Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

Gaddafi

Name: Anonymous 2011-08-21 14:03

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.

Name: Anonymous 2011-08-29 14:52

>>39
The oil resources will still profit libyans in the future, except now the money isn't regulated by Gaddafi.

Yes, if you happen to be a woman, you'll end up getting equally opressed as men are. You're still not allowed freedom of speech, and so on, under penalty of death.

When you had a despot whose national anthem was "Allah is great", and you now replace it with a government whose motto is "Freedom, Justice, Democracy!", then it's pretty clear that Gaddafis rule was much more fundamentalist.

Name: Anonymous 2011-08-29 15:56

>>41
>The oil resources will still profit libyans in the future, except now the money isn't regulated by Gaddafi.
The oil resourses will be in hands of foreign companies and so they will profit europeans, while Libya itself will get little money. Neo-colonialism politics.
>You're still not allowed freedom of speech, and so on, under penalty of death.
Penalty of death? Now you're bullshitting me.
>When you had a despot whose national anthem was "Allah is great"
English anthem is "God save the Queen". American motto is "In God we trust". "Allah" simply means "God" in arabic. How is that different?
>and you now replace it with a government whose motto is "Freedom, Justice, Democracy!", then it's pretty clear that Gaddafis rule was much more fundamentalist.
Such words are empty. The rebels have many Al-Qaeda terrorists among their ranks and these terrorists are the most capable and skilled military force among them. So the democratic rulers will (at best) control some parts of few cities like in Somali, or (at worst) will be got rid of.

Name: Anonymous 2011-08-30 7:45

>>42
Before Gaddafi:
A government drilled the oil, embezzled half of it, and gave some percentage to the people for free, making libyan money worthless through inflation.
After Gaddafi:
Skilled oil companies drills the oil, gives the government any percentage they demand, and they use this money to improve Libyas infrastructure, actually profiting the libyan people.

Before Gaddafi:
If you as much as said publicly that Libya didn't have freedom of speech, and you weren't famous, Gaddafi would send death squads to whereever you lived, EVEN IF YOU THOUGHT YOU WERE LIVING SAFELY IN EUROPE, and assassinate you. If you were a famous activist, you would instead be dragged before a libyan court charged with insulting, and even conspiring to KILL, Gaddafi, and if you weren't sentenced to death, you'd be brought to a lifetime prison, to be killed in a prison massacre by Gaddafi.
After Gaddafi:
Democratic rights.

"God is great!" ("Allahu akbar!") is the exact phrase that fundamentalist fanatics say before they detonate their suicide bombs. Would the anthem be "Allah save Gaddafi" it wouldn't be as bad.

A revolution will require capable fighters, so any rebel wanting illegal guns and expertize to overthrow a government, would have to deal with shady elements - I'm certainly not thinking lesser of them for it. It would be another matter if they would forcefully try to appoint fundamentalists to rule the government, but as it is now, canidates are being appointed for a democratic election, and this time the canidates are not secretly working for a despot.

Name: Anonymous 2011-08-30 9:53

>>43
>making libyan money worthless through inflation.
As a person, who once traveled there, I can say that you could buy pretty much there. The only problem was aquiring alcohol, because it was officially banned and you could get it only through smugglers.
That plus free housing, free medicine, free education, little taxes made living conditions there quite fine.
>Skilled oil companies drills the oil, gives the government any percentage they demand
Skilled oil Russian and Chinese companies were already invited by Gaddafi, giving him percentage he demanded.
Now the situation will be like it was in Russia in the 90s - European and American lapdog companies extracted oil, while giving the country less than 20% of the profits.
>Gaddafi would send death squads
Fanatical nonsense and bullshit
>Democratic rights.
You mean things like this? Hardly any difference
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bVa6jn4rpE
>"God is great!" ("Allahu akbar!") is the exact phrase that fundamentalist fanatics say before they detonate their suicide bombs.
Do you know that many peaceful muslims frequently say "Allahu akbar!"? Do you know that arabian christians also say "Allahu akbar!"? Seriously, your ignorance could fill the oceans.
>A revolution will require capable fighters, so any rebel wanting illegal guns and expertize to overthrow a government, would have to deal with shady elements - I'm certainly not thinking lesser of them for it.
Dealing with shady elements is one thing - overthrowing a lesser evil with the help of a much bigger one is entirely different.
>It would be another matter if they would forcefully try to appoint fundamentalists to rule the government
Oh, no need for "forcefully". In Palestine the Hamas extremists were elected absolutely democratically.
>canidates are being appointed for a democratic election
Technically, Somali has democratic government. In fact, the legitimate democratic government controls less than a half of just one city.

