NATO says alliance ready to protect Libyan civilians, urges UN agreement

[LaoPo]

The Germans seems to know that the use of armed force isn't conflict solving.

And i wouldn't describe the US, the UK or France as the winner here. What they have won or will win?

Who is qualifying those countries as winners?

What they will win ? Even if they could save a few lives they won already; it's about saving lives.

They've taken out the Libyan air defense system and that has saved already lots of lives.

LaoPo

Edited March 21, 2011 by LaoPo

[bangkokeddy]

The Germans seems to know that the use of armed force isn't conflict solving.

And i wouldn't describe the US, the UK or France as the winner here. What they have won or will win?

Who is qualifying those countries as winners?

What they will win ? Even if they could save a few lifes they won already; it's about saving lifes.

They've taken out the Libyan air defense system and that has saved already lots of lives.

LaoPo

Below the "winner" quote and as far as i got the news i heard that the these air strikes killed a few people more.

Germany just blew their chance to be on the winning side for the first time in the past two centuries.

[WarpSpeed]

55555.

Did you read what geriatrickid wrote?: If the USA is smart it stays out of this.

Do they?

Answer: No.

Do not look for a scapegoat instead of addressing your own uninformed and incompetent post.

That's all he does, pick the pieces that suits his position and nothing more.

[powderpuff]

Not to mention incomprehensible gibberish.

[WarpSpeed]

the main consensus was that the "rebels" didn't believe the allied forces, and America in particular, would come and help them.

It turned OBL into a national hero. Will we now do the same with the rebels? Will we later regret it?

That's the funny thing about life and doing the morally right thing sometimes, as it may not be the outcome you desired being an unknown but standing by doing nothing is definitely NOT the outcome desired and that is known...

Edited March 21, 2011 by WarpSpeed

[TheyCallmeScooter]

oh my, Turkey tries to block - unexpected?

The jockeying over the spoils has begun especially early this time...

And i wouldn't describe the US, the UK or France as the winner here. What they have won or will win?

In the course of the rebellion, Libya has gone from a once-promising economy with the largest proven oil reserves in Africa...(to a country up for grabs).

Who is qualifying those countries as winners?

What they will win ? Even if they could save a few lives they won already; it's about saving lives.

They've taken out the Libyan air defense system and that has saved already lots of lives.

LaoPo

Yeah, it warms the cockles.

5 million helpless souls displaced in Sudan (couple hours south of Libya). 90% 'living' in abject misery, below the 'poverty' line. 15 years of civil slaughter. Hundreds of thousands of women and children raped and hacked into pieces with machetes.

BBC: "The UN will not step in because it does not have the consent of the warring parties necessary for the despatch of a peacekeeping force."

hahahah

ahhahahahahah

THEY DON'T HAVE THE CONSENT OF THE GENOCIDAL MANIACS, SO THEIR HANDS ARE TIED! ahhahaha

But after 15 years of children and women being raped and slaughtered, hands tied in agony because they didn't have the permission of the warlords to save the victims of genocide...only two hours north in Libya, after a week of skirmishing between 300 Islamic jihadists and the government, with crowds of up to 200 (maybe even more!) gathering in anticipation of freedom, they decide they don't need permission! hahahah

Their hands were FREE! They have the bombs! Free to be humanitarian champions! And the President of a nation which just banned the burqa, a nation which has done nothing as millions have been slaughtered only 30 min south of Libya (as the Mirage 2000 flies), looks straight into the world's cameras and says - deadpan, without even a chuckle or a smirk, as French bombers crash through Libyan airspace - that it was his duty, to launch an unprovoked act of war against Libya.

You see, the lives of hundreds of armed Islamic jihadists were in grave danger, of running into the rule of law. HUNDREDS OF THEM!

It just warms the cockles.

http://news.bbc.co.u...lysis/84985.stm

An east-west division of Libya is already beginning to loom as a possibility. The sanctity of post colonial borders may no longer remain inviolable. There is a ready made example in a country contiguous with Libya — Sudan. A Muslim north and a Christian south with a brand new capital in Juba.

Should Libya be halved, the European scramble for the oil bearing regions cannot be checked, particularly now when some of EU members are stone broke.

