4 ms·

Look at what happened in Libya. Gaddafi spent the last 10 years working with the UN and the US, disarming his country, going on camera shaking hands and smilin

Look at what happened in Libya. Gaddafi spent the last 10 years working with the UN and the US, disarming his country, going on camera shaking hands and smiling with US, French and Italian delegates, ambassadors, and presidents. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=856HOHH5UJE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=856HOHH5UJE Then he became a "despot" overnight that has been torturing and murdering everyone for the last 40 years... First a group of people attacked a military base / weapons cache and were met with deadly force (what the news reported as something else), and then a sworn enemy of Gaddafi reported that Gaddafi was bombing more innocent and unarmed people. That was all we needed to hear! The whole thing was a setup, and well prepared. Now Libya is a torn country where murder, rape, torture, and general human suffering are the norms. Do you really think Syria is going to be the different one? The one where we come in and fix things properly. If you want something another country has, or want to prevent or destabilize an alliance, just go in and stir things up a bit. That country will split up into factions, one fighting another, and you get whatever you want on the cheap. http://libyancivilwar.blogspot.com/2011/08/bombing-his-own-people-really.html http://libyancivilwar.blogspot.com/2011/08/bombing-his-own-p...

pooriaazimi 15y ago
yep... And it was I (with the help of NATO of course) who bombed Libyan cities. Poor Muammar, just like Caesar, he was surrounded by bad friends who killed him at the end... :( Some one's sworn enemy reporting something about him does not make their point invalid; Just like Gizmodo reporting bad stuff about iPhone 4's antenna doesn't mean iPhone 4's antenna design is flawless. By the way, it was the first time I've heard that Gaddafi was a sworn enemy of Arabs! Last time I heard, he was The King of Arabs. Maybe you meant Saudis, but even then you would've been wrong.
- powertower 15y ago
  Gaddafi was not on good terms with the Arab League or the states within it, I certainly wouldn't call him their "King".
  - pooriaazimi 15y ago
    He called himself 'The Arab King' and 'King of Kings'... They were not the best allies - but allies nonetheless; by no means were they sworn enemies. As an example, currently France and UK are not in good political terms, but they are not considered enemies, rather allies with different interests.
    - powertower 15y ago
      So what is your point about Libya?
afterburner 15y ago
"Gaddafi spent the last 10 years working with the UN and the US" Yeah, and before those 10 years of rapprochement, Gaddafi was a pariah on the world stage for 30 years, to the West and Arab countries, who allowed terrorists to train on his soil. He is one of the worlds most succesful despots, and one of the least benevolent; he amassed massive fortunes over 40 years of reign, and his people barely benefited from the riches spewing from Libya's earth. The 10 years of relatively good relations, that was the exception, in 40 years of standing alone being a tyrant no-one cared to much to dislodge until now. Italy was already a partner in its oil-extraction business. Despite the obvious incentives, this really was a case of a long-standing bad guy finally going too far, declaring open war on his own people, threatening to slaughter thousands (literally threatening this). The existence of an organized and geographically defendable opposition, a coastline favouring easy carrier access, and diplomatic support from the Arab league in favour of military intervention, the case for a military reaction was easy to make. If you're worried about intervention in Syria, I doubt it is being considered so easily. Syria is a far, far more complicated problem, both militarily and politically. Syria has been involved in nearly every major event in the area in the last 60 years. And really, I'm not sure what your point is in defending an obvious selfish lunatic tyrant.
- powertower 15y ago
  I see the media has helped you understand the way the world really is, and how Libya was before the liberation and enlightment process happened. Before this intervention, Libya was considered to be the Switzerland of the African Continent (relatively speaking of course). http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26686 http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26686 You're notions that it was some type of a hell hole, are misplaced to the wrong pivotal point in its history. It's all been the same formula... 1. Arm a number of "protestors". 2. Get said protestors to attack military and gov personnel and vehicles with ak47s and rocket launchers. 3. Let them go back into their homes. 4. Claim response is unprovoked mass slaughter of innocent lives. 5. Get video showing innocents caught in the cross fire. 6. Start calling the leadership despots and monsters. 7. Claim that our side is now the majority of the populace. 8. Fight the evil! 9. Divvy up the tasty pie.

pooriaazimi 15y ago

yep... And it was I (with the help of NATO of course) who bombed Libyan cities. Poor Muammar, just like Caesar, he was surrounded by bad friends who killed him at the end... :( Some one's sworn enemy reporting something about him does not make their point invalid; Just like Gizmodo reporting bad stuff about iPhone 4's antenna doesn't mean iPhone 4's antenna design is flawless. By the way, it was the first time I've heard that Gaddafi was a sworn enemy of Arabs! Last time I heard, he was The King of Arabs. Maybe you meant Saudis, but even then you would've been wrong.

powertower 15y ago
Gaddafi was not on good terms with the Arab League or the states within it, I certainly wouldn't call him their "King".
- pooriaazimi 15y ago
  He called himself 'The Arab King' and 'King of Kings'... They were not the best allies - but allies nonetheless; by no means were they sworn enemies. As an example, currently France and UK are not in good political terms, but they are not considered enemies, rather allies with different interests.
  - powertower 15y ago
    So what is your point about Libya?

afterburner 15y ago

"Gaddafi spent the last 10 years working with the UN and the US" Yeah, and before those 10 years of rapprochement, Gaddafi was a pariah on the world stage for 30 years, to the West and Arab countries, who allowed terrorists to train on his soil. He is one of the worlds most succesful despots, and one of the least benevolent; he amassed massive fortunes over 40 years of reign, and his people barely benefited from the riches spewing from Libya's earth. The 10 years of relatively good relations, that was the exception, in 40 years of standing alone being a tyrant no-one cared to much to dislodge until now. Italy was already a partner in its oil-extraction business. Despite the obvious incentives, this really was a case of a long-standing bad guy finally going too far, declaring open war on his own people, threatening to slaughter thousands (literally threatening this). The existence of an organized and geographically defendable opposition, a coastline favouring easy carrier access, and diplomatic support from the Arab league in favour of military intervention, the case for a military reaction was easy to make. If you're worried about intervention in Syria, I doubt it is being considered so easily. Syria is a far, far more complicated problem, both militarily and politically. Syria has been involved in nearly every major event in the area in the last 60 years. And really, I'm not sure what your point is in defending an obvious selfish lunatic tyrant.

powertower 15y ago
I see the media has helped you understand the way the world really is, and how Libya was before the liberation and enlightment process happened. Before this intervention, Libya was considered to be the Switzerland of the African Continent (relatively speaking of course). http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26686 http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26686 You're notions that it was some type of a hell hole, are misplaced to the wrong pivotal point in its history. It's all been the same formula... 1. Arm a number of "protestors". 2. Get said protestors to attack military and gov personnel and vehicles with ak47s and rocket launchers. 3. Let them go back into their homes. 4. Claim response is unprovoked mass slaughter of innocent lives. 5. Get video showing innocents caught in the cross fire. 6. Start calling the leadership despots and monsters. 7. Claim that our side is now the majority of the populace. 8. Fight the evil! 9. Divvy up the tasty pie.