Name: Anonymous 2011-08-30 13:48

>Do you know that many peaceful muslims frequently say "Allahu akbar!"

Those are called dead Muslims. They say it and set off the bomb. Then they are peaceful.

Name: Anonymous 2011-08-30 13:50

>You mean things like this? Hardly any difference

If he was in the Middle East, he would have been tortured and executed.

Name: Anonymous 2011-08-30 14:38

>>45
>>46
You have run out of arguments, I see.

Name: Anonymous 2011-08-30 16:05

All these nations run on the "strongman" social organization. And the West is just trying to impose their own strongmen. Nothing will change for the general public, except for McDonald's moving in.

Name: Anonymous 2011-08-30 18:25

>>47
Actually, that wasn't even me. I might reply tomorrow.

Name: Anonymous 2011-08-31 17:56

>>44
Inflation is something that sneaks up on a country. Couple that with the government severing relations with foreign businesses when they decided to rob the oil companies without warning, and you have an eventual economical disaster waiting to happen.

Yes, the oil companies gave the percentage Gaddafi demanded, which he then put into his own pocket, giving a pretty much undiclosed portion of it to the people. Overthrowing Gaddafi doesn't mean that the government has to cease their control of the oil wells. Now they're free to negotiate much better deals, but this time without it feeding state corruption.

As for assassinations, 1980-1987 Gaddafi succeeded in assassinating 25 political opponents OUTSIDE of Libya, in 37 attacks:
http://articles.latimes.com/1987-07-18/news/mn-604_1_amnesty-international
"Gaddafi and his revolutionary guard went public in March 1980 declaring that “the masses have the right to liquidate their enemies at home and abroad”."
http://english.libya.tv/2011/04/16/gaddafi’s-history-of-intimidation-and-assassinations/
There is also a list there of all the victims.
After this he continued harassing his own people in pretty much the same way.

Democratic rights does not mean american rights. In fact America has a poor record of democratic rights.

Gaddafi is a much, MUCH bigger evil than al-Qaeda has ever been. Al-Qaeda is pretty much muslim Hells Angels. That America appointed this group as its number one enemy, has been laughable. That America had to completely flatten entire cities in its war against this gang, is both hilarous and tragic.

So what you're worried about here, is not whether or not Libya gets a democratic society, but whether or not the people would want to vote for "the right party" or not. Personally I like Hamas. Anyone who hates Israels theocracy is okay by me, and there is nothing better that a militant organisation can do, than to get political instead. If Al-Qaeda would win an election somewhere, and run a country with the honest support of its people, then I'd applaud it. No matter who wins, at least the people has a choice.

>Technically, Somali has democratic government. In fact, the legitimate democratic government controls less than a half of just one city.
Are you saying that a democracy will be more powerless than Gaddafis rule?

Name: Anonymous 2011-08-31 19:08

gaddafi never wanted war huh? Same with hitler.

>>50
Did you miss the rebels genociding and running all the filthy niggers out of libya?

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-01 1:15

>>47
Not really, I was simply stating my opinions on the subject and didn't realize it was an ego contest for you. My apology, kind sir.

Of course, my statements were still true.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-01 1:18

>>50
Gaddafi was a pretty typical Muslim tyrant. His replacement will be just as bad. Not much changes in the Middle East.

Arab Spring...lol!

Name: RedCream 2011-09-01 4:06

Current reports are that members of Gaddafi's household have either been captured, or have fled in a motorcade to Algeria. Britain is back to its old tricks of freezing his overseas assets.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-01 4:47

>>54
1. Never be related to anyone ruling a country.
2. Never invest in english or american businesses. (Their governments might decide to rob you.)

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-01 8:25

>>55
They'll only rob you if they have an excuse, otherwise they won't bother rocking the boat and sapping investor confidence.

Most investors are not psychopathic dictators falling from grace so they have no reason to fear having their assets frozen.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-01 11:14

>>56
Any rich enough person can be painted black and have their asets frozen. It's not just world leaders. America and England has now become so poor that they are eager to rob anyone in this way.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-01 11:33

>>57
Obviously you don't live in the West, since what you describe is diametrically opposed to current practice. The rich have all the cards are playing those as hard as they can. The poor and the masses have no power.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-01 15:23

>>58
That is true as well: The rich rob the poor, and the state robs the rich.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-01 15:45

>>59
The state is the rich, so they don't rob themselves. When will you learn?

