Gaddafi

Gaddafi would be better to receive a nobel prize than Obama. Gaddafi never wanted war. Obama just continues it, and sends more troops everywhere. Theyr'e just hired guns, not America's army exactly.

*yawn*

100% Agree

A++ POST OP

US Special Forces Spotted On Al Jazeera In Libya On The Front
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnDUS-MR2g8

>>1
1 - Send assassination squads all over the world to shut up the slightest critics for "insulting" you.
2 - Spread propaganda to countless american conspiracy idiots about how you're completely innocent, and that it's all Americas fault.
3 - Win nobel peace prize.

"The person in open support of terrorism around the world, deserves a nobel peace prize. What's "the Abu Salim prison massacre"? What's a "death squad"? All I know of is Obama, and I heard he's the president of America right now, and that's pretty bad if you ask me."
- 4chan conspiracy nutter

Obama ended the brutal American military dictatorship over the oppressed peoples of Iraq and Afghanistan once and for all, he closed the American concentration camps all over the world and his free health care system brought the American people one huge step further towards first world standards. This man is a saint and he deserves the price.

What did Gaddafi do?

>>7
You realize he hasn't actually accomplished any of those things yet. Right?

You know workers apart of the military industrial complex will lose jobs if we dont sell or go to war. People complain about corporate lobbying but individuals, employers and unions lobby a lot for these businesses.

>>9
If you take a closer look at that, it's insane. Generating unnecessary government consumption to generate superfluous work to distribute goods to the working class. Just to keep the system running as it is. People don't like to work, so they shouldn't have to work when not necessary.

I live in a welfare state with relatively high taxation, it has a lot of its own problems, but it never had to go to war to prevent unemployment and poverty in the lowest classes. 32 hour work weeks, a four week paid vacation per year and a generous social spending on every level do the trick too. We don't need to generate values only to let politicians waste them in the next second. Where we waste them, we waste them the convenient way. With a good private life.

WEEEEEEEP WEEEEEP WEEP!!!!! *tears help bring more flooding down to New Orleans*

ASSHOLES!!! >8

>>7
"What did Gaddafi do?"
This right here, is newpols problem.
Get a fucking clue before you open your big fat mouths.
Gaddafi is one of the most notorious despots in modern times, but you were all born yesterday, so all you know about is Obama, and have the combined ambition to read excyclopedias equal to that of a nigger, yet you desperately want to have an opinion.

>>12
You failed. Next!

Invading Libia is a best thing that could happen in our economy crisis, we are like Robbin hood, taking his gold and providing it to poorer countries (greace), new libian goverment will have to buy everything from higher developed countries (EU)boosting our economy. Obama,Sarcosy and others deserve Nobel price again

>>10
A 40 hour work week isn't a big deal.

>>15
Pfft, you wage slave.  30 hours is enough for anyone.  Get your boss to cut your hours for the same money for an instant pay rise.  You then get to tell prospective employers that you're earning 30% more than you were.

>>14
>Invading Libia is a best thing that could happen in our economy crisis
Overthrowing a legitimate government is a good thing? I would have understood if the rebels did it themselves - it would have proved that it represents the will of its people. But bombing civilians and invading with foreign military (NATO special forces, Qatari mercenaries, etc.) - isn't_fucking_democratic! Basically, it violates UN resolutions and human rights (the fundamental thing of democracy). Crisis or no, this is absolutely wrong.
>we are like Robbin hood, taking his gold and providing it to poorer countries (greace)
Implying it is something to be proud of. Your crisis is your own fault, while there are a lot of peaceful civilians in Libya you have doomed to live in poverty, chaos and banditism. Do you consider them subhuman to suffer instead of you, because of your own problems?
Second, the whole operation costed more than the gold taken - you do realize that petrol, bombs, keeping planes in working condition while actively using them, making mass media lie, etc. - is a HELL lot of money? You haven't prevented economic crisis, idiot, you accelerated its arrival! Oil and gold may compensate it a bit, but in destabilized country, turned into second Somali, its much more problematic than its worth.
>new libian goverment will have to buy everything from higher developed countries (EU)boosting our economy
How? It is a poor country now, even the money you have taken from Gaddafi has already been stolen. They won't buy anything from you, because they don't have money and they barely control the territory. Just like Somali.
What could have boosted your economy - was letting Libya develop. It could have grown into prosperous civilized country both to your and their benefits. Peaceful beneficial coexistence. Now enjoy the consequences of the chaos, you have created. Terrorist nests right nearby Europe, pirates in the Mediterranean sea, SWARMS of migrants from africa - enjoy!
>Obama,Sarcosy and others deserve Nobel price again
They should be hanged as war criminals

>>17
legitimate government
Since it was the Libyan people who did the overthrowing, what defines the legitimacy of a government?

