koan;1357559 wrote: I acknowledged within the same post that it's an easy thing to do, pulling bits from a text like that. I do, nonetheless, find it rather odd that some of those words exist next to each other in a piece of literature meant to be taken seriously.
It's easy to clarify the oddness, isn't it. Read the quotes in context. Why did you bring them up at all, given how "it's an easy thing to do, pulling bits from a text like that". I've said I find the Green Book an interesting read, that ought to count for more than some snide git taking cheap shots by quoting sentences out of context and calling them "top 10 quotes". Top in what sense? A dismissive one as opposed to an enquiring one, I suggest.
The USA Position on Libya
The USA Position on Libya
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
If that's your solution then, you are offering those quotes in context as bits you approve of. I somehow doubt that's the case. Please tell me which bits you approve of or I'd read it and be struck by the stupid parts, overlooking the parts that you want me to see.
Aside from that, writing a book doesn't mean he's living according to it. To assess a head of state based not on his actions or laws but on a book he wrote once seems a little too utopian fantasy.
Aside from that, writing a book doesn't mean he's living according to it. To assess a head of state based not on his actions or laws but on a book he wrote once seems a little too utopian fantasy.
The USA Position on Libya
He impresses me because he was once capable of writing it. He engages with long-standing dilemmas and articulates his proposed mechanisms to cater for them. Take the bits he was being mocked for above, for example. “Mandatory education is a coercive education that suppresses freedom. To impose specific teaching materials is a dictatorial act” - it's a specific comment about the use of propagandist teaching materials sourced from the country's colonial masters. While they remain the basis for schooling the mindset of the people will remain that of a subsidiary client. He identified a problem of major proportions at the time he was planning the governance of Libya, and he put it to the people's committees to find ways forward.
“Labour in return for wages is virtually the same as enslaving a human being. In a socialist society no person may own a private means of transportation for the purpose of renting to others, because this represents controlling the needs of others.” - I find it hard to understand anyone saying it's untrue. of course it's true. Wage slavery is the basis of the capitalist system. I doubt the accuracy of the translation to "transportation", I think the original must be "means of production" though goodness knows it's true enough about transportation too.
“No representation of the people—representation is a falsehood. The mere existence of parliaments underlies the absence of the people, for democracy can only exist with the presence of the people and not in the presence of representatives of the people.” - I couldn't have put it better myself. The Soviet principle of devolved committees which he adopted into the Green Book at least involves everyone in the community. I recognise that not everyone in the community wants to be involved and that the committees became, in time, discredited to an extent, but full marks to the chap for making the effort. He doesn't want to govern, he wants to protect the revolution. What a guy.
“Labour in return for wages is virtually the same as enslaving a human being. In a socialist society no person may own a private means of transportation for the purpose of renting to others, because this represents controlling the needs of others.” - I find it hard to understand anyone saying it's untrue. of course it's true. Wage slavery is the basis of the capitalist system. I doubt the accuracy of the translation to "transportation", I think the original must be "means of production" though goodness knows it's true enough about transportation too.
“No representation of the people—representation is a falsehood. The mere existence of parliaments underlies the absence of the people, for democracy can only exist with the presence of the people and not in the presence of representatives of the people.” - I couldn't have put it better myself. The Soviet principle of devolved committees which he adopted into the Green Book at least involves everyone in the community. I recognise that not everyone in the community wants to be involved and that the committees became, in time, discredited to an extent, but full marks to the chap for making the effort. He doesn't want to govern, he wants to protect the revolution. What a guy.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
Let's say that The Green Book is a masterful work of socialist theory. I'll, without even reading the whole thing, be willing to concede that it may be true. That still doesn't mean anything in regards to the country of Libya and how the writer of that book handled his leadership. I've personally watched someone with pure ideals become tyrannical when given an ounce of power.
Give me something real. Something current. Something of substance. I'm willing to concede to reason but not to fantasy and fiction. As far as I can see his theories might be based on altruistic ideas but his practice as the ruler of a people resulted in them rebelling against him.
Additionally, my opinion or anyone elses opinion of him as a person, a thinker, a writer, or a philosopher is completely irrelevant unless we live in his country. The people who live there decided they didn't want him anymore. Instead of opening a discussion he tried to kill them.
Give me something real. Something current. Something of substance. I'm willing to concede to reason but not to fantasy and fiction. As far as I can see his theories might be based on altruistic ideas but his practice as the ruler of a people resulted in them rebelling against him.
Additionally, my opinion or anyone elses opinion of him as a person, a thinker, a writer, or a philosopher is completely irrelevant unless we live in his country. The people who live there decided they didn't want him anymore. Instead of opening a discussion he tried to kill them.
The USA Position on Libya
koan;1357640 wrote: The people who live there decided they didn't want him anymore. Instead of opening a discussion he tried to kill them.
As has been conceded time and again in this and other threads, some unknown fraction of the people who live there decided they didn't want him anymore. He made a radio broadcast threatening mayhem. I expect he was upset. He did not, regardless of what you assert, try to kill them: those who decided they didn't want him anymore.
The acts of his internal security service may have killed a few protesters, which brings Kent State University to mind. Internal security services do that. One wishes they didn't. His army may very well, on his instructions, have suppressed the beginning of a civil war. I'm sure he'd have succeeded, and at far less loss of life, had Western governments not intervened militarily.
The responsibility for so many deaths, and the continued likelihood of far more, lies precisely there, with foreign opportunist governments creating a bandwagon out of thin air. Blaming their propaganda-created bogeyman just encourages the buggers.