It is the mass arrival of refugees that could well cause the international community to contemplate a model where European troops take care of different sectors to keep the peace.

There's no lives being saved here. Don't be ridiculous. This is the sacrifice of tens of thousands of lives (or hundreds even), for oil.

Dirty, bloody, filthy oil.

This world is pretty messed up.

[bangkokeddy]

^^

[TheyCallmeScooter]

What...a dog's breakfast.

Without a sam for thousands of miles in every direction, in perfect weather, fighting a non-existent military - 50% of Libya's air assets obliterated in a couple days...of course, they had to put one into the ditch. It's got to be part of the contract with FOX, feed that newscycle, make people realise this is a bonafide war here, not some despicable outrageous 3-way mismatch. These are wars of attrition, incredibly taxing...fall asleep for just a lazy 10 minutes having forgotten to put on autopilot in perfect visibility, and look what can happen.

With the coms onboard, and the fact that no one gets mixed up in 50/50 or even 90/10 propositions when a guided missile or a drone can pretty much does everything your $50,000,000 fighter could theoretically do...and do it a great deal more economically, and professionally, I'm pretty sure the last genuine vector threat a US fighter pilot faced was probably in Top Gun. But they're still out there, you gotta admire their pluck in the face of redundancy, scrapping away...putting the odd one in the ditch in perfect conditions, bailing out without an enemy in sight. Leaving behind the taxpayer's $50,000,000 toy, burning for a few hours in the grass or sand. Isn't war grand.

TRIPOLI, Libya — A U.S. fighter jet crashed in Libya after an apparent equipment malfunction but both crewmembers were able to eject and are back safely in American hands, U.S. officials said Tuesday.

Computers were flying better than humans two decades ago. And yet, pilots exist. What's with that. But its a bit early to be shaving points off the spread...

As it turns out, the huge revolution, the one which threatened to topple the evil dictator, with the masses rising up by their dozens (there were even reports of 200 strong crowds - although that estimate could not be independently verified)..with no less than the military might of NATO behind them, the greatest military arsenal the world has ever seen, rushing into the breach to give the heroic freedom fighters that little extra to get them over the top...

...has become a strategical stalemate.

NATO and 200 brave men, backs against the world....slugging it out shoulder to shoulder, fighting law & order. And donut-eating cops. A stalemate. Again.

No, this won't do. They're going to have to start paying Libyans to pretend to fight for the rebels. At least throw on some khakis, give FOX News something to get hyperbolic about.

Story: CNN calls Fox's human shield accusation 'nuts'

A CNN correspondent has angrily denied a Fox News report that he and other journalists were used by the Libyan government as human shields against an attack on Moammar Gadhafi's compound.

Fox News' Jennifer Griffin reported Monday that the British military had to call off a mission on the Libyan ruler's compound because journalists had been taken there on a trip to view earlier bomb damage. She added that Fox correspondent Steve Harrigan avoided the government-sponsored trip because of concern about being used as a shield. CNN's Nic Robertson, who was part of the CNN crew cited in the Fox story, shot back on the air Monday night, calling the allegation "outrageous and absolutely hypocritical."

"To say it was a human shield is nuts," Robertson said on Wolf Blitzer's primetime CNN show. "This allegation is outrageous and it's absolutely hypocritical. You know, when you come to somewhere like Libya, you expect lies and deceit from the dictatorship here. You don't expect it from the other journalists."

A senior defense official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss classified data, told The Associated Press on Monday the attacks thus far had reduced Libya's air defense capabilities by more than 50 percent.

Libyan rebels have welcomed the airstrikes and say they are coordinating with the Western powers. But there was little sign at the vanguard of battle in east Libya that this communication extended to forward rebel units.

Western powers say they are not providing close air support to rebels or seeking to destroy Gadhafi's army, but rather only protecting civilians, as their U.N. mandate allows, leaving disorganized rebel fighters struggling to make headway.

"If we don't get more help from the West, Gadhafi's forces will eat us alive," rebel fighter Nouh Musmari told Reuters.

They need MORE help, NATO! For heaven's sake! Have we learned nothing from "The Surge"? Ah shucks, it's that cursed mandate getting in the way again? The one that tied NATO's hands for a decade of slaughtering just over the border. Cursed mandates, and failing to receive invites from warlords to intercede in a war between faces and machetes.