>>18
The majority of the Libyan people are still loyal to Gadaffi.
In a democratic society, majority wins.

>>19
Muslims have no loyalty. They'll just replace Gadaffi with another Gadaffi.

>>20

Eh? One minute muslims are indoctrinated, un-changable, mindless war-drones who are devoted to a cause. The next minute they "have no loyalty". I wish you haters would make up your mind.
Also, who they choose to elect is their own damn buisness. If we kill Gadaffi, force their country into an election, and they elect a Gaddafi clone... so what? It's democracy. Shouldn't you be happy?

>>12
He is a despot. A dictator. A tyrant.... I still say so fucking what? What did he do that was wrong? Why is being a dictator automatically a bad thing? Why is being democratic autmatically a good thing?
What, justifies, this, war?

>>21
I still say so fucking what? What did he do that was wrong?
Idiot. From wikipedia:

Crimes against humanity arrest warrant

The UN referred the massacres of unarmed civilians to the International Criminal Court.[205] Among the crimes being investigated by the prosecution is whether Gaddafi purchased and authorized the use of Viagra-like drugs among soldiers for the purpose of raping women and instilling fear.[206] His government's heavy-handed approach to quelling the protests was characterized by the International Federation for Human Rights as a strategy of scorched earth. The acts of "indiscriminate killings of civilians" was charged as crimes against humanity, as defined in Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.[207]

On 27 June 2011 the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Gaddafi, accusing him of crimes against humanity and of ordering attacks on civilians in Libya.[19] Arrest warrants were also issued for his son Saif al-Islam Gaddafi and the intelligence chief Abdullah Senussi.[19] The presiding judge, Sanji Monageng, stated that there were "reasonable grounds to believe" that Gaddafi and Saif al-Islam were "criminally responsible as indirect co-perpetrators" for the murder of civilians.[208] She added that they "conceived and orchestrated a plan to deter and quell by all means the civilian demonstrations" and that Senussi used his position to have attacks carried out.[209] Libyan officials rejected the ICC's authority, saying that the ICC has "no legitimacy whatsoever" and that "all of its activities are directed at African leaders".[208]

The International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Gaddafi, his son Saif al-Islam, and Abdullah al-Senussi, head of state security for charges concerning crimes against humanity on 27 June 2011.[210][211] According to Matt Steinglass of The Financial Times the charges call for Gaddafi, and his two co-conspirators, to "stand trial for the murder and persecution of demonstrators by Libyan security forces since the uprising based in the country’s east that began in February." This makes him the second still-serving state-leader to have warrants issued against them, the first being Omar al-Bashir of Sudan.[211]

A Libyan government representative, justice minister Mohammed al-Qamoodi, responded by saying that "The leader of the revolution and his son do not hold any official position in the Libyan government and therefore they have no connection to the claims of the ICC against them ..."[210]

Russia and other countries, including China and Germany, abstained from voting in the UN[212] and have not joined the NATO coalition, which has taken action in Libya by bombing the government's forces. Mikhail Margelov, the Kremlin special representative for Africa, speaking in an interview for Russian newspaper Izvestia, said that the "Kremlin accepted that Col Gaddafi [sic] had no political future and that his family would have to relinquish its vice-like grip on the Libyan economy."[213] He also said that "It is quite possible to solve the situation without the colonel".[213]

>>19
The majority of the Libyan people are still loyal to Gadaffi.
And how would you know this if they are under a totalitarian regime where political opponents, real or perceived, are routinely tortured and executed?

>>21
What is your problem? Are you unable to spell to "Wikipedia", or what?
I want to try that too:
Your moms pussy is disgusting.
Why isn't it disgusting? Because you say so?
I still say so fucking what! I want a sample!
I'm an idiot! Prove me wrong!

I also think >>22 is an idiot, because he fucking fell for it. Don't feed these idiots! Let them die of brain failure!