As has been conceded time and again in this and other threads, some unknown fraction of the people who live there decided they didn't want him anymore. He made a radio broadcast threatening mayhem. I expect he was upset. He did not, regardless of what you assert, try to kill them: those who decided they didn't want him anymore.
The acts of his internal security service may have killed a few protesters, which brings Kent State University to mind. Internal security services do that. One wishes they didn't. His army may very well, on his instructions, have suppressed the beginning of a civil war. I'm sure he'd have succeeded, and at far less loss of life, had Western governments not intervened militarily.
The responsibility for so many deaths, and the continued likelihood of far more, lies precisely there, with foreign opportunist governments creating a bandwagon out of thin air. Blaming their propaganda-created bogeyman just encourages the buggers.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
koan;1357640 wrote: I've personally watched someone with pure ideals become tyrannical when given an ounce of power.Let's leave my moderating technique out of this shall we?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
spot;1357641 wrote: As has been conceded time and again in this and other threads, some unknown fraction of the people who live there decided they didn't want him anymore. He made a radio broadcast threatening mayhem. I expect he was upset. He did not, regardless of what you assert, try to kill them: those who decided they didn't want him anymore.
The acts of his internal security service may have killed a few protesters, which brings Kent State University to mind. Internal security services do that. One wishes they didn't. His army may very well, on his instructions, have suppressed the beginning of a civil war. I'm sure he'd have succeeded, and at far less loss of life, had Western governments not intervened militarily.
The responsibility for so many deaths, and the continued likelihood of far more, lies precisely there, with foreign opportunist governments creating a bandwagon out of thin air. Blaming their propaganda-created bogeyman just encourages the buggers.
That's your fiction. You have yet to show it is fact.
I wrote that line about threatening to kill them knowing that you pick on the wording instead of the bigger picture.
He wrote a book that was based on people loving him and his ideas. The world consists of many people. Many of those people have their own ideas and they shouldn't be punished for having them. He wasn't prepared to deal with that so he created law 75 in 1973. At that point he failed.
spot;1357642 wrote: Let's leave my moderating technique out of this shall we?
ha. I mean real power.
The acts of his internal security service may have killed a few protesters, which brings Kent State University to mind. Internal security services do that. One wishes they didn't. His army may very well, on his instructions, have suppressed the beginning of a civil war. I'm sure he'd have succeeded, and at far less loss of life, had Western governments not intervened militarily.
The responsibility for so many deaths, and the continued likelihood of far more, lies precisely there, with foreign opportunist governments creating a bandwagon out of thin air. Blaming their propaganda-created bogeyman just encourages the buggers.
That's your fiction. You have yet to show it is fact.
I wrote that line about threatening to kill them knowing that you pick on the wording instead of the bigger picture.
He wrote a book that was based on people loving him and his ideas. The world consists of many people. Many of those people have their own ideas and they shouldn't be punished for having them. He wasn't prepared to deal with that so he created law 75 in 1973. At that point he failed.
spot;1357642 wrote: Let's leave my moderating technique out of this shall we?
ha. I mean real power.
The USA Position on Libya
koan;1357643 wrote: He wasn't prepared to deal with that so he created law 75 in 1973. At that point he failed.What happened to "Give me something real. Something current. Something of substance."?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
I've been wondering that for a long time in this thread. You gave me a book he wrote.
The USA Position on Libya
The Green Book is Gaddafi. Gaddafi is The Green Book. Either manifests the other. If you want to discover what Trotsky's driving compulsions were, you read My Life. If you want to discover what Bill Clinton's driving compulsions were, you read My Life. If you want to discover what Golda Meir or Fidel Castro or Richard Wagner's driving compulsions were, you read My Life. Gaddafi was slightly more original, he called his testament The Green Book.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
Did you ever notice how sometimes people say one thing and do another?
It happens sometimes.
It happens sometimes.
The USA Position on Libya
Every political ideology faces this problem:
The USA Position on Libya
I'm only on page four of The Green Book. Already I have issues with it. This part is important to me because he is setting up a premise. If his premise is flawed the rest becomes meaningless. This is what I have, the bold parts being what the book says and the brackets being the thoughts that arose when I read it:
The form of government over a people causes strife.
(In what way? Strife between peoples and their government, between two different peoples with different governments? It sounds like a thesis. Perhaps he'll write the essay to prove it.)
Conflict within family units is often about the government.
(why? they can't agree on who to vote for? imo, usually it's about who's turn it is to do the dishes or why dumbass hasn't found a job yet but has time to play video games. Again, perhaps he'll write the essay.)
No one has yet solved this problem.
(No one has yet proved the thesis that it is a problem)
The Green Book is the answer to the problem of how to govern people
(I think this is his actual thesis but the preceding statements muddy the water a bit.)
All political systems that currently exist are fueled by power struggles between those competing to rule it. If a country is taken over by an individual, group, party or class through victorious struggle they defeat geniune democracy.
(But, that's how Gaddafi got there)
He clarifies democracy as being dictatorial when 51% vote for one leader and the other 49% are stuck with the leader the others voted for.
(So, the 49% are having their government imposed on them. Imposed by whom? The majority of the people in the country. To avoid this would require 100% majority. I think Gaddafi either doesn't get math and percentages or doesn't get that his philosophy means he is running a dictatorship if even one person doesn't want him as a leader.)
The form of government over a people causes strife.
(In what way? Strife between peoples and their government, between two different peoples with different governments? It sounds like a thesis. Perhaps he'll write the essay to prove it.)
Conflict within family units is often about the government.
(why? they can't agree on who to vote for? imo, usually it's about who's turn it is to do the dishes or why dumbass hasn't found a job yet but has time to play video games. Again, perhaps he'll write the essay.)
