Looks Like Gaddafi is History

Damocles said:
I don't think that benevolence is enough of a reason to exchange one overbearing government for one of a different type. While I agree we should get out of the ME and meddling in their affairs, I think that this meddling won't change anything at all. We bombed more brown people by remote control, do you remember when that caused "terrorism" or is it okay of it is a D by the name of the President?

It's stupid to say it is okay here to replace a dictator with some other dictatorial government that hates us equally as much as the previous one, but IMO it was not worth the treasure we spent to do that. We need to spend that money building the new infrastructure for US energy concerns to get us off foreign oil and end our interest in this portion of the world. Saying, "It's all good because this time we didn't choose the leader," is, IMO, ignorant of the history of the region. End our interest there, that will actually do something.
Click to expand...


Damocles is correct. Our "policy" in Libya (which most JPP-ers couldn't locate without Google if their life depended on it) has been an unmitigated disaster.


Obama was wrong to get us involved. His actions were impeachable. When he waffled in the face of opposition - which is what he does best, apparently - he hid the illegal adventure under a mask and carried on.


The moth-eaten "NATO" disguise fooled nobody.


If anyone thinks the rebels will be friendly, I have a bridge for sale.
 
\(\(V\/V)/)/ said:
Damocles is correct. Our "policy" in Libya (which most JPP-ers couldn't locate without Google if their life depended on it) has been an unmitigated disaster.


Obama was wrong to get us involved. His actions were impeachable. When he waffled in the face of opposition - which is what he does best, apparently - he hid the illegal adventure under a mask and carried on.


The moth-eaten "NATO" disguise fooled nobody.


If anyone thinks the rebels will be friendly, I have a bridge for sale.
Click to expand...

I don't care if they are or are not. Let them run it for the best interest of their nation. They may not like us but do you really think they want to cross swords with us? Probably not.
 
Damocles said:
I would root for the people of Libya, but I fear they'll simply be ruled by a more Muslim government that still hates America. It's hard to choose between Gaddafi and Al Qaeda...
Click to expand...

So if its not Quaddafi its Al Queda?
If they are more Muslim, thats automatically bad?
If a democratic process elects a government hostile to America, we should be opposed to the democratic process?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I don't care if they are or are not. Let them run it for the best interest of their nation. They may not like us but do you really think they want to cross swords with us? Probably not.
Click to expand...


We should've stayed out of it.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Well I agree with that sentiment but what does that have to do with democratization of the ME? Or hell, even regime change in Libya for that matter?
Click to expand...

You didn't bother reading the post.

In Libya we bombed still more brown people by remote control.
In Libya we exchanged one dictatorial government for what is likely to be another, for this we will not be thanked, rather we'll still be vilified.
In Libya we did all those things which under Bush we heard "created terrorism"...

On and on. This isn't a better action because we did it for some altruistic reason, the result is the same because it is the same action for still more "regime change"...
 
Jarod said:
So if its not Quaddafi its Al Queda?
If they are more Muslim, thats automatically bad?
If a democratic process elects a government hostile to America, we should be opposed to the democratic process?
Click to expand...

We should not be the promoter, nor involve ourselves in it at all. You, again, were one of the people who told me that bombing people by remote control caused "collateral damage" and "created terrorists"... Yet you seem to support it ever more readily because of a D next to a name. I find this hypocritical to an extreme, such hypocrisy never ceases to disgust me. Bombing "brown people" (that's how you and others put it back then) isn't the altruistic action you seem to believe.

While I'll be on the side of Libya's population, I fear we have done nothing to benefit either them or us.
 
Damocles said:
You didn't bother reading the post.

In Libya we bombed still more brown people by remote control.
In Libya we exchanged one dictatorial government for what is likely to be another, for this we will not be thanked, rather we'll still be vilified.
In Libya we did all those things which under Bush we heard "created terrorism"...

On and on. This isn't a better action because we did it for some altruistic reason, the result is the same because it is the same action for still more "regime change"...
Click to expand...

Dude you're not only comparing apples to oranges your drawing conclusions when the game is still in play. You have no idea if any on these things will happen. The situation in Libya is far more comparable to the situation in Syria and Egypt and hardly even comparable to Iraq at all. You're just spinning to make partisan snipes.
 
Damocles said:
We should not be the promoter, nor involve ourselves in it at all. You, again, were one of the people who told me that bombing people by remote control caused "collateral damage" and "created terrorists"... Yet you seem to support it ever more readily because of a D next to a name. I find this hypocritical to an extreme, such hypocrisy never ceases to disgust me. Bombing "brown people" (that's how you and others put it back then) isn't the altruistic action you seem to believe.

While I'll be on the side of Libya's population, I fear we have done nothing to benefit either them or us.
Click to expand...


