Merged Libya: People's Revolution / Criminal Imperialism?

[Pardalis]

So you reuse to acknowledge where you were wrong citing neighborhoods bombed.

I don't know the layouts of Libyan cities, so you can post all the google earth images you want, I can't tell if you're truthful or not.

But your support for this madman is clear, and your bias doesn't help your case. You seem to be on a mission to expiate Qadhafi.

Of course some of the rebels are bad and violent, but that's what you get when you're oppressing people for four uninterrupted decades.

 

[Virus]

Caustic Logic believes that Pearl Harbour was allowed to happen and the assassination of JFK was an inside job.

 

[Pardalis]

I see he has a way with evidence...

 

[trustbutverify]

Caustic Logic believes that Pearl Harbour was allowed to happen and the assassination of JFK was an inside job.

That's actually just the beginning.

 

[trustbutverify]

We're back to the same message these folks said in the 60s: liberal democracies were evil and opressive, but totalitarianism was cool and, like, groovy, man.

Extra points if your totalitarianism happens to be flavored with brutal sadistic obscenities committed against defenseless men, women and children.

But what do you expect from people who hold up Cuba as the city on the hill. Of course, if you don't like living in the city on a hill you're not allowed to leave, but hey...

 

[trustbutverify]

I am not sure intervention in the affairs of a foreign country ever works out. Certainly the winners and losers are changed a bit when there is foreign intervention but is it ever, in net, beneficial to the population?

But if intervention is ever beneficial, this looks like a pretty good model for US intervention to me.
1. It was done without being driven by US corporate interests
2. It was done without the US manufacturing evidence to justify the action.
3. It was done for clearly altruistic reasons
4. It was done without cramming a consensus down the throat of US allies about what needs to be done
5. It was done by allowing countries that seem to have a better handle on what needed to be done to be in charge instead of succumbing to the routine US jingoistic chant that the US needs to be in charge of everything.
6. It was done after a clear cut revolutionary force had established itself (as SkepticGinger said).

No one will ever know what the net benefits of the NATO actions in Libya were, but right now it is looking like loss of life was relatively small for this kind of thing and that a Libyan government will form that won't suck US or NATA resources and that might govern Libya in a way more beneficial to the Libyans and to the rest of the world.

Of course, if you're a routine Republican partisan nut job, you can look at the way this worked out and say something like it would have been so much better if the US had intervened sooner and with more force because that model worked out so much better in Iraq.

The worst intervention was perpetrated by the French in the American war of independence. Those imperial bastards subjected the world to the cancer that is the US.

 

[trustbutverify]

They hate our fweedoms.

“With each newly minted crisis, US leaders roll out the same time-tested scenario. They start demonizing a foreign leader … charging them with being communistic or otherwise dictatorial, dangerously aggressive, power hungry, genocidal, given to terrorism or drug trafficking, ready to deny us access to vital resources, harboring weapons of mass destruction, or just inexplicably “anti-American” and “anti-West.” Lacking any information to the contrary, the frightened public … are swept along.”

- Michael Parenti

Qaddafi was demonized by the imperialists for exposing the instant- coffee spiking scandal!!

 

[RandFan]

The worst intervention was perpetrated by the French in the American war of independence. Those imperial bastards subjected the world to the cancer that is the US.

You have a point but I'm more concerned about Pommes Frites. That's just wrong.

 

[trustbutverify]

Michael Parenti is a Truther.

Doesn't that improve his credibility?

 

[Caustic Logic]

Hang on there. Perhaps I've swallowed a whole lot of nonsense and you are on to something. How long was Gaddafi in power? How many elections were held during his reign? Didn't Gaddafi abolish the Constitution? Why is he called a "dictator"? Why is he listed as an autocrat in Wiki?

These things are true. There was a definite lack of freedom, voting, a proper constitution. I understand they were working on some of these, supposed to happen later in the year, but they were too slow it seems. And if we had waited, I suppose there's no guarantee they'd follow through. So perhaps this is the only way, but I for one find that very sad.