But don't despair, lovers of democracy. If history is anything to go by, they'll find a way to realign their sense of duty. And get Abdul and Nouh and the drunk Hazreedi cousins, up over that pesky sand dune.

Inshallah.

Who knows, if He Wills it, maybe even coax and protect a few civilians, all the way in to Tripoli, carrying their AK47s, walking into bullets......

[powderpuff]

Turkey was always gonna be the weak link in NATO.

No Muslim country is gonna agree to get involved in fighting in another Muslim country. Kick them the hell out is OK with me.

This Qatar thing I do not understand.

[TheyCallmeScooter]

Turkey was always gonna be the weak link in NATO.

No Muslim country is gonna agree to get involved in fighting in another Muslim country. Kick them the hell out is OK with me.

This Qatar thing I do not understand.

Um wut ? Arabs have been fighting each other for thousands of years. Muslims aren't exactly Jehovah's Witnesses, or hippies. They're not averse to a little hot-headedness, when the situation, temperature or the level of one's oil reserves calls for it.

Assange is probably going to get killed by The Land of the Free, not for the supposed security threat that wasn't, but out of sheer embarrassment and fury at his blurting out the fact that the Sultans, Sheiks and President Kings of the Gulf were all dirty, backstabbing horsetraders. All public solidarity with their Muslim brothers for appearances, whilst they plead with the US privately, begging for them to level Tehran and "cut the head off of the snake".

I daresay you've got this world (and humans) all back to front. We make wonderful friends, I'm referring to humans, of course. Wonderful, loyal friends - for as long as it's in our perceived best interests / requirements to do so. Then, when the winds change, we make wonderful friends again. Always bonding with others of shared interests, 'cultural values', shared identity, etc. Just lots of different ones, over time. Though it's not mere time that changes us, but our best interests being served most advantageously with those guys before...but over here now. Then over there. I can see how those guys way over there and us, have a lot in common, now. Our fathers killed each other in brutal wars of attrition, but what's 30 million dead, between such close economic friends with such strong ties.

[flying]

Anyone still believe this is a policing action?

An enforcement of a no fly zone?

Sad & embarrassing

[Hawaiian]

Anyone still believe this is a policing action?

An enforcement of a no fly zone?

Sad & embarrassing

Sad and embarrassing for who? Paragraph 4 of the U.N. resolution, Protection of Civilians states, "to take all necessary measures." If someone was employed to protect my life I would expect them to do whatever necessary. The coalition forces are dealing with an unstable Gadaffi who has basically ordered his troops to murder anyone who gets in their way. Neutralizing Gaddafi's military machine is the best way to implement the protection of civilians.

[flying]

Anyone still believe this is a policing action?

An enforcement of a no fly zone?

Sad & embarrassing

Sad and embarrassing for who? Paragraph 4 of the U.N. resolution, Protection of Civilians states, "to take all necessary measures." If someone was employed to protect my life I would expect them to do whatever necessary. The coalition forces are dealing with an unstable Gadaffi who has basically ordered his troops to murder anyone who gets in their way. Neutralizing Gaddafi's military machine is the best way to implement the protection of civilians.

Sad & embarrassing to me....Was I not clear about that?

Protection of civilians?

Have only soldiers been killed?

Ah yes you are of the collateral damages are to be expected & accepted group.....

If it was your wife or children you would feel the same about collateral damages being acceptable & are to be expected?

1)Gadaffi is not our concern

2) Let the talking heads sway you but it is a civil war.

Is firing on the opposition ( rebel forces) "killing /murdering anyone who gets in their way?"

If instead the rebels were called enemy combatants would that then be ok ?

3) See #1

4) How is it different when the enforcers of the no fly zone are killing the opposite side of the civil war?

5) See #1

6) How is it different from... another embarrassment to me....The drones killing civilians in Pakistan? Is that one ok with you too?

Please dont recite silly paragraphs to me from the UN resolution.

It is tantamount to saying cops should destroy all cars to enforce a no speeding law.

Do it before they speed & not bother with enforcing a law after they are caught speeding? If if while they are destroying the cars a few pedestrians ore destroyed ...again no problem right?