No one has yet solved this problem.
(No one has yet proved the thesis that it is a problem)
The Green Book is the answer to the problem of how to govern people
(I think this is his actual thesis but the preceding statements muddy the water a bit.)
All political systems that currently exist are fueled by power struggles between those competing to rule it. If a country is taken over by an individual, group, party or class through victorious struggle they defeat geniune democracy.
(But, that's how Gaddafi got there)
He clarifies democracy as being dictatorial when 51% vote for one leader and the other 49% are stuck with the leader the others voted for.
(So, the 49% are having their government imposed on them. Imposed by whom? The majority of the people in the country. To avoid this would require 100% majority. I think Gaddafi either doesn't get math and percentages or doesn't get that his philosophy means he is running a dictatorship if even one person doesn't want him as a leader.)
The USA Position on Libya
That's your fiction. You have yet to show it is fact.
It seems pretty set in fact to me. Matter of fact it's about as close as we're going to get considering the dearth of said facts so I'm going to look on it as a damn good assessment of the whole stinking situation.
As far as I can see his theories might be based on altruistic ideas but his practice as the ruler of a people resulted in them rebelling against him.
Who is rebelling? That's the key question. It seems to me that Mr Q has done quite a lot with the oil revenue Libya got, they have built the GMMR system, one of the largest aquaduct systems ever built in history. All of Libya has benefited from it. Maybe some think they have been left out but it seems to me that the reasons for that are how it was built, people who were hooked into the system earlier benefited earlier than those further down the line. Family J at the 510 mile mark are not going to get hooked into the system as soon as family A at the 5 mile mark. So I guess it's cool for family J to murder family A then?
They also have cradle to the grave medical care and free education. I guess that's bad too.
I simply think that you Koan are jumping right on the hate wagon without thinking things through. It's unlike you.
It seems pretty set in fact to me. Matter of fact it's about as close as we're going to get considering the dearth of said facts so I'm going to look on it as a damn good assessment of the whole stinking situation.
As far as I can see his theories might be based on altruistic ideas but his practice as the ruler of a people resulted in them rebelling against him.
Who is rebelling? That's the key question. It seems to me that Mr Q has done quite a lot with the oil revenue Libya got, they have built the GMMR system, one of the largest aquaduct systems ever built in history. All of Libya has benefited from it. Maybe some think they have been left out but it seems to me that the reasons for that are how it was built, people who were hooked into the system earlier benefited earlier than those further down the line. Family J at the 510 mile mark are not going to get hooked into the system as soon as family A at the 5 mile mark. So I guess it's cool for family J to murder family A then?
They also have cradle to the grave medical care and free education. I guess that's bad too.
I simply think that you Koan are jumping right on the hate wagon without thinking things through. It's unlike you.
The USA Position on Libya
koan;1357681 wrote: The form of government over a people causes strife.
(In what way? Strife between peoples and their government, between two different peoples with different governments?Am I to answer each bolded point, or are you musing?
Between people and government. The Social Contract, however it's formed, hands government the right to coerce some or all of its citizens. If it doesn't, the political system accepted by the Social Contract is "Anarchy". Every enlightenment author from Locke, Hulme and Bentham onward have recognized and accepted the need for coercion, Gaddafi's laying out just the same framework that they did. He's writing in a very recognizable form, laying out his grounding elements of philosophy before synthesizing his proposals.
(In what way? Strife between peoples and their government, between two different peoples with different governments?Am I to answer each bolded point, or are you musing?
Between people and government. The Social Contract, however it's formed, hands government the right to coerce some or all of its citizens. If it doesn't, the political system accepted by the Social Contract is "Anarchy". Every enlightenment author from Locke, Hulme and Bentham onward have recognized and accepted the need for coercion, Gaddafi's laying out just the same framework that they did. He's writing in a very recognizable form, laying out his grounding elements of philosophy before synthesizing his proposals.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
The world has both the space and the need, in my opinion, for different political experiments. It's unfortunate that Western capitalist governments are so terrified of the alternatives posed by the likes of Castro, Ortega, Chavez and Gaddafi, and they're only examples who managed to survive.
I think they're actually going to fall to an entirely unexpected quarter in the form of the belligerent intransigent uncompromising Richard Stallman, who's far more extreme than any of those I just mentioned.
I think they're actually going to fall to an entirely unexpected quarter in the form of the belligerent intransigent uncompromising Richard Stallman, who's far more extreme than any of those I just mentioned.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
Sometimes you need a certain type of government, in times of severe crisis you need a dictatorship. Someone once said that if Russia and America were to have a nuclear exchange America in the aftermath would become the worlds largest concentration camp. I don't know concentration camps to be "democratic" places.
Here's a link to the aquaduct project in Libya.
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Libya's thirst for 'fossil water'
It's quite impressive and frankly considering its size I hate to say that I doubt America could build something like this. I'd also like to point out that Libya has become a very successful country in its own right. It makes me wonder if a lot of the reasoning behind this aggression are just that fact. We can't have rigimes like that doing better than we are. It's embarrassing.
Here's a link to the aquaduct project in Libya.
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Libya's thirst for 'fossil water'
It's quite impressive and frankly considering its size I hate to say that I doubt America could build something like this. I'd also like to point out that Libya has become a very successful country in its own right. It makes me wonder if a lot of the reasoning behind this aggression are just that fact. We can't have rigimes like that doing better than we are. It's embarrassing.
The USA Position on Libya
I'm only discussing Gaddafi's merit or lack thereof to pass the time while we wait to see how events unfold. And wait to see if spot gets an answer from either of the reporters who have been there and seen Gaddafi manufacturing dead children. (eta: yes the child is dead but she wasn't his child till she was dying)
The reason my opinion on Libya differs from my opinion on Iraq is a) The Libyans asked for help b)the Libyans asked for help and c) the Libyans asked for help
get it?