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-01 17:27

So Gadhafi wants his supporters to fight on, huh.  That's him - - always fighting to the last drop of someone else's blood.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-01 22:52

>>58
Don't forget the lobbyists, special interests, the unions, the media, 2 corrupt political parties and any man willing to vote with a gun.

There is a lot of power all over the place.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-02 11:24

>>60
I think I need to see some ID here. I'm 34. How old are you?

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-03 13:35

>>61
Are you surprised?  Remember this from March?
>We shall implement a ceasefire as soon as we've finished shooting at these civilians.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-10 6:49

Amazingly a lot of soldiers died in "Afganistan" when the "rebels" were taking over Tripoli...
And who has profit from Iraqi oil resources now? (you think it's going to be different in Libya?)...NATO is bringing chaos and power to the muslim brotherhood.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-10 9:44

>>65
Breaking news: soldiers die in war.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-10 10:59

I can't believe the Gaddafi fanboy doesn't think he had death squads.

Why are you like holocaust deniers, creationists and 9/11 truthers Gaddafi fanboy? Even the most biased estimates in you favor that stay within reason show Gaddafi to be a regular tyrant who used force to suppress political opposition even if he wasn't a fan of mass purges which sweep up innocents and persecute minorities.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-10 13:22

>>Breaking geographic news: Afganistan is not in Tripoli...

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-10 13:31

>>67 Why the "rebels" are killing blacks? Is that a part of democracy american-style?
And why Libya Ex-Islamic terrorist heads Tripoli Military Council?

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-10 14:42

When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross. — Sinclair Lewis 1935

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-10 14:55

Does not USA have death squads? Is it only ok for tyrants to protect 99% of country's people against 1% of extremists? And please, why Gaddafi opresses someone when he isn't a politician himself. Everybody knows that. And of course, if opposition was strong enough, there weren't any Lybian war longer than a week.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-10 15:15

>>69
Because Gaddafi started recruiting many black Africans in his militias after he gave up on pan-Arabism and embraced pan-Africanism.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-10 16:16

>>69
>Why the "rebels" are killing blacks?
Do you have a source for this that isn't Libyan TV?

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-10 17:14

g

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-10 17:14

g

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-10 17:14

fg

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-10 17:44

>>73
It's been mentioned on several news sources. They've been accused of a lot of different things including of mass rapes and such.

However, this is still Africa so it's not much of a surprise.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-11 6:48

http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/07/27/lies-of-the-libyan-war/

Lies of the Libyan War
by THOMAS MOUNTAIN

As exposed here on CounterPunch the lies used to justify the NATO war against Libya have surpassed those created to justify the invasion of Iraq. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch both had honest observers on the ground for months following the rebellion in eastern Libya and both have repudiated every major charge used to justify the NATO war on Libya.

According to the Amnesty observer, who is fluent in Arabic, there is not one confirmed instance of rape by the pro-Gadaffi fighters, not even a doctor who knew of one. All the Viagra mass rape stories were fabrications.

Amnesty could not verify a single "African mercenary" fighting for Gaddafi story, and the highly charged international satellite television accounts of African mercenaries raping women that were used to panic much of the eastern Libyan population into fleeing their homes were fabrications.

There were no confirmed accounts of helicopter gun ships attacking civilians and no jet fighters bombing people which completely invalidates any justification for the No-Fly Zone inSecurity Council resolution used as an excuse for NATO to launch its attacks on Libya.

After three months on the ground in rebel controlled territory, the Amnesty investigator could only confirm 110 deaths in Benghazi which included Gadaffi supporters.
Only 110 dead in Benghazi? Wait a minute, we were told thousands had died there, ten thousand even. No, only 110 lost their lives including pro-government people.

No rapes, no African mercenaries, no helicopter gun ships or bombers, and only 110 ten deaths prior to the launch of the NATO bombing campaign, every reason was based on a lie.

Today according to the Libyan Red Crescent Society, over 1,100 civilians have been killed by NATO bombs including over 400 women and children. Over 6,000 Libyan civilians have been injured or wounded by the bombing, many very seriously.

