Endgame for Gaddafi as rebels enter Tripoli

bk

AlekSmart wrote: »

Oh ?...I defer to your greater local knowledge bk ,but the News coverage has been speaking of Tripoli falling,as in,now controlled by the "rebels"...Has not the Gadaffi compound been stormed and taken ?

Not when the video was taken.

Sunday night the Rebels entered Tripoli, but hadn't taken (and still haven't) taken the whole city then. In particular they were nowhere near Gaddaffi's compound at this stage.

Monday night this video was taken. The video was taken in the middle of Gaddaffi's compound.

This isn't a city street. Gaddaffi's compound is 6KM square and surrounded by three separate rings of very high walls and gun towers. It was the center of Gaddaffi's power, all his soldiers etc. were there.

No sniper or suicide bomber could ever get anywhere close to him there. Anyone inside these walls was a carefully hand picked Gaddaffi supporter.

Only on Tuesday did the rebels begin their assault on this compound, it took them most of the day before they could get into the compound.

Only on Wednesday did the journalists trapped in the Rixos hotel finally get out and the rebels are only now entering this area to fight Gaddaffi forces.

AlekSmart wrote: »

However,all I'd say is this latest example of the uprising is all the more enthusiastic for the presence of the Truck Mounted Heavy Machine Guns and AK47 waving rebels zipping around the streets...when in Rome etc...?

Except that many of the rebels interviewed on TV actually seem to be Tripoli residents who only picked up a gun for the first time over the last three days and have joined the rebels.

While of course there is still some fighting, the ease with which the rebels entered Tripoli shows that there was very little sympathy for Gaddaffi amongst the ordinary people of Tripoli. If the ordinary people of Tripoli actually supported Gadaffi and took up arms, a million of them would easily repel any rebel attack, even if the rebels had Nato support.

Remember Nato is only any good against tanks, artillery, etc. It would be useless against local residents, with local knowledge of the city and some basic weapons.

The ease with which the rebels entered Triploi and other cities, shows how most ordinary people feel about it.

wes

Been watching the news the last few days on this, and I am not to sure what to make of things just yet. There seems to be some confusion as to what exactly is going on. Hopefully things work out for the Libyan people.

cyberhog

Russia stays cautious on Libya rebel recognition (AFP)

Medvedev warned starkly on Wednesday that it may well be premature for the rebels to be proclaiming victory or for other nations to be establishing formal ties with the opposition’s National Transitional Council (NTC).

The situation in Libya remained “what it was before... in essence, there are two powers in the country,” said Medvedev during a rare summit meeting in Siberia with North Korea’s reclusive leader Kim Jong-Il.

“Russia has a careful position and we are watching how events develop,” the Kremlin chief added.

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle09.asp?xfile=data/international/2011/August/international_August1136.xml&section=international

JustinDee

Judgement Day wrote: »

I couldn't find a pic of an Irish politician cosying up to these scumbags but since Blair boasts Irish roots he will have to do. Which of them is worse the dictator or the 'democrat' who keeps them in power before dispatching his ill equipped armed forces to deal with them? :mad:

Any old picture of Gerry Adams will do.

JustinDee

Icepick wrote: »

Serious competition for The Onion.

"They are murdering civilians in their thousands" ... what?

That Russian 'news' channel and Press TV will hilariously get quoted on this subject in this forum.

AlekSmart

bk wrote: »

Sunday night the Rebels entered Tripoli, but hadn't taken (and still haven't) taken the whole city then. In particular they were nowhere near Gaddaffi's compound at this stage....

....While of course there is still some fighting, the ease with which the rebels entered Tripoli shows that there was very little sympathy for Gaddaffi amongst the ordinary people of Tripoli. If the ordinary people of Tripoli actually supported Gadaffi and took up arms, a million of them would easily repel any rebel attack, even if the rebels had Nato support.

Remember Nato is only any good against tanks, artillery, etc. It would be useless against local residents, with local knowledge of the city and some basic weapons.

The ease with which the rebels entered Triploi and other cities, shows how most ordinary people feel about it.

I'm not so certain that taking six months to effect a triumphal,albeit partial entry into Tripoli can be described as an easy entry at all ?