Libyan rebels are racist

Media habitually tells us that Libyan rebels are noble freedom fighters, struggling aganist a bloodthirsty tyrant. But after all the buckets of half-truths and blatant lies, that news poured on our heads, treating us viewers like brainless sheep and feeding us half-baked reports that often got disproved the next day, some of us started to look further and investigate. What they found out, is extremely disturbing. Say, from the very beginning of war we've been hearing reports about "Gaddafi's black mercenaries". We even saw photos and videos of several people that, supposedly, were these mercenaries. But the whole truth is much more complicated - and scary.

Yes, there indeed are several divisions of black Africans and citizens of Chad in the army of Libya, that is formed on the principle of territorial militia. But they can hardly be considered mercenaries - not more than French Foreign Legion or non-American citizens in US Army. In general, the status of black men of Libyan army's various units is civil servants.

In a country with 6 million inhabitants, one third are black (the most oppressed group in the country). Would not it be easier for the rebels to call for their solidarity and ask them join the rebel ranks? But not only black Libyans do not join the rebellion - they flee in terror.

The first wave of reports and evidence of beatings of black Africans began in February and March. The rebels, under the trademark of fighting with the mercenaries from Chad, were slaughtering all black people with no mercy. They even started to post various Youtube videos with their actions filmed (like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8bpNgB1oEk The victim was the Libyan citizen Hisham Mansour, born 22-02-1983). Back in early March, the Human Rights Watch even warned black migrant workers on the need to flee the revolutionary terrain.

"We left behind our friends from Chad. We left behind their bodies. We had 70 or 80 people from Chad working for our company. They cut them dead with pruning shears and axes, attacking them, saying you're providing troops for Gaddafi. The Sudanese, the Chadians were massacred. We saw it ourselves. I am a worker, not a fighter. They took me from my house and [raped] my wife", - a Turkish oilfield worker, who fled Libya, told BBC in February 25.

One of the editors of the Monthly Review, Yoshie Furuhashi, writes:

"The black African workers now live in fear in the territories held by the rebels in Libya. Some have been attacked by mobs, some have been imprisoned and some of their houses and shops have been torched. Many African workers say they felt safer under the regime of Gaddafi".

In March, a reporter from the Daily Mail was in Benghazi and reported:

"Africans I saw ranged from a 20 year old and a late forties, with a grizzled beard. Most wore casual clothes. When they realized that I spoke English erupted in protests. "We did nothing," one told me, before he was silenced. "We are all construction workers in Ghana. Do not harm anyone. "

Another accused, a man in green overalls, showed the paint on their sleeves and said: "This is my job. I do not know how to shoot a gun "

Abdul Nasser, 47, protested: "They lie about us. They took us out of our house at night when we were asleep. " While still complaining, they were taken.

International Business Times published an article on March 2 that says:

"According to reports, over 150 black Africans at least a dozen different countries escaped from Libya by plane and landed at the airport in Nairobi, Kenya, with horrific stories of violence."

"We were attacked by locals who said they were mercenaries who killed people. I mean blacks who refused to see "Julius told Reuters Kiluu, a construction supervisor for 60 years.

Michel Collon with a fact-finding delegation were in Libya in July and when he learned what had happened, he said:

"I met these people during my research in Tripoli. I could talk to some people. They were not "mercenaries," as the rebels and the media tell. Some were dark-skinned Libyans (much of the population is of African type, in fact), others were black civilians from African countries who stayed in Libya for a long time. All support Gaddafi precisely because he opposes to racism and treats them as Arabs and Africans on an equal footing. On the contrary, the rebels in Benghazi are known for their racism, and blacks were victims of terrible systematic atrocities. The paradox is that NATO wants to bring democracy to a section of Al Qaeda and Libyan Ku Klux Klan-type racists".

Here's another footage, with English explanations given: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2IBT_dQpEY

After the rebels entered Tripoli, numerous reports of black men being killed appeared again. Twitter explodes with rebels' messages about killing "African mercenaries". In the chaos of embattled Tripoli, black people are being simply seized from the streets and taken somewhere openly.

http://i56.tinypic.com/63tx15.jpg

On the photo above we can see that the dead people's hands are tied with plastic handcuffs and their clothes are relatively clean. This means these people were captured not after a fight, but deliberately.

The Colonel was being building good relations with the south of Africa. NATO plan of destabilizing Libya might as well include having the black Africans turning away from this country forever, using contempt and xenophobia of the rebels as a driving force of the persecution. After all, lynching black people simply for being in Africa sounds ridiculous. But results are pretty much of the same racist kind, and they are not funny at all.