The reason my opinion on Libya differs from my opinion on Iraq is a) The Libyans asked for help b)the Libyans asked for help and c) the Libyans asked for help
get it?
The USA Position on Libya
spot;1357686 wrote: Am I to answer each bolded point, or are you musing?
Between people and government. The Social Contract, however it's formed, hands government the right to coerce some or all of its citizens. If it doesn't, the political system accepted by the Social Contract is "Anarchy". Every enlightenment author from Locke, Hulme and Bentham onward have recognized and accepted the need for coercion, Gaddafi's laying out just the same framework that they did. He's writing in a very recognizable form, laying out his grounding elements of philosophy before synthesizing his proposals.
I'd have been more interested in your thoughts on government being the source of nuclear family conflict. Of course not everyone wants the same government system. That's why voting systems were developed... so that the majority decides instead of no one. You need a system to poll the people to find out what they want or no one is represented. When you poll it should have a result and it seems more fair to go with what the most people want instead of what the fewer people want. Sucks to be in the minority but they should start pounding the pavement harder to tip the 51% requirement in their favour. Explain to me how his 49% problem is actually a solvable problem. How do you satisfy them without sacrificing the 51%?
Between people and government. The Social Contract, however it's formed, hands government the right to coerce some or all of its citizens. If it doesn't, the political system accepted by the Social Contract is "Anarchy". Every enlightenment author from Locke, Hulme and Bentham onward have recognized and accepted the need for coercion, Gaddafi's laying out just the same framework that they did. He's writing in a very recognizable form, laying out his grounding elements of philosophy before synthesizing his proposals.
I'd have been more interested in your thoughts on government being the source of nuclear family conflict. Of course not everyone wants the same government system. That's why voting systems were developed... so that the majority decides instead of no one. You need a system to poll the people to find out what they want or no one is represented. When you poll it should have a result and it seems more fair to go with what the most people want instead of what the fewer people want. Sucks to be in the minority but they should start pounding the pavement harder to tip the 51% requirement in their favour. Explain to me how his 49% problem is actually a solvable problem. How do you satisfy them without sacrificing the 51%?
The USA Position on Libya
koan;1357728 wrote: The reason my opinion on Libya differs from my opinion on Iraq is a) The Libyans asked for help b)the Libyans asked for help and c) the Libyans asked for help
get it?
Similarly, many opportunist Iraqis on the make asked for the "liberation" of Iraq. Some of them, if I remember, were called Chalabi. The majority of Iraqis didn't exactly thank him for bringing on the destruction of their country. "Chalabi failed to win a seat in parliament in the December 2005 elections, and when the new Iraqi cabinet was announced in May 2006, he was not awarded a post", to quote his entry on Wikipedia.
get it?
Similarly, many opportunist Iraqis on the make asked for the "liberation" of Iraq. Some of them, if I remember, were called Chalabi. The majority of Iraqis didn't exactly thank him for bringing on the destruction of their country. "Chalabi failed to win a seat in parliament in the December 2005 elections, and when the new Iraqi cabinet was announced in May 2006, he was not awarded a post", to quote his entry on Wikipedia.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
koan;1357729 wrote: I'd have been more interested in your thoughts on government being the source of nuclear family conflict. Of course not everyone wants the same government system. That's why voting systems were developed... so that the majority decides instead of no one. You need a system to poll the people to find out what they want or no one is represented. When you poll it should have a result and it seems more fair to go with what the most people want instead of what the fewer people want. Sucks to be in the minority but they should start pounding the pavement harder to tip the 51% requirement in their favour. Explain to me how his 49% problem is actually a solvable problem. How do you satisfy them without sacrificing the 51%?
I'm not sure I've ever seen a better or more concise argument against democracy. Something in the system has to protect the minority underbelly, and the one thing I've learned over the years is that it won't be the average voter when the chips are down and the newspapers are baying for blood. Either you insulate Parliamentary power by a party system which filters potential members or you have a theocracy where the power base prays a lot or you have a system of Soviet committees from the apartment block and factory floor up to the Praesidium, and a great deal of debate can take place in a more formal setting than the street corner. What you cannnot do is sacrifice the minority. Defending the constitution is an entirely different affair.
I'm not sure I've ever seen a better or more concise argument against democracy. Something in the system has to protect the minority underbelly, and the one thing I've learned over the years is that it won't be the average voter when the chips are down and the newspapers are baying for blood. Either you insulate Parliamentary power by a party system which filters potential members or you have a theocracy where the power base prays a lot or you have a system of Soviet committees from the apartment block and factory floor up to the Praesidium, and a great deal of debate can take place in a more formal setting than the street corner. What you cannnot do is sacrifice the minority. Defending the constitution is an entirely different affair.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
I guess now some places are fast approaching severe humanitarian crisis. Misrata has seen street fighting now for weeks and the population is fast approaching the point of starvation. Apparently the rebels have tried to bring in goods by boat ("humanitarian supplies") through the port but the loyalists who have control of one side of the port shoot up the boats. Not a bad idea considering those supplies have a lot of ammunition mixed in with them.
What we have here now is a full scale civil war, neither side capable of doing in the other with little concern anywhere for the people just trying to survive it. Precedents have been set. Several loyalist soldiers who surrendered a few weeks ago were tortured and beheaded, I don't think loyalists are going to be inclined to give up. Both sides are giving priority to supplying troops, civvies caught in the middle get little if anything. It was never about helping Libyan civilians or protecting them, it's about something else. This NATO intervention is going to cost the people of Libya far more than they ever dreamed of.