What is detectable,in the undercurrent of reportage from tripoli is a less than fullsome support for the Rebel Tactics or what passes for them.

Equally if it's felt that a Millon Dollar Dead or Alive reward is now the only way to "Get Gadaffi" then the level of Broad Libyan Support is surely open to further question ?

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/africa/terror-in-tripoli-as-loyalists-vow-to-fight-to-the-death-2857224.html

In the corner of a street, a man who was shot in the crossfire, the back of his blue shirt soaked in blood, was being carried away by three others. "I know that man, he is a shopkeeper," said Sama Abdessalam Bashti, who had just run across the road to reach his home. "The rebels are attacking our homes. This should not be happening.

The rebels are saying they are fighting government troops here, but all those getting hurt are ordinary people, the only buildings being damaged are those of local people. There has also been looting by the rebels, they have gone into houses to search for people and taken away things. Why are they doing this? They should be looking for Gaddafi, he is not here."

And later in the ariticle....

"Some of them came from outside a few days ago, they do not live around here, but others are local," said Mohammed Selim Mohammed, a 38-year-old engineer. "Muammar has supporters here and for sure the government gave out guns. They also gave out money. But I don't think people are fighting for that. What good is money if you end up dead?

"Maybe they just do not like the rebels. Why are people from outside Tripoli coming and arresting our men? I did not get any money, but I was given a gun. It was an AK-47, made in Ukraine. I have kept it for the protection of my family; we do not know what is going to happen. They say Muammar is defeated, but if that is the case, why is he not in prison?"

....and perhaps the most apposite quite from a "Rebel" who has perhaps the best grasp of his cause that I've yet heard....

A little further down the road, Amr Mohammed Bahudin called for more reflection among the revolutionaries. "We have the overwhelming number of our people supporting us. We have had the support of Nato. Many of Gaddafi's generals have left him. So why are there civilians in Abu Salim supporting him and fighting us? We need to find the answer or we will be fighting for a very long time." [/QUOTE]

Mohammed Bahudin poses the question which I have been asking since Feburary,and which the U.N./NATO leadership have asidiously avoided acknowledging.

AlekSmart

JustinDee wrote: »

That Russian 'news' channel and Press TV will hilariously get quoted on this subject in this forum.

It may yet prove to be a rush-to-judgement to flippantly cast aside reportage which does'nt fit in with the considerable spin.

One thing is clear the Russian Government's wait n see approach may yet prove to be the saner one....

Medvedev warned starkly on Wednesday that it may well be premature for the rebels to be proclaiming victory or for other nations to be establishing formal ties with the opposition’s National Transitional Council (NTC).

The situation in Libya remained “what it was before... in essence, there are two powers in the country,” said Medvedev during a rare summit meeting in Siberia with North Korea’s reclusive leader Kim Jong-Il.

“Russia has a careful position and we are watching how events develop,” the Kremlin chief added.

bk

AlekSmart wrote: »

I'm not so certain that taking six months to effect a triumphal,albeit partial entry into Tripoli can be described as an easy entry at all ?

Ah come off it Alex.

You are talking about guys who started out with zero military training and weapons going up against heavily armed and professionally trained soldiers and mercenaries. 6 months is incredible under those circumstances.

Again, there would be absolutely no way the rebels could so easily sweep into a city of 2 million people, it the majority of those 2 million people didn't support them.

If those 2 million people actually supported Gadaffi, then they would have absolutely slaughtered the rebels, who numbered only in the couple of thousand, in street to street fighting.

Please use your logic here.

Let me ask you this, why would the majority of people support Gadaffi?

This is a man who for the last 40 years has kept the people in a police state. People were in constant fear, rounded up, tortured and executed.

And the majority of people were kept in poverty. This is a country with great natural resources. The level of wealth per person there should actually be higher then Europe, about equivalent to the UAE. Instead most people are unemployed and live in poverty. Use your logical facilities Alex, why would the majority of people support him for keeping them in poverty?