If you want to recite paragraphs start with Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution

Or the War Powers Act

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 a United States Congress joint resolution providing that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by authorization of Congress or if the United States is already under attack or serious threat. The War Powers Resolution requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war. The resolution was passed by two-thirds of Congress, overriding a presidential veto.

Lastly is that what the US Military is these days? Hired guns? Since you say ....

If someone was employed to protect my life I would expect them to do whatever necessary.

What does this job pay?.....Oh that's right it does not does it?

In the end guess what?........If the US & the others who join in this so called no fly zone enforcement<sic> is successful & the rebels become the new regime.....How does that look? ...Looks like another propped up regime to me.

Then to top it off if they the rebels then become national hero's as Osama did

( the last rebel we backed except we then called him a freedom fighter)

& later the rebels drunk with puffed up power decide to run things their way & the US does not like it......What then?

Hint.........Look at the other 3 ME countries we are bankrupting our children futures in.

Edited March 23, 2011 by flying

[chuckd]

Hint.........Look at the other 3 ME countries we are bankrupting our children futures in.

You might want to look inward and see just how much this administration is wasting in the US as well. Don't forget to look at the over 100 countries the US is supporting with foreign aid, including China, Germany, et al.

We are bankrupting our country around the world, but mostly in the US.

[flying]

Hint.........Look at the other 3 ME countries we are bankrupting our children futures in.

You might want to look inward and see just how much this administration is wasting in the US as well. Don't forget to look at the over 100 countries the US is supporting with foreign aid, including China, Germany, et al.

We are bankrupting our country around the world, but mostly in the US.

Agreed it all adds up & has not gone unnoticed either

Perhaps we could kill two birds with one stone?

Bring the troops home & turn the fire power on Goldman Sachs, dirty politicians et al?

On 2nd thought save the dough just bring the military home.

We the people can handle the other work ourselves

Same with foreign aid.....We ( the USA ) are hemorrhaging....Now is not the time to donate blood

Edited March 23, 2011 by flying

[Steely Dan]

Agreed it all adds up & has not gone unnoticed either

Perhaps we could kill two birds with one stone?

Bring the troops home & turn the fire power on Goldman Sachs, dirty politicians et al?

On 2nd thought save the dough just bring the military home.

We the people can handle the other work ourselves

Same with foreign aid.....We ( the USA ) are hemorrhaging....Now is not the time to donate blood

I think the U.S were always luke warm about Libyan intervention and if anyone is covetous of Libyan oil it's more likely Europe than the U.S. I suspect that a certain amount of shaedenfreude would be felt by the U.S if European forces were not sufficient to pursue regime change unaided and after Sarkozy went all in.

http://www.debka.com/article/20790/

Coalition warplanes for no-fly zone

Four days after the Western-Arab coalition decided Saturday, March 19 to enforce a no fly zone over Libya, only six Western warplanes - American, British, Canadian and French - are in the sky at any one time, debkafile's military sources disclose. This is barely enough for a no-fly zone just over Benghazi. And so the anti-Qaddafi operation has run out of steam, slowed also by the falling-out between Washington, London and Paris over its nature and goals and the fading away of the Arab component.

[flying]

I think the U.S were always luke warm about Libyan intervention and if anyone is covetous of Libyan oil it's more likely Europe than the U.S. I suspect that a certain amount of shaedenfreude would be felt by the U.S if European forces were not sufficient to pursue regime change unaided and after Sarkozy went all in.

http://www.debka.com/article/20790/

Coalition warplanes for no-fly zone

Four days after the Western-Arab coalition decided Saturday, March 19 to enforce a no fly zone over Libya, only six Western warplanes - American, British, Canadian and French - are in the sky at any one time, debkafile's military sources disclose. This is barely enough for a no-fly zone just over Benghazi. And so the anti-Qaddafi operation has run out of steam, slowed also by the falling-out between Washington, London and Paris over its nature and goals and the fading away of the Arab component.

Thanks for the link

That would be good news if it in fact it did run out of steam/support before becoming a matter of pride & a need to finish something with an ill defined start.

I think we should remember 1990 as Ron Paul puts it best.......