I do not belive I ever said such a thing about bombing by "remote Control".
I dont belive I made such comments re: "brown people".
You did not answer my questions....????????????????????
 
Mr. T said:
speculation: Enough to stage another nobel peace prize for Obammy before the elections.
Click to expand...

No, the Republicans have convenced there followers that Up is Down, Right is Left, Educated is uneducated, Sciense is bad, not answering questions is answering them, walking away from tough questions is braver than answering them, Christ is to be feared and gred is to be loved, and winning the Nobel Peace Prize is evil.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Dude you're not only comparing apples to oranges your drawing conclusions when the game is still in play. You have no idea if any on these things will happen. The situation in Libya is far more comparable to the situation in Syria and Egypt and hardly even comparable to Iraq at all. You're just spinning to make partisan snipes.
Click to expand...

Of course he's just sniping.

Damo's just mad because he backed a loser for 8 years who did nothing but line his own pockets, and now, he has to give credit to the LEFT! It was leaders from THE LEFT that took out Bin Laden and helped to take out one of the ME's most reviled and deeply entrenched dictators, Gaddafi.

They supported Bush with all their little hearts and souls, but now can't muster up the same level of support since it was a LIBERAL CinC who helped get two of the world's biggest terrorists...Suck on that one, chickenhawks!
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Of course he's just sniping. Damo's just mad because he backed a loser for 8 years who did nothing but line his own pockets, and now, he has to give credit to the LEFT! It was leaders from THE LEFT that took out Bin Laden and helped to take out one of the ME's most reviled and deeply entrenched dictators, Gaddafi. They supported Bush with all their little hearts and souls, but now can't muster up the same level of support since it was a LIBERAL CinC who helped get two of the world's biggest terrorists...Suck on that one, chickenhawks!
Click to expand...

I cannnot agree. We had no business engaging in regime change or nation-building in either case.
 
There seems to be an underlying belief here, and I might well be wrong, that Libya = Muslim, that Muslim nations do not like America, that their ambition is to destroy America and that in time they certainly will.
That is sad.
It harks back to the bush policy of scaring the shit out of Americans with real and imaginary bogeymen to make them more maleable and more likely to allow the extreme right fat cats to lay their grubbly little hands on even more that should rightly belong to the people of your country.
You have no more reason to fear most Muslims than to fear most Christians. Muslim nations have quite enough to occupy their minds building and rebuilding their nations from the mess left by the puppets we (the west) promoted and allowed free rein.
Why can't Americans (who after all are honourable men! [after Mark Anthony]) put these fears and superstitions behind them and work to save their own nation from the mess it is in? A mess, incidentally, not entirely of their own making but vastly exacerbated by the idiocy and mind boggling ignorance of bush.
 
Lowaicue said:
There seems to be an underlying belief here, and I might well be wrong, that Libya = Muslim, that Muslim nations do not like America, that their ambition is to destroy America and that in time they certainly will.
That is sad.
Click to expand...
For once we agree. The new Libyan government will almost certainly be the most moderate one in the ME, with the possible exception of Iraq and Jordan. I fully support our new Libyan comrades and it's one of the few policies of Obamas I supported from the get go. Well, partially. I would have liked it better if we just trained the rebels and supplied them, not actually bomb them. The differences might be slight, but its different enough in my eyes.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Of course he's just sniping.

Damo's just mad because he backed a loser for 8 years who did nothing but line his own pockets, and now, he has to give credit to the LEFT! It was leaders from THE LEFT that took out Bin Laden and helped to take out one of the ME's most reviled and deeply entrenched dictators, Gaddafi.

They supported Bush with all their little hearts and souls, but now can't muster up the same level of support since it was a LIBERAL CinC who helped get two of the world's biggest terrorists...Suck on that one, chickenhawks!
Click to expand...

Here you only make clear your ignorance of me...

Do me a favor, stop telling me who I "backed" and maybe read a post or two.
 
Damo.... Can you answer these questions? Or are have taken a page from Christine O'Donnel and are going to pretend you already did....

So if its not Quaddafi its Al Queda?
If they are more Muslim, thats automatically bad?
If a democratic process elects a government hostile to America, we should be opposed to the democratic process?
 
Jarod said:
Damo.... Can you answer these questions? Or are have taken a page from Christine O'Donnel and are going to pretend you already did....

So if its not Quaddafi its Al Queda?
If they are more Muslim, thats automatically bad?
If a democratic process elects a government hostile to America, we should be opposed to the democratic process?
Click to expand...

Probably, according to all the experts I have heard the Muslim Brotherhood is going to run the show and they are not benevolent.
No.
No, we should leave them alone. We should have in the first place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top