Unless there is a military coup, you don't overthrow a powerful dictator without support from the people. That's silly in the extreme.

Dictatorships are, by definition, anti-democratic.

Unless you have several whole nations helping you out, freezing the government's money, banning their diplomats, and of course bombing the hell out of their opposing forces. Benghazi and points east were never attacked, no matter how weakly they were held by whatever minority, because NATO prevented it.

Doesn't that make it a bit less silly?

I don't know the layouts of Libyan cities, so you can post all the google earth images you want, I can't tell if you're truthful or not.

But your support for this madman is clear, and your bias doesn't help your case. You seem to be on a mission to expiate Qadhafi.

Of course some of the rebels are bad and violent, but that's what you get when you're oppressing people for four uninterrupted decades.

Okay, that's fair enough. Because you don't know if that's the image for where something else (shooting attackers of the Katiba) happened (it is, if you just look at the video), then I'm probably full of it and bombing neighborhoods probably did happen. You go on ignore now, faith-based "skeptic."

 

[Caustic Logic]

Okay, never mind on ignore. I feel a need for a sanction, a cyber slap, but I also want to keep talking if possible.

Caustic Logic believes that Pearl Harbour was allowed to happen and the assassination of JFK was an inside job.

Okay, not quite twoofer and holocaust denier, but ignorable. You're not completely right. The latter, no clear opinion either way, the former... okay, that's my best guess after study.

Too bad I was so correct on the Libyan civil war you were unable to deal with my arguments there directly instead of finding cheap ways to dismiss it all.

So, I've been hit with the charred warehouse victims. Do we have any previous evidence the Gaddafi regime, crumbling or not, is known for this type of thing? Weren't there cases, or at least one, back in February? Was it Benghazi or maybe Dernah? A video, with 4 or 5 charred bodies?

 

[Caustic Logic]

Except a lot of us saw firing on protestors it on the news. You seem to have a blindspot to these things.

I must have missed that indeed. Firing on, hitting, what? Is this video still viewable, or is it just too late for the slow among us? Can ANYONE show me this, since the Funk doesn't like to help people?

Caustic Logic and Little grey rabbit, could one or both of you post your best evidence (a link) not your summaries, I know you've already said a lot and I'm not trying to make work for you. These threads were merged and I just don't want to review 5 pages.

Until you get more specific, here's my whole site, not complete yet of course. I've been trying to avoid "Spamming" with links.

But faking a popular uprising the backing it with NATO forces is way more than the things we've seen occur.

Oh I would agree. You don't fake an uprising. You'll need people who can shoot guns, thousands at least.

What you might do is fake that it's popular (ETA: Or exaggerate its popularity so it seems a clear and overwhelming majority). It's not hard - we all know it's unfree, that from what we hear it's evil, and we know peoplw are people, so they all or mostly MUST want ot. And maybe they do. But not neccessarily under the rebels, or on our terms. We couldn't let a chance to free the people slide by, but judging by the signs I cited above, a large portion still clearly said please, let it slip away. We can wait.

And besides the perhaps 1 in 4 Libyans who protested in July in solidarity with the government, there were likely many others just lukewarm on the very complex issue. Because in fact the Jamahiriya offered many good things along with the bad (and they're view of the bad is likely much different than our media-managed, exaggerated and demonized perspective), and ditching it all would be seen as risky and frightening to many.

This sounds closer to the secret cabal of the too much TV, too many movies crowd. Sorry.

No that's okay. You just misunderstood. I watch no TV and only a few movies. In fact, I should probably watch more. Might do that.

ETA: To summarize, we have this:
A large number of Libya's people rose up against the government. I won't deny that. It might even be a majority, though I doubt that.

What we don't have is proof that a clear and overwhelming majority of the people has demanded the government go.