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1838%3Aintroducing-sense-of-congress-resolution-on-intervention-in-libya&catid=16%3Aspeeches&Itemid=1

Whatever we may think about the Gaddafi regime, we must recognize that this is a coup d’etat in a foreign country. What moral right do we have to initiate military action against Libya? Libya has not attacked the United States. Neither the coup leaders nor the regime pose an imminent threat to the United States and therefore, as much as we abhor violence and loss of life, this is simply none of our business.

I would remind my colleagues that we have been here before. In the 1990s we established “no fly” zones and all manner of sanctions against Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq in attempt to force him from power. When that did not work -- at a high cost in Iraqi lives -- the US ultimately went to war to achieve these ends. The costs of this war, I do not need to remind my colleagues, was much higher even, in US military lives, in Iraqi civilian lives, in our diminished moral standing in the world, in our economy. Yet none of us seem able to learn from an enormous mistake made only a few years ago. Once again a bad man is doing bad things thousands of miles away and once again irresponsible voices are demanding that the US “do something” about it. Will we ever learn? We continue to act as the policemen of the world at our own peril, and as we continue we only accelerate our economic collapse.

Edited March 23, 2011 by flying

[powderpuff]

.Is firing on the opposition ( rebel forces) "killing /murdering anyone who gets in their way?"

/quote]

Dude the part I really like is Gadaffi bring in black African mercenaries to help kill the rebels civilians whatever.

Take out one Marxist & reoplace him with another.

Death to despots. Gadaffi you can go first.

[elcent]

very good inof of hardware(arms) used in Libya http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/interactive/2011/03/2011321153722922470.html

[elcent]

this is an interesting angle of events

In the Libyan rebel stronghold of Benghazi, tensions are mounting between conservative reformers, trigger-happy youths and Gadhafi loyalists. There is growing frustration at the lack of jobs as companies pulled out of the city. The absence of progress is putting the revolution at risk.

While international journalists are piling into Libya to report on the air strikes by Western fighter jets, while children are playing among destroyed tanks and the rebels are storming towards Ajdabiyah, there's a strange, separate war raging behind the front line, in Benghazi.

Conservative reformers, inexperienced rebels and supporters of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi are pitted against each other in this struggle. A new order is being established in the city. And the longer Gadhafi manages to stay in power, the longer schools stay shut and commercial life remains on hold, the greater the chance that the revolution will fail. Without Gadhafi having to lift a finger.

On Liberation Square at the old courthouse, a declaration was issued on Monday that the "Ligan Thauria," the old revolutionary committees and supporters of Gadhafi, had 24 hours to hand over their weapons. If they didn't, they would be treated as what they were: murderers and enemies of the revolution. The term "enemies of the revolution" is familiar. It was used in the French Revolution to put old opponents under the guillotine. Gadhafi used those words himself after his own revolution.

continue reading it here ... http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,752580,00.html

[elcent]

very interesting psycholigical analysis of Gaddafi that somehow applies also to many other leaders.

Gadafi is a sociopath, a man impervious to any sense of self-doubt. His kind are all too common in positions of power. Sociopathocracy-government by sociopath is so common, the argument that the war in Iraq was a priority because it got rid of one such sociopath makes little sense. Yes the world is better off without Saddam, but for every deposed tyrant there are dozens more. Supposedly three percent of males and one percent of females are sociopaths. Among leaders the percentage is much higher. It makes you wonder what puts them in power. Information theory, the science that provides us such useful concepts as signal to noise ratio, gigabytes and bandwidth also provides insights into the prevalence of sociopathocracy. The key insight is in what's called "redundancy."

You're at a large party with people talking all around you. You're in conversation with one person but the signal to noise ratio is low, meaning his voice, the signal, is quiet relative to the ambient conversational noise. Someone loud laughs in the background drowning out your conversational partner so you ask him to repeat what he said. You have to do that a lot actually.

Claude Shannon the genius mathematician and engineer for Bell labs who founded information theory showed how redundancy-repeating the message compensates for noise. He imagined a channel in which information is sent at a steady rate. Noise in the channel, for example static on a phone line, means that bits of information get drowned out. But if you send the same information again, chances are different bits will be drowned out and you'll be able to piece together the information. Shannon noted however that the more message redundancy is required the less new information can be sent. Conversation at that party is less informative because you waste so much time repeating yourselves.