What we have here now is a full scale civil war, neither side capable of doing in the other with little concern anywhere for the people just trying to survive it. Precedents have been set. Several loyalist soldiers who surrendered a few weeks ago were tortured and beheaded, I don't think loyalists are going to be inclined to give up. Both sides are giving priority to supplying troops, civvies caught in the middle get little if anything. It was never about helping Libyan civilians or protecting them, it's about something else. This NATO intervention is going to cost the people of Libya far more than they ever dreamed of.
The USA Position on Libya
So what's it about? I think this is what it's about, corporations seeking to expand and protect their interests. Just last year Qadaffi really pissed off some major players in the oil industry. This has a really bad smell to it.
Libya: blood bonanza for contractors — RT
Libya: blood bonanza for contractors — RT
The USA Position on Libya
According to Gaddafi's Green Book, he should be more concerned than any of us if only a few people were unhappy. If they aren't the majority he'd be even more on their side.
Scrat. Don't forget France and the UK initiated the air strikes, not the US.
Scrat. Don't forget France and the UK initiated the air strikes, not the US.
The USA Position on Libya
Al Q may be there on the rebel side. I guess this guy is a known member, I'm going to run this by my wife as she speaks Arabic.
YouTube -
YouTube -
-
SnakeDoctor
- Posts: 15
- Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 6:18 pm
The USA Position on Libya
I'm pretty sure Obama is against the war. Think about that.
The USA Position on Libya
SnakeDoctor;1357771 wrote: I'm pretty sure Obama is against the war. Think about that.
It's shame he's so bloody ineffective then, isn't it. If he didn't want it he should have damn well said so loudly before the bombing started. With, you might have noticed, US planes replaying old Reagan scenarios on the authority of the US President. Oh... that's Obama.
It's shame he's so bloody ineffective then, isn't it. If he didn't want it he should have damn well said so loudly before the bombing started. With, you might have noticed, US planes replaying old Reagan scenarios on the authority of the US President. Oh... that's Obama.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
The more I read of the Green Book the more I'm convinced that Gaddafi is to politics what L Ron Hubbard was to religion.
The USA Position on Libya
Scrat. Don't forget France and the UK initiated the air strikes, not the US.
Largely correct and it just goes to prove my point. Sarkozy is running for reelection soon, the Brits would love to have more say in Africa. There are other motives to this whole thing. It's more about upsetting a balance and trying to gain something from it. The rebels leadership works along the same lines, some people just can't get enough. Some people just want power damn all. Things like this take on a life of their own once they start and it's going to take awhile to sort out. Lots of innocent people are going to get killed. If Qadhaffis forces win he will slaughter the Rebel side, if the Rebels win they will slaughter the Loyalists.
The best thing that could have happened at this point was for Qadhaffi to win, some of the rebels would have been killed some jailed but we would have avoided this ongoing blood bath. Misurata has been under direct siege for many days now, loyalists are tightening the noose. A lot of civvies have been killed and there is little of anything getting through to them. Most of what does get into the port goes to the rebels. Ships come from Benghazi at night and offload mixed amounts of water food and ammo. Don't even try to tell me these are humanitarian in nature. This should show you where the rebels priorities lay. There's little anyone can do. The Loyalists have moved into the city with their heavy equipment in order to protect it from NATO aircraft. Try hitting tanks in the middle of a citys tall buildings from an airplane. NATO can't keep up the tempo of the airstrikes to be really effective.
This is going to be a really nasty affair. It's best we just leave the Libyans to their war in the interest of preventing more bloodshed. The longer NATO stays the bloodier it will be.
Largely correct and it just goes to prove my point. Sarkozy is running for reelection soon, the Brits would love to have more say in Africa. There are other motives to this whole thing. It's more about upsetting a balance and trying to gain something from it. The rebels leadership works along the same lines, some people just can't get enough. Some people just want power damn all. Things like this take on a life of their own once they start and it's going to take awhile to sort out. Lots of innocent people are going to get killed. If Qadhaffis forces win he will slaughter the Rebel side, if the Rebels win they will slaughter the Loyalists.
The best thing that could have happened at this point was for Qadhaffi to win, some of the rebels would have been killed some jailed but we would have avoided this ongoing blood bath. Misurata has been under direct siege for many days now, loyalists are tightening the noose. A lot of civvies have been killed and there is little of anything getting through to them. Most of what does get into the port goes to the rebels. Ships come from Benghazi at night and offload mixed amounts of water food and ammo. Don't even try to tell me these are humanitarian in nature. This should show you where the rebels priorities lay. There's little anyone can do. The Loyalists have moved into the city with their heavy equipment in order to protect it from NATO aircraft. Try hitting tanks in the middle of a citys tall buildings from an airplane. NATO can't keep up the tempo of the airstrikes to be really effective.
This is going to be a really nasty affair. It's best we just leave the Libyans to their war in the interest of preventing more bloodshed. The longer NATO stays the bloodier it will be.
The USA Position on Libya
Okay, I asked my wife about the video I posted. She got hold of some friends in Jordan (she is Circassian born in Amman and used to work for World Vision and the Red Crescent) and they said this.
the guys name is Said Ali al-Shihri, a well known terrorist leader, a Saudi National, in the Youtube Video(at 01mn 16sec) you can see him claiming that he is a Libyan national, even showing his passport to prove it , he is even making an effort to speak with a libyan accent.