>>25
tl;dr:
Libyan rebels are posting YouTube videos from Libya. The only ones having access to YouTube from Libya is Ghaddafi government workers. The rest have been blocked since last years Salim massacre protests.
OP is spreading false propaganda.

Heh. It appears that well-connected (former government) Ghaddafi supporters have taken the battle to YouTube (with the "Libyancouncil" YouTube channel just being one of several spreaders of false propaganda). If you want to partake in Libyas fight for real freedom, you can flag the videos on all these channels for "supporting terrorism", because Gaddafi is no longer acknowledged as the leader of Libya, and even when he ruled, he stood for both regular terrorism (bombings) and state terrorism.

>>26
>The only ones having access to YouTube from Libya is Ghaddafi government workers. The rest have been blocked since last years
Well, not anymore. Since rebels control the situation, it is not surprising that the access to YouTube in Libya appeared back.

>>27
>even when he ruled, he stood for both regular terrorism (bombings) and state terrorism.
Nope. He stopped supporting terrorism for a decade already. Should I remind you, that USA once had connections with Al-Quaeda, too?
And currently Gaddafi stood against terrorism, unlike rebels - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgBzZtzqQ_M

>>26
Hooking up a laptop to a mobile phone is 90s era technology. Not sure what you're thinking here.

A long time Gaddafi was a good partner to US and EU governments, they done a lot of businesses, but now suddenly he became a dictator in the public eye and in the governments opinion. It is kind of treachery isn't it?

>>31
So much facepalm.
I fully believe that you believe this. I fully believe that you're not a troll or on Gaddafis payroll, and that you're just a stupid american that actually believes this, because Bush has shown that americans really can be this stupid.

Gaddafi has always been a ruthless dictator. Always. It's just that he has made damn sure to manufacture good PR for himself to cover up assassinations, massacres and countless civil rights violations. Gaddafis relations toward the US is that he has been applauding terrorist bombings, and he never missed a chance to fuck with the other members of the UN. Gaddafi has even held a speech in the UN, where he spoke about there being no actual loyalty between the countries - just business.

>>29
What Libya is revolting against now, is his STATE terrorism.

>>33
Not really. It's tribal, actually. What Gaddafi did was pretty normal. Gaddafi was a bit insane.

The people who will replace him will be just as bad. The EU will make a lot of money 'helping' the new government. Life goes on in durkaville.

Gaddafi has always enjoyed majority support in Libya.  The problem has been in how he has maintained it.

>>34
Not "as bad". Much worse.
Libya was the most prosperous country in Europe and promised soon to become as prosperous as European. In time it could peacefully turn into democracy - Gaddafi's sons had more european democratic mindset and Libya was ALREADY the most civilized and least oppressive of the muslim countries.
Now Libya is a poor, half-destroyed shadow of its former self. It is not only thrown 40 years back, but became second Somali - a pure chaos, where government will control just few regions of one city, while others are swarming with terrorists. Is it worth spreading democracy? Replacing a reasonable dictator with savage gangs of fundamentalists?

>>36
>the most prosperous country in AFRICA
selffix

>>36
Lybia - most prosperous? In what regard?
Least opressive? Now you're bullshitting me.
I can buy that Libya was aiming for democracy, but when you have a merciless military dictator (Gaddafi) standing in the way of it, you end up with a necessary democratic revolution. Nepotism doesn't lead to democracy.

>>38
>Lybia - most prosperous? In what regard?
Decent salary ($1000), free medicine, free education, free housing, etc. Compare this to other African countries or even to some Eastern European countries.
>Least opressive? Now you're bullshitting me.
Name me another muslim country where women are treated with respect.
>a necessary democratic revolution.
Then why do these arabic democratic revolutions result in fundamentalists coming to power? Do you even realize that some societies may not be ready for democracy yet and that so called "democratic revolutions" are just the the means for another undemocratic group to rise to power? Middle East mentality is such a delicate matter - crude methods simply won't work we way you expect them to.
Gaddafi wasn't saint, but he was much better than those who will assume power in Libya now.

>>39
It's true that Libya had an unusually high standard of living, though most of that was due to oil wealth, it's like a diluted version of Dubai. It's also true that Libya looks like Somalia right now but so does every wartorn country, they are on the mediterranean, they have the world's attention, an educated urbanized population and of course oil, it will pass. The new leader will probably fill the same political niche Gaddafi did but he will make the concessions Gaddafi didn't and as Libya's economy develops like many emerging markets around the world the political scene will liberalize.