So what can we really say about what "the people" want? (hint - there's no one answer, but that's all we gave them)

 

[RandFan]

These things are true. There was a definite lack of freedom, voting, a proper constitution. I understand they were working on some of these, supposed to happen later in the year, but they were too slow it seems. And if we had waited, I suppose there's no guarantee they'd follow through. So perhaps this is the only way, but I for one find that very sad.

Yeah, message to dictators, "Arab Spring", get off your ass.

Unless you have several whole nations helping you out, freezing the government's money, banning their diplomats, and of course bombing the hell out of their opposing forces. Benghazi and points east were never attacked, no matter how weakly they were held by whatever minority, because NATO prevented it.

Doesn't that make it a bit less silly?

I apologize, I don't know what your point is.

 

[RandFan]

What we don't have is proof that a clear and overwhelming majority of the people has demanded the government go.

I don't care. If you don't give people freedom then some percentage those people have the right to kick your ass out of power. If you want democracy then by god install democracy. BTW: The majority does not have the right to tyrannize the minority. Might doesn't make right. If you are withholding fundamental rights from citizens using force you put yourself in danger of being overthrown. I will not defend any majorities right to oppress any minority. That includes the US.

 

[JihadJane]

Okay, that's fair enough. Because you don't know if that's the image for where something else (shooting attackers of the Katiba) happened (it is, if you just look at the video), then I'm probably full of it and bombing neighborhoods probably did happen. You go on ignore now, faith-based "skeptic."

No surprise to see Pardalis supporting the jihadists.

 

[Pardalis]

The humor section is over that way →

 

[little grey rabbit]

The bodies in a warehouse storing is slowly evolving in attempt to match reality, but still along way to go

Andrew Hosken

BBC News, Tripoli

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I visited a farmyard in south-east Tripoli, at Ein Zara, situated behind the barracks of the so-called Khamis Brigade whose commander was Col Gaddafi's son, Khamis.

In a barn I saw the remains of a large number of burnt corpses which are said to be those of army officers who refused to fight for Col Gaddafi in recent weeks.

According to the rebels' National Transitional Council, at least 53 people died here.

Let's run through it very simply.

1. NATO and perhaps a few rebels hurled lots of flying bits of metal and explosives at fellow Libyans who belonged to the national army.

2. Many of these soldiers died so that the rebels could take power

3. These dead bodies were difficult to bury in collapsing circumstances

4. Rebels took over deserted compound and then incinerated the bodies

5. Called in media and said it was a Gaddafi atrocity.

Come on BEEB, it really isn't that hard. NATO bombs kill people, dead people lie around and begin to decompose, you seem to think is an excellent idea so why try so hard to conceal the consequences?

 

[RandFan]

The bodies in a warehouse storing is slowly evolving in attempt to match reality, but still along way to go



Let's run through it very simply.

1. NATO and perhaps a few rebels hurled lots of flying bits of metal and explosives at fellow Libyans who belonged to the national army.

2. Many of these soldiers died so that the rebels could take power

3. These dead bodies were difficult to bury in collapsing circumstances

4. Rebels took over deserted compound and then incinerated the bodies

5. Called in media and said it was a Gaddafi atrocity.

Come on BEEB, it really isn't that hard. NATO bombs kill people, dead people lie around and begin to decompose, you seem to think is an excellent idea so why try so hard to conceal the consequences?

Thanks for the summary. Could you cite your sources?

 

[little grey rabbit]

You can find the quote from Andrew Hosken describing the incinerated men as being Gaddafi officers - albeit Gaddafi officers who refused to fire on civilians - here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14709896

 

[RandFan]

2. Many of these soldiers died so that the rebels could take power

Isn't that what happens when a dictator is overthrown? Can we at least be honest that Libya was autocratic? Perhaps some of the people didn't want to be oppressed. What should oppressed people do? I think the people America oppresses have every right to fight back. I don't fault them for fighting for freedom. Who would?