The catch is that in his libyan passport picture he has a beard, but according to the libyan law (khadafi) you have to be clean-shaven in the passport picture.
at 04mn 45 sec you can see him inside a car in Ras lanouf, when it was being bombarded by the khadafi troops trying to flee, the problem here is that he is using his SAUDI accent, and any Arabic speaking person can testify to that. He is probably not any threat, he simply wants to get some news time
The plot thickens "eh :yh_rotfl Maybe we shouldn't be giving the rebs advanced weapons now should we? Maybe we shouldn't even take sides. What a glorious mess we have made. :yh_rotfl
the guys name is Said Ali al-Shihri, a well known terrorist leader, a Saudi National, in the Youtube Video(at 01mn 16sec) you can see him claiming that he is a Libyan national, even showing his passport to prove it , he is even making an effort to speak with a libyan accent.
The catch is that in his libyan passport picture he has a beard, but according to the libyan law (khadafi) you have to be clean-shaven in the passport picture.
at 04mn 45 sec you can see him inside a car in Ras lanouf, when it was being bombarded by the khadafi troops trying to flee, the problem here is that he is using his SAUDI accent, and any Arabic speaking person can testify to that. He is probably not any threat, he simply wants to get some news time
The plot thickens "eh :yh_rotfl Maybe we shouldn't be giving the rebs advanced weapons now should we? Maybe we shouldn't even take sides. What a glorious mess we have made. :yh_rotfl
The USA Position on Libya
It's only a war at all because of this damnable foreign interference. There's a shocking amount of death and destruction going on, none of it called for and none of it justifiable. If there's a crime against humanity involved it's on the part of the Western leadership, and the only reason they can't let go now is the wound it would leave to their personal pride and reputations. That's the simple cause of the mounting death toll.
That death toll might get a lot higher still if Executive Outcomes and their vile sort get called in. I can't see the world's mercenaries being paid by both sides to wage a proxy fight against each other in the sandy parts where there's no population.
What's needed is some law and order. Gaddafi was quite good at that before this externally-fed rumpus kicked off.
That death toll might get a lot higher still if Executive Outcomes and their vile sort get called in. I can't see the world's mercenaries being paid by both sides to wage a proxy fight against each other in the sandy parts where there's no population.
What's needed is some law and order. Gaddafi was quite good at that before this externally-fed rumpus kicked off.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
He certainly offered a better alternative. Just like Saddam. I just heard there was an apartment building in Misurata where there was a fire fight. The Loyalists blasted the Rebels out of the building but there was so much damage it partially caved in. There were women and children in the basement and some were killed.
Can you say collateral damage? Freedom and democracy have a steep price 'eh?
Can you say collateral damage? Freedom and democracy have a steep price 'eh?
The USA Position on Libya
Scrat;1357783 wrote: Can you say collateral damage? Freedom and democracy have a steep price 'eh?Except freedom and democracy aren't on offer by either side. Freedom, in many senses of the word, is what Gaddafi's brought to Libya for the last forty years though he's not been democratic if the representative sense. His Green Book explains exactly why he's eschewed representative democracy. Democracy may or may not be on offer if the rebels win, but they're not bringing freedom with that. They're bringing conformity, capitalism and the cheeseburger way of life. They're bringing wage-slavery and pay for what you need or die. Freedom is far more a Gaddafi reality than it is a capitalist one.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
I totally agree with you Spot, extreme poverty apparently was all but eradicated in Libya with the Gadaffis regime. There were poor people but you see that in all societies, some people never learn how to spend money. There was also that problem of having many educated people with a lack of opportunity that seems to be common in the Arab world. I highly doubt things are going to improve under someone else though.
I found this, Al Q is active there on the rebel side but to keep things in perspective the Arab world has it's mercenaries also. I think that is what these guys are.
Libya revolt: Libya rebel's story shows links to Taliban, Al Qaeda, NATO - latimes.com
I found this, Al Q is active there on the rebel side but to keep things in perspective the Arab world has it's mercenaries also. I think that is what these guys are.
Libya revolt: Libya rebel's story shows links to Taliban, Al Qaeda, NATO - latimes.com
The USA Position on Libya
Now that Gaddafi's regime has fallen in the east, stories like Farsi's – detailing the government's far-reaching coercive power – are finally entering public view.
Under Gaddafi's eyes - Features - Al Jazeera English
Did Mr Simpson honour you with a reply yet?
Under Gaddafi's eyes - Features - Al Jazeera English
Did Mr Simpson honour you with a reply yet?
The USA Position on Libya
Since my first visit to Libya in 1978, when Col Gaddafi had the aura of revolutionary chic about him, I have been back here nine times: sometimes a welcome guest, sometimes a pariah to be held in my hotel room for days at a time.
Whenever I met him, there was never any doubt that his mind was deeply disturbed. He could be pleasant, in a distant, dismissive kind of way, but he never made eye-contact.
John Simpson in Libya: Gaddafi was mad, bad and dangerous to know - Telegraph
Any response from Ms. Slavin yet? Is she outraged with being misquoted?
Whenever I met him, there was never any doubt that his mind was deeply disturbed. He could be pleasant, in a distant, dismissive kind of way, but he never made eye-contact.
John Simpson in Libya: Gaddafi was mad, bad and dangerous to know - Telegraph
Any response from Ms. Slavin yet? Is she outraged with being misquoted?
The USA Position on Libya
Nobody has, as yet, replied to the queries.
Do you seriously think Libya's in a better state now than it would have been without Western intervention last month? Or the well-being of Libyans has been improved?
How many years off do you think it might be before conditions get back to as good as they were before the bombing started?
Are you honestly of the opinion that life for Libyans is going to be better this Christmas than it was last? Or that Christmas next year will be? Or the year after that? And if not, what benefit have the many Western bombing deaths brought to anyone living there?
