter who they hung. An enemy. I do not understand why these are called peaceful rebels and why West expect that these people are capable or willing to build democracy... Why are they better then Gaddafi and his supporters?
Because they're "the people". You even said that yourself. They may not be better but at least the have the chance to make something of it, and whatever they make of it will be their choosing, rather than Gaddafi and friend's.
Somebody counted rebels and Gaddafi supporters? Who has the majority? The majority decides in democracy. OK, it is obvious now that there are people pro-Gaddafi and there are people against. Why NATO bombs pro-Gaddafi people? Why USA want to help more conservative with strong radical Islam position east part of Libya? They called them terrorists and frighted them in Iraq. And now they are rebels. If you give them power... you have seen what are they capable of. As soon as NATO leave Libya, they will start massacre. This is 100% internal affair.
On March 31 2011 04:58 Petruccio wrote: Well, I wrote "cut heads"...I guess the video is going to be deleted shortly after...
I think does not matter who they hung. An enemy. I do not understand why these are called peaceful rebels and why West expect that these people are capable or willing to build democracy... Why are they better then Gaddafi and his supporters?
Because they're "the people". You even said that yourself. They may not be better but at least the have the chance to make something of it, and whatever they make of it will be their choosing, rather than Gaddafi and friend's.
This idolatry of "the people" is one of the most idiotic evils of the modern world. One shudders upon that aimless principle where not law, not conscience, not nature, not even a rational desire for the common good, but accounting is inducted to exonerate barbarism. And fictitious accounting at that!
Regardless of whether what you're stating is true or not, that wasn't his point. He clearly referred to Europe, and thus was referring to the Eastern European countries that became part of the Soviet bloc and had Soviet puppet governments, despite the population being overwhelmingly against it.
Although it must be mentioned that even in the Soviet system there was considerable room for manoeuvre and the setting of independent policies. The obvious cases being Ceaucescu's anti-Soviet foreign policy, or "Goulash communism" under Kadar. By the end, the only uniform elements of Eastern European Communism (minus Yugoslavia and Albania) were official adherence to the Warsaw Pact, and the nominal monopoly of the Communist party.
Some think that the majority should rule, instead of having a leader providing his wise advice to the ignorant masses. Some think "people" should chose for themselves, no matter the results, unlike Plato and every philosopher who followed thinking that only "illuminated people should reign.
What I do dislike is the fact that we talk about the people's rule all the time, but in the end it's very rarely the case, whether it's in Japan, the USA or Europe.
Reuters: Obama signed an order, known as a presidential "finding",in last 2 or 3 weeks authorizing secret CIA operations in #Libya
I have no doubts USA will go to the end, does not matter if there will be a resolution or not and what are the consequences. They want to gain control over the country. They simply attack the country because they have their interests. Everybody else is already bought or simply afraid. Anybody still believes that they protect civilians?
I am still worried about there being no reporting on what these rebels are like.
It was exactly the problem that i had when this began, who the hell are we helping? Are they people who just dislike Gaddafi but want to do everything he does, only in their favour?
Is there a strong pro-democracy movement?
Are we helping islamists?
I hope that the leaders of Europe and America have more information on that, i would assume they do and they wouldn't rush in to help what is essentially a bunch of theocrats.
At this point we have thrown our lot in with the rebels whilst i did say prior to the intervention we should have left it alone. Gaddafi is clearly not defeated and seeing as he even regained some ground it seems that a stalemate is very possible.
Supplying the rebels with weapons seems like a must, we don't have another option. We threw our lot in with them so we have to stick with them, end of story.
I said it was stupid to intervene and here we are, fighting a war for a bunch of people who are at this point utterly unpredictable.
On March 31 2011 05:30 Kukaracha wrote: Petruccio->How many people are there in Libya?
~6,5 millions The conservative close to redial Islam positions part, so called "rebels", is about half million, most of them are just sitting and waiting till it ends. The rest 6 millions are happy with the things like they are. One of the leaders of the biggest tribe Warfalla was killed by NATO bomb. Warfalla is with Gaddafi. It is going to be a long and bloody war with hundreds of thousands dead. Libyans know very well what is the east opposition and I guess many of them will join Libyan army. NATO is going to train, give weapons and use the eastern minority with a small amount of NATO troops and heavy air support.
EPT