Shannon was thinking about communication in which the listener is eager to hear correctly what the speaker is eager to convey correctly, but of course not all conversation is like that. Sometimes the listener would like to hear something else. At a party you might be done listening to a boring, repetitive guy but can't get away because he's filling your ears with stuff he's eager to say but you are not eager to hear.

Or imagine that you're at a group strategy meeting and one guy is dominating, insisting over and over that he has the answers. Dissenting opinions aren't heard because the dominant opinion fills the information channel. The more redundancy; the less information, but also the less variety of information.

Hitler's PR man Joseph Goebbels said "The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over." Repeating himself he said "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

A lack of self-doubt is, by definition a lack of variety. It's like drowning out dissenting opinions in one's own head with a redundant belief. Conviction, faith and confidence are contagious for all sorts of psychological reasons. We envy, are attracted to, and find charismatic the passionately insistent. Conversely, we surrender to them sometimes, as anyone with demanding children knows. You start to seek reasons why it's OK to give in to them just to get a little peace.

Shouting matches and other conflicts are really doubting-matches. We argue by casting doubt on each other's opinions. Redundancy is how we dominate in doubting matches, and sociopaths can out-redundant non-sociopaths, hands down. The insistent fill our ears until we can't hear ourselves or anyone else think a dissenting thought. Sociopaths repeat reasons why their opponents should doubt themselves and so, in doubting matches, self-doubters always lose.

I think the Radical Rightthe Aways-Right wingthat has taken over the Republican party is a budding sociopathocracy. No, not on the scale of the worst culminations of such budding, but it pays to be wary nonetheless since all budding sociopathocracies start small. The movement's reckless disregard for how much it repeats the mistakes that have culminated in the sociopathocracies of higher magnitude should be checked by counter-caution. Fox News is nothing if not redundant. Watch Bill O'Reilly drown out any dissenting opinion.

In principle though I'm with the Radical Right on one thing. Its greatest enemy, as is mine, is sociopathocracy.

They mistakenly think that sociopathocracy is a product of certain ideologies and that their ideology including their passionate contempt for sociopathocracy make them immune to the risks of becoming a sociopathocracy. To them only Muslims, Liberals or Socialists could become sociopathocracies. There's no evidence of sociopathocracy is only the product of certain ideologies. Really it doesn't matter what the belief system is, so long as you repeat it and drown out the opposition. Call it peristuasion-persuasion by persistence. Call it memeocide-a concerted attempt to drown out and kill off dissenting ideas.

Indeed, ironically, what all sociopathocracies have in common though is this: They are all vehemently, viciously, virulently anti-sociopathocracy. More often than not revolutions in the name of liberation from sociopathocracies become the next sociopathocracies.

I'm sincere in my opposition to sociopathocracies, but then all of these other anti-sociopathocracy movements claim sincerity too. We are all and should be intolerant of intolerance. But none of us should ever assume that our particular ideology is somehow immune to sociopathocratization. Perhaps the most cancerous repeated lie is that sociopathocracies are the product of only certain ideologies. They are not. All ideologies, even mine and the Always-Right Wing'sour conviction that liberty and variety of thought is a fundamental virtue can become, as we are witnessing the basis for a budding sociopathocracy.

So what's a self-doubter to do? You can't nip sociopathocracies in the bud except by beating them at their own game, out-convincing potential supporters that they shouldn't support the sociopathocracy.

But reason is no match for repetition. Somehow you have to meet the self-certain with equal and opposite insistence and persistence. They'll accuse you of being a hypocrite and you'll have to do what they do, denying emphatically that you are or else you don't stand a chance. And yet somewhere you have to harbor some self-doubt or else what makes you anything other than another self-certain sociopath?

http://www.psychology-advice.net/sociopathocracy-what-information-theory-teaches-us-about-tyrants Edited March 23, 2011 by elcent

[bangkokeddy]

very interesting psycholigical analysis of Gaddafi that somehow applies also to many other leaders.

thats fringe science.

[bangkokeddy]

Dude the part I really like is Gadaffi bring in black African mercenaries to help kill the rebels civilians whatever.

Take out one Marxist & reoplace him with another.

Death to despots. Gadaffi you can go first.