Compared to the war on Iraq, these numbers are tiny, but the reasons for the Libyan war have no merit in any form.
Saddam Hussein was evil, he invaded his neighbors in wars that killed up to a million. He used Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD’s) in the form of poison gas on both his neighbors and his own people, killing tens of thousands. He was brutal and corrupt and when American tanks rolled into Iraq the Iraqi people refused to fight for him, simply put their weapons down and went home.

Libya under Col. Gadaffi hasn’t invaded their neighbors. Gadaffi never used WMD’s on anyone, let alone his own people. As for Gadaffi being brutal, in Libya’s neighbor Algeria, the Algerian military fought a counterinsurgency for a decade in the 1990′s that witnessed the deaths of some 200,000 Algerians. Now that is brutal and nothing anywhere near this has happened in Libya.

In Egypt and Tunisia, western puppets like Mubarak and Ben Ali had almost no support amongst their people with few if anyone willing to fight and die to defend them.

The majority of the Libyan people are rallying behind the Libyan government and "the leader", Muammar Gadaffi, with over one million people demonstrating in support on July 1 in Tripoli, the capital of Libya. Thousands of Libyan youth are on the front lines fighting the rebels and despite thousands of NATO air strikes authentic journalists on the ground in western Libya report their morale remains high.

In Egypt the popular explosion that resulted in the Army seizing power from Mubarak began in the very poorest neighborhoods in Cairo and other Egyptian cities where the price of basic food items like bread, sugar and cooking oil had skyrocketed and lead to widespread hunger. In many parts of Egypt’s poor neighborhoods gasoline/benzene is easier to find then clean drinking water. Medical care and education is only for those with the money to pay for it. Life for the people of Tunisia is not that much better.

In contrast, the Libyan people have the longest life expectancy in the Arab world. The Libyan people have the best, free public health system in the Arab world. The Libyan people have the best, free public education system in the Arab world. Most Libyan families own their own home and most Libyan families own their own automobile. Libya is so much better off then its neighbors every year tens of thousands of Egyptians and Tunisians migrated to Libya to earn money to feed their families, doing the dirty work the Libyan people refused to do.

When it comes to how Gadaffi oversaw a dramatic rise in the standard of living for the Libyan people despite decades of UN inSecurity Council sanctions against the Libyan economy honest observers acknowledge that Gadaffi stands head and shoulders above the kings, sheiks, emirs and various dictators who rule the rest of the Arab world.

So why did NATO launch this war against Libya?

First of all Gadaffi was on the verge of creating a new banking system in Africa that was going to put the IMF, World Bank and assorted other western banksters out of business in Africa. No more predatory western loans used to cripple African economies, instead a $42 billion dollar African Investment Bank would be supplying major loans at little or even zero interest rates.

LIbya has funded major infrastructure projects across Africa that have begun to link up African economies and break the perpetual dependency on the western countries for imports have been taking place. Here in Eritrea the new road connecting Eritrea and Sudan is just one small example.

What seem to have finally tipped the balance in favor of direct western military intervention was the reported demand by Gadaffi that the USA oil companies who have long been major players in the Libyan petroleum industry were going to have to compensate Libya to the tune of tens of billions of dollars for the damage done to the Libyan economy by the USA instigated "Lockerbie Bombing" sanctions imposed by the UN inSecurity Council throughout the 1990′s into early 2000′s. This is based on the unearthing of evidence that the CIA paid millions of dollars to witnesses in the Lockerbie Bombing trial to change their stories to implicate Libya which was used as the basis for the very damaging UN sanctions against Libya. The government of the USA lied and damaged Libya so the USA oil companies were going to have to pay up to cover the cost of their governments actions. Not hard to see why Gadaffi had to go isn’t it?

Add the fact that Gadaffi had signaled clearly that he saw both Libya’s and Africa’s future economic development linked more to China and Russia rather than the west and it was just a matter of time before the CIA’s contingency plan to overthrow the Libyan government was put on the front burner.

NATO’s war against Libya has much more in common with NATO’s Kosovo war against Serbia. But one still cannot compare Gadaffi to Saddam or even the much smaller time criminals in the Serbian leadership. The Libyan War lies are worse than Iraq.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-11 9:55

>>78
Oh, look, another so-called "reporter" making shit up to make a point.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-11 10:26

>>79
>so-called "reporter"
>THOMAS MOUNTAIN
Err... this guy is a quite known and respected journalist in the USA.

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List