2. Best for people is to use their universal natural ability that differentiates them from animal: freedom to chose. Freedom of analyze things in an open process and to chose. For 42 years Libyans were not able to chose.
3. Libya is not being bombed into stone age. As Gaddafi rather choses to see Libyans die but cling to power, Libyans are getting killed. This happens in every war. Germany was destroyed in the war for large parts bu built anew and is one of the financial and infrastructural giants of the world.
4. When it's badly armed people being butchered by a dictator with military and mercenaries, it's clear which side you will chose in order to prevent a massacre. Very easy to understand.
Comparing apples to peaches doesn't help your cause other than trying to relativize Gaddafi's deeds. "Yes, he is not innocent but others are also bad, so there is nothing exceptionally evil in him. After all, he isn't that bad at all". You can play these tricks only with your mirror image. Too easy to see through this.gaddafi is not innocent baby, we all know that, but like who is, this leaders in US and NATO countries are responsible for destruction in all this wars, for thousands of deaths, and who is now in jail for all that?
1. UN Security Council resolutions ARE international law.Just as i said double standards, not even sign of democracy, and without respect for any international law, which are the basis for today's world and if they are not followed I do not know what will, total anarchy (or as chavez explained stone age).
2. International law allows even individual countries to engage themselves militarily, if mass murder in a different country is about to be carried out or is being carried out - even without UN Security Council resolutions.
3. Chavez again? You seem to like every bobblehead. One red-shirted in Venezuela, one who lets Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor be arrested and sentenced to death on charge to have made Libyans sick with AIDS, the one who openly proposes to abolish Switzerland and give neighboring countries its territorial parts etc.
Finally you said it - you support him. Just because the Saud family is still in power, dosn't make Gaddafi legitimate. Absolutely, there are other evil regimes. They are not like here but tolerated to some extent as they are cooperating on key issues.they are not talking about situation in quatar, saudi arabia and all their allied countries with 5X worse regimes, these are all reasons why I support him.
It's not the "bad guy picture in western medias". It is what Serbia's and Serbian previous leaders did, starting with 1991. They waged war in Croatia, in Bosnia, conducted ethnic cleansing in parts of Kosovo. No, NATO was not "destroying everything they want", being very well aware that Serbia will be a partner after Milosevic has been ousted. I know these notions among some Serbians but you rather should look into the mirror. Serbia started it all and is responsible for many deaths. But you don't mention it with a single word.and u think that im against nato just because of war in serbia, thats partly true because i saw how their humanitarian missions are working, with many innocent victims and destroying simple everything they want, against every international law + massive propaganda without any truth in it, we were just shocked back than with that and Serbs are still suffering from that bad guy picture in western medias. And they are using same tactics/methods in every single war.
BTW, I was watching Serbian TV through Russian TV in that time partly. Media propaganda happens everywhere and is normal. One difference - Milosevic's Serbia was speaking with one voice, while here we had different voices and opinions - as always in democracies. Every mislead NATO bomb was in the news, showing what was hit and destroyed. Hey, what do you think? Tens or hundreds of thousands of soldiers are being involved, heavy military and you think it can be a chirurgical operation with no collateral damages?! Nice, if it could be like that but get real.
The Lybians finally got rid of that power hungry criminal,Gaddafi.
I just wish they could've done it without NATO's help, NATO and the US got what they wanted now, they saw that Gaddafi was a loosing card,so they just let him go just like they did with Mubarak and sided with the revolution in order to protect their oil intrests.
And it's just yesterday that the revolutionaries said that they will respect the oil contracts signed during Gaddafi's rule.
So in the end,it's clear why the US intervened, it's to protect their intrests and oil mining contracts and not actually protect democracy and all that shit.
Poor democracy,how many battles are fought in your name
Goodluck to the Lybians,they're free now,i just hope they can get out of US influence.
Placative statements are often beyond truth and this is a good example for it. Not everything is so cynical.
Gaddafi was a "losing card" for the US? Since when have they been partners? The US had nothing to do with him. The situation is also completely different than with Mubarak. Mubarak has been an ally and he abandoned power without starting war against Egyptians. Gaddafi was not a partner and he started using military and mecenaries against his people. Having Mubarak fall and immediately recognizing the wish of the Egyptian people (nothing has changed really, the military is still deciding everything) was not a politically wise move but as people in the West have welcomed the wave of revolutions and supported it, Western governments were d'accord with them. Basically, the West went against its own security interest but not everything has to be reduced to money.
Gaddafi was never supported by the West, although he exported gas to France and Italy. But the initial movement had to be an inner-Libyan one. When it came to place, it was vocally supported by the West. When Gaddafi was about to suffocate it physically, especially having the context of North African revolutions and uprisings in 2011, the UN - incl. Russia and China - gave NATO the mandate to clean things up, which is rather normal than stand by the ide and watch a dictator murder his citizens.
The Gaddafi story is by far not over yet. Even when he will be ousted from power, he is still able to lead partizan war for some time (after all, the territory of Libya is large). But it's a matter of time.
Next in line will be Syriabut there will be no military engagement. Syria under Assad is becoming increasingly unpopular in the Arabic world, so imho the day of the elites to drop him in order to save their own interests (and lives) is not far away. What Assad is doing now is the best way to silence and weaken Hezbollah, to isolate Iran. A military engagement would quickly trigger a broader cnflict with Hezbollah and Hamas coming into the play. In order to put an end to it it would be an all-out war, not only on Syrian soil. At the same time, the number of murdered people in Syria is already four digit and the whole world has not done anything but say word so far, which is a shame.
Just a friendly suggestion. Since you feel obliged to answer to any single post in this thread (nothing blamable about that), try to express your thoughts more briefly. At the end, none will care to read your huge posts. Perhaps, this is already the case.
ps I still care, but I have plenty of time and patience. Probably I'm the exception.
Originally Posted by Joško Poljak Fan