The rebels look hardly civil to me. you have to be probably Marxists or in some other ways totally nuts to believe that story about the "civilians" or pro-democracy protester.

The NATO soldier will not get some decent above average payment for it. The big business makes someone else and we pay taxes.

[Steely Dan]

very interesting psycholigical analysis of Gaddafi that somehow applies also to many other leaders.

thats fringe science.

It applies much to the lunatic fringe, which the region seems almost uniquely blessed by.

[TheyCallmeScooter]

Gadhafi used those words himself after his own revolution.

http://www.spiegel.d...,752580,00.html

Yes.

How many were killed in that uprising?

There's a funny thing about revolutions and political change. When you have a mandate, you don't have to use any violence at all. When you do not have a mandate, you must spill blood.

There's a funny thing about oil as well. Men who travelled to Iraq expressly to kill Americans for Islam, stir your emotions to save them from law & order only 2 years after their hatred for Americans inspired them to lay down their lives, to kill Americans. These are the heroic victims, of the cruel Libyan despot. Heroic victims who so pulled at the heart-strings of humanitarians like Sarkozy and Cameron, men of honour and duty and sentiment, who've never actually heard of Darfur or Somalia or Rwanda or genocide. These are the heroic lovers of freedom and democracy, who love it so much they believe your wife / daughter, should be beaten or raped or stoned, if she insists on living her life exposing her face (*gasp*) in public. These are fine, wonderful men. Men of honour, integrity, character - men worth saving at great expense, unlike the worthless millions of Sudanese and Ethiopian women and children, slaughtered and raped only km's south of the fight for 'freedom'.

Those pitiful victims of genocide couldn't induce the doves of the United Nations to act, because the UN did not have an invitation from all sides of the bloody slaughter. But now, the plight of those whose lives have been spent on such noble pursuits as killing Americans and killing their countrymen, have stirred those United Nations doves into violent action.

I think Gaddafi is more or less a cult leader, who has gotten very rich over 40 years of craftily convincing 6 million apathetic people that he's tops, It's worth noting that they have been, convinced. But only 90% of them. There is 10% who want to kill and murder, to bring Islamic fundamentalism / freedom to Libya. But who cares about annoying percentages, who cares about peace or proportional representation or the right to self-determination? Worthless considerations, as worthless as the millions of women and children slaughtered by machetes. There is a bloody battle for freedom being fought by men who LOVE freedom, freedom to rape and murder their wives and daughters, freedom to kill blasphemers who disagree with their literal interpretations of the Qur'an, freedom to kill Americans.

Yes, their plight is real. Gaddafi likely would have killed some of them, this time. It's why the very men who travelled to Iraq and Pakistan and Afghanistan, expressly to kill American invaders, willing to die in order to kill Americans, are now welcoming US nuclear carrier groups and long-range bombers, as a means to an end.

I hope they leave the US a nice, greasy tip on the bedside table, for the cab-fare home, as they duck out in the morning to return to Al-Qaeda, their sweet, demure and unopinionated wife.

By all means, support Obama's unconstitutional and illegal support of a desperately unpopular, outgoing French President. It breaks every international law there is, but I think the redundancy ship has probably sailed, on that count. When the UN refuses to save the lives of millions of innocents, because they haven't been invited by the genocidal maniacs who are killing them - only to then strongly feel some jihadists a few clicks north, warrant urgent and decisive military intervention. It's stupid beyond capacity to believe, but whatever. It is every man's right to be stupid.

Just don't insult yourself, by pretending the West is on moral high ground here. There is no moral high ground in this fight, but there are degrees of filth and degrees of depth to consider, before one frolics in the sewer.

Libya was second only to Saudi Arabia in the overall number of men who had left for Iraq. Libya far outpaced every other Arab country in the per capita rate of volunteers.US diplomatic cables sent from the Tripoli embassy in 2008 - released by WikiLeaks earlier this year - described eastern Libya as an impoverished region and a breeding ground for Islamic extremism.

In another cable, a US embassy officer described having lunch with a Derna resident who said that volunteering for "jihad" in Iraq was a way of striking a blow at Gaddafi when attacking the regime at home was considered a lost cause.