Do you seriously think Libya's in a better state now than it would have been without Western intervention last month? Or the well-being of Libyans has been improved?
How many years off do you think it might be before conditions get back to as good as they were before the bombing started?
Are you honestly of the opinion that life for Libyans is going to be better this Christmas than it was last? Or that Christmas next year will be? Or the year after that? And if not, what benefit have the many Western bombing deaths brought to anyone living there?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
I'm seriously of the opinion that the Libyan people have a right to decide what government they want and they decided they are done with Gaddafi.
The USA Position on Libya
koan;1357888 wrote: I'm seriously of the opinion that the Libyan people have a right to decide what government they want and they decided they are done with Gaddafi.
You keep saying "they want" and it's not true at all. A section of the Libyan people, in a section of the country, decided they are done with Gaddafi. You haven't the slightest reason for thinking it's even a majority, and yet you continually express it as all Libyans which is quite obviously mistaken.
It is, I think, deeply immoral for foreign nations with their own agendas to interfere when the most likely consequence is making things worse within the country for the foreseeable future. it is deeply immoral to continue that interference when it becomes clear that continued interference will make things worse for the foreseeable future. Nothing about the Western bombing, either before it happened or since it started, has a moral leg to stand on. It's is deeply vile self-interest with a cynical, almost mocking, pretence of concern for the Libyan people which bears no relation to what's actually happening to them. This would all have been dealt with internally at a far lower cost in lives, and been done and finished with, had these fat-cat oil-consumers kept their killer pilots at home in bed where they belong.
You keep saying "they want" and it's not true at all. A section of the Libyan people, in a section of the country, decided they are done with Gaddafi. You haven't the slightest reason for thinking it's even a majority, and yet you continually express it as all Libyans which is quite obviously mistaken.
It is, I think, deeply immoral for foreign nations with their own agendas to interfere when the most likely consequence is making things worse within the country for the foreseeable future. it is deeply immoral to continue that interference when it becomes clear that continued interference will make things worse for the foreseeable future. Nothing about the Western bombing, either before it happened or since it started, has a moral leg to stand on. It's is deeply vile self-interest with a cynical, almost mocking, pretence of concern for the Libyan people which bears no relation to what's actually happening to them. This would all have been dealt with internally at a far lower cost in lives, and been done and finished with, had these fat-cat oil-consumers kept their killer pilots at home in bed where they belong.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
oh, no I don't. I've never once implied that it would take all of the Libyan people in agreement to constitute a legitimate revolt.
Additionally, I've always maintained that the one exception I had to outside interference would be if the people of a country asked for help.
Additionally, I've always maintained that the one exception I had to outside interference would be if the people of a country asked for help.
The USA Position on Libya
koan;1357890 wrote: oh, no I don't. I've never once implied that it would take all of the Libyan people in agreement to constitute a legitimate revolt.
Additionally, I've always maintained that the one exception I had to outside interference would be if the people of a country asked for help.So 1% of the population turn out to demonstrate and you're in favour of bombing until the government resigns?
5%?
10%?
What about the voice of the majority?
Additionally, I've always maintained that the one exception I had to outside interference would be if the people of a country asked for help.So 1% of the population turn out to demonstrate and you're in favour of bombing until the government resigns?
5%?
10%?
What about the voice of the majority?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
But, I thought you'd read the Green Book. Listening to the voice of the majority is undemocratic. :p
The USA Position on Libya
koan;1357892 wrote: But, I thought you'd read the Green Book. Listening to the voice of the majority is undemocratic. :pListening to the voice of the majority is definitively democratic, that's what the words mean.
I don't think you quite grasped the essential point of the Green Book. It's entirely about governance by consent. You have no good reason to believe the consent wasn't granted at the time of the revolution - it quite evidently was - or that it's not still willingly given by the majority of the population. Libya is not governed by representation, it's governed directly by the people. Implementing the will of the people happens under the oversight of the Leader, who safeguards the revolution on behalf of the people. It's a social contract which the Libyans voluntarily entered into. The choice of constitution is entirely a matter for the people of Libya, and these Western bombing raids are a foreign attempt to overthrow that internal process.
I don't think you quite grasped the essential point of the Green Book. It's entirely about governance by consent. You have no good reason to believe the consent wasn't granted at the time of the revolution - it quite evidently was - or that it's not still willingly given by the majority of the population. Libya is not governed by representation, it's governed directly by the people. Implementing the will of the people happens under the oversight of the Leader, who safeguards the revolution on behalf of the people. It's a social contract which the Libyans voluntarily entered into. The choice of constitution is entirely a matter for the people of Libya, and these Western bombing raids are a foreign attempt to overthrow that internal process.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
And I don't think you quite grasp how Gaddafi's Libya was really run.
The USA Position on Libya
Who does? When do we get truly accurate information in quantity about life there? Yeah, it's somewhat of a police state. What about America? What about Russia? Canada? I know 2 things for sure, if you protest in the streets of Moscow without a permit your demonstration will be crushed. Same as in America. Same as in many other places.
I've said this before and I'll say it again. Sometimes you have to crack heads to keep the peace. What we're seeing in Libya now is the result of interference in what was a stable society, in ways unfair to some without a doubt but stable all the same and progressing.
My friend and his wife in Belarus is probably what you would call a merchant or a trader. He does well even in a country that has statues of Lenin and KGB headquarters on the same square. He has 2 daughters a home a wife a dog named Basa 2 cats and a Ford F-350 Superduty V-8 6.0 liter Turbo diesel that he wants me to get a bunch of parts for, including smoked headlight covers. A lot of the people who live there have the same problems he does in everyday life.