"There was a strong perception, he said, that the US had decided ... to support the regime to secure counter-terrorism cooperation and ensure continued oil and natural gas production," the embassy officer wrote.

A chance for a 'friend' in America

Ibrahim and Jamal agreed. Sending men to fight in Iraq showed Gaddafi that eastern youth "don't differentiate between life and death," Ibrahim said. If they can sacrifice themselves in Iraq, they are ready to sacrifice themselves in Libya.

Jamal was wanted by the regime for supporting young men who went to fight US troops in Iraq [Evan Hill]

Though Jamal never intended to travel to Iraq himself, he viewed the US presence there as an "injustice" and felt obligated to support other young men who wanted to go by giving them money and encouragement and offering his family home as an occasional place to stay in Ajdabiya.

Even so, he said, the US is not the Libyan people's enemy; in fact, it could be an ally against Gaddafi. Though he warned that Libyans would never tolerate a foreign military presence in their country, the people would consider the US "a friend" if it interceded to protect the uprising by launching air strikes against Gaddafi's troops and military buildings, Jamal said.

They are blunt about their religion: Islam guides their worldview, and they would like to achieve the democracy and freedom they desire for Libya in an Islamic context. But the brothers have not shut themselves off from the outside world. They are not cave-dwelling radicals in the mold of Osama bin Laden, waiting for the return of an Islamic golden age and worldwide dominion.

"Yes we are Muslim, but we can be modern too," Ibrahim said.

He is not lying. They can be modern too, when it's expedient to put on clothes and emerge from the cave.

Pakistan was 'modern'. And the people who idiotically believed that, allowed them to develop advanced nuclear capability. Now they're killing those who 'blaspheme', They're killing governors who speak out against killing those who blaspheme. They'd kill you, if they could. They likely wouldn't kill your wife and daughter, at least not straight away.

Let's save them from Gadaffi's law and order. We have Escalades that are thirsty.

The lunatics control the asylum. But then, I guess they always have.

[bonobo]

Bring the troops home & turn the fire power on Goldman Sachs, dirty politicians et al?

Surely most people could get behind this idea. One of the few sane things I have read in this benighted thread so far.

[Steely Dan]

Pakistan was 'modern'. And the people who idiotically believed that, allowed them to develop advanced nuclear capability. Now they're killing those who 'blaspheme', They're killing governors who speak out against killing those who blaspheme. They'd kill you, if they could. They likely wouldn't kill your wife and daughter, at least not straight away.

Let's save them from Gadaffi's law and order. We have Escalades that are thirsty.

The lunatics control the asylum. But then, I guess they always have.

Yes, better the despot you know than some religious extremist nutcase you don't. Despots understand borders fundamentalist Islam recognises no borders, both cases are a human rights disaster, but the fallout from the second scenario is so much less predictable. If there is a telltale indicator that all is not as it seems take the case of the Burqa which the U.S and U.K governments lack the stomach to ban, whilst various middle eastern states such as Turkey, Tunisia and Egypt have. The liberals have really opened up Pandora's box in chancing that liberal democracies will emerge out of a power vaccuum, still it makes interesting viewing seeing the moral gymnastics the BBC engages in to justify our presence.

[Wallaby]

What I don't like is the crap we are fed by the leaders of our governments.

Iraq - Weapons of mass destruction that can be fired upon us in a moment. We must act now to defend you, the people.

Oh wait, the reason we really went in is because Hussein is the anticrhrist and needed to be removed.

Libya - no fly zone enforced to stop the mass murder of the people of Libya

Ok, not really a no fly zone, we really want Gadaffi out and we're bombing the shit out of his army so the rebels (whoever they are) can take over but we didn't want to tell you that in case you didn't agree with us trying to enforce a polical head to our liking.

For goodness sake, what is going on with these politicians. If you want rid of someone, tell it like it is, Say what you intend to do then go and do it if that's what your intentions are, but please stop bullshitting us with tall tales to make it more palatable.

When the forces have packed their bags and gone home could someone please discover oil in Zimbabwe so the forces can then vote for another 'no fly zone' around the home of Mugabe so we can rid the world of another despot..

[canuckamuck]

Ghadaffi was bad news for Libyans, but not much of a threat to the rest of the world. The next guy? Who knows.

Did the pot need stirring?