Lukashenko is a dictator and sometimes he's prime grade A authoritarian a**hole and if you challenge him he's going to squash you like a bug BUT he saved Belarus from the same rape Russia got from it's "liberators" 20 years ago and the country is STABLE. You can build a life there without having it torn to pieces.
The key is STABILITY, what kind of government is in power is strictly secondary. Thank god Belarus doesn't have any oil.
I've said this before and I'll say it again. Sometimes you have to crack heads to keep the peace. What we're seeing in Libya now is the result of interference in what was a stable society, in ways unfair to some without a doubt but stable all the same and progressing.
My friend and his wife in Belarus is probably what you would call a merchant or a trader. He does well even in a country that has statues of Lenin and KGB headquarters on the same square. He has 2 daughters a home a wife a dog named Basa 2 cats and a Ford F-350 Superduty V-8 6.0 liter Turbo diesel that he wants me to get a bunch of parts for, including smoked headlight covers. A lot of the people who live there have the same problems he does in everyday life.
Lukashenko is a dictator and sometimes he's prime grade A authoritarian a**hole and if you challenge him he's going to squash you like a bug BUT he saved Belarus from the same rape Russia got from it's "liberators" 20 years ago and the country is STABLE. You can build a life there without having it torn to pieces.
The key is STABILITY, what kind of government is in power is strictly secondary. Thank god Belarus doesn't have any oil.
The USA Position on Libya
Well, spot seems to think that his appreciation for Gaddafi's social experiment is more important than whether or not Gaddafi actually did what he said. He seems to think that a group of people who overcame laws against dissent to form a group big enough to rebel are less important than his hope that Gaddafi gets a chance to finish his experiment. He seems to think that journalists who have been there don't have more credit than his own desire to have them be wrong.
The USA Position on Libya
koan;1357927 wrote: Well, spot seems to think that his appreciation for Gaddafi's social experiment is more important than whether or not Gaddafi actually did what he said. He seems to think that a group of people who overcame laws against dissent to form a group big enough to rebel are less important than his hope that Gaddafi gets a chance to finish his experiment. He seems to think that journalists who have been there don't have more credit than his own desire to have them be wrong.
You're deliberately misinterpreting, with no justification in anything I've written. I'm entirely content if an internal revolution topples Gaddafi and leaves his head on a spike outside the Tripoli barracks. Any group of people who overcame laws against dissent to form a group big enough to rebel are fine by me. I take exception, throughout, to foreign interference in the internal affairs of Libya. Bombing, financing the rebellion, advising their leaders on military tactics, all of it is illegitimate and so will arming them be when we uncover the arming bit.
I'd have been equally content with an internal coup against Saddam Hussein. In both cases though, external interference shores up support for the existing government. If you ask the average citizen in Tripoli whether they approve of the bombing I bet there's not many would even think yes, much less tell you so. That's because they're being bombed. Saddam was a better leader of a better country than Iraq presents now. What it lacked in some respects it made up for in others, like the ability of women to achieve reasonable goals for example. Iraq's secular republic is dead, long live Islamic Iraq.
Next year I'll write the same again: Gaddafi was a better leader of a better country than Libya presents now. What it lacked in some respects it made up for in others, like the ability of women to achieve reasonable goals for example. Libya's secular republic is dead, long live Islamic Libya.
Western politicians want corrupt administrations to deal with. They're trying to buy yet another in a country where previously they couldn't. I hope they fail for once in their immediate objective.
You're deliberately misinterpreting, with no justification in anything I've written. I'm entirely content if an internal revolution topples Gaddafi and leaves his head on a spike outside the Tripoli barracks. Any group of people who overcame laws against dissent to form a group big enough to rebel are fine by me. I take exception, throughout, to foreign interference in the internal affairs of Libya. Bombing, financing the rebellion, advising their leaders on military tactics, all of it is illegitimate and so will arming them be when we uncover the arming bit.
I'd have been equally content with an internal coup against Saddam Hussein. In both cases though, external interference shores up support for the existing government. If you ask the average citizen in Tripoli whether they approve of the bombing I bet there's not many would even think yes, much less tell you so. That's because they're being bombed. Saddam was a better leader of a better country than Iraq presents now. What it lacked in some respects it made up for in others, like the ability of women to achieve reasonable goals for example. Iraq's secular republic is dead, long live Islamic Iraq.
Next year I'll write the same again: Gaddafi was a better leader of a better country than Libya presents now. What it lacked in some respects it made up for in others, like the ability of women to achieve reasonable goals for example. Libya's secular republic is dead, long live Islamic Libya.
Western politicians want corrupt administrations to deal with. They're trying to buy yet another in a country where previously they couldn't. I hope they fail for once in their immediate objective.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
It's not deliberate at all.
I think it's a horrible comparison to what happened in Iraq. There's absolutely no comparison at all.
Perhaps Gaddafi will have been better for Libya than what happens next but that's their mistake to make. It's the mistake they are asking to be allowed to make and one they deserve the chance to make.
I think it's a horrible comparison to what happened in Iraq. There's absolutely no comparison at all.
Perhaps Gaddafi will have been better for Libya than what happens next but that's their mistake to make. It's the mistake they are asking to be allowed to make and one they deserve the chance to make.
The USA Position on Libya
Do you suppose you could try qualifying each of these comments with "some"? As in "the mistake some of them are asking to be allowed to make"? it makes an immense difference to the reasonableness of your position, which is why perhaps you're ignoring the qualification.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The USA Position on Libya
I'm not ignoring it. I'm keeping in mind that a country that executes and/or imprisons dissidents can't easily get a group of protestors together who'd be even noticeable.