Of course some people support him, he couldn't stay in power for 40 years if some didn't. Like many countries in the region, there is a ruler who has the support of his own tribe (or religious grouping Shia versus Sunni) and uses those loyal to him (and who are thus richly rewarded) to keep the rest of the majority of people down using fear and intimidation.

I know some people here don't trust western governments like the Brits. I absolutely understand and agree, I was 100% against them invading Iraq. But in this case they actually have done a good thing and should be praised for that, so hopefully in future they will continue to do the right thing.

AlekSmart

bk wrote: »

Except that many of the rebels interviewed on TV actually seem to be Tripoli residents who only picked up a gun for the first time over the last three days and have joined the rebels.

While of course there is still some fighting, the ease with which the rebels entered Tripoli shows that there was very little sympathy for Gaddaffi amongst the ordinary people of Tripoli. If the ordinary people of Tripoli actually supported Gadaffi and took up arms, a million of them would easily repel any rebel attack, even if the rebels had Nato support.

The ease with which the rebels entered Triploi and other cities, shows how most ordinary people feel about it.

But that's what I mean bk,it was yourself that brought up the "ease" factor in the rebel entry to Tripoli.

I see no ease about any of the gains being reported by the various,and multiplying,Rebel factions.

What I do see,and this is with my logical eye,is a highly volatile internal situation in which a supposedly finished former leader and his administration is still ,managing a somewhat credible resistance.

Not all of the News Coverage is reporting totally anti-gadaffi rhetoric and one item of this mornings batch even has locals referring to Gadaffi by his first name....:eek:

"Some of them came from outside a few days ago, they do not live around here, but others are local," said Mohammed Selim Mohammed, a 38-year-old engineer. "Muammar has supporters here and for sure the government gave out guns. They also gave out money. But I don't think people are fighting for that. What good is money if you end up dead?

"Maybe they just do not like the rebels. Why are people from outside Tripoli coming and arresting our men? I did not get any money, but I was given a gun. It was an AK-47, made in Ukraine. I have kept it for the protection of my family; we do not know what is going to happen. They say Muammar is defeated, but if that is the case, why is he not in prison?"

Sure it's not a fully researched report from an NGO,but the divil is often in the detail,and small details such as how the locals speak of their much despised,feared and lunatic dictator can tell every bit as much as a thousand MI6 cables to Whitehall.

bk: Again, there would be absolutely no way the rebels could so easily sweep into a city of 2 million people, it the majority of those 2 million people didn't support them.

If those 2 million people actually supported Gadaffi, then they would have absolutely slaughtered the rebels, who numbered only in the couple of thousand, in street to street fighting.

With Gadaffi's standing Army comprising 70,000 men supplemented by several thousand specialized units and the supposedly prolific "African Mercenaries" the 2 Million figure is somewhat overstating it.

My take on it is that the majority of Tripoli's non-combatant,non-aligned citizenry now find themselves in a no-win situation.

Even if,at heart,they support the former system of Governance (Not necessarily the same as supporting Gadaffi,the individual,to the death) they now find themselves in the midst of a totally uncontrolled maelstrom of death and destruction waged by a multitude of factions through their local streets and towns.

Consider how,in the past 6 months,the U.N./NATO led campaign on the Libyan sands has also been accompanied by a far less well covered economic campaign designed to frustrate the Gadaffi administration to attend to the normal business of governance...paying the bills,running the schools,electricity,health,roads and all the other trappings of civilization.

It's quite easy to ascribe noble freedom-fighting motives to a chanting Libyan in a Tripoli crowd,but perhaps in reality he only wants to get back to earning a living as he was under Gadaffi.

bk:Let me ask you this, why would the majority of people support Gadaffi?

Maybe,just maybe,the ordinary Libyan regarded stability and strong rule as something which allowed them to just bget on with life ?

There were certainly significant numbers of those who were clearly disaffected with Gadaffis rule,and seized their moment to revolt and luckily (?) secure the U.N./NATO impramatur.

bk: And the majority of people were kept in poverty. This is a country with great natural resources. The level of wealth per person there should actually be higher then Europe, about equivalent to the UAE. Instead most people are unemployed and live in poverty. Use your logical facilities Alex, why would the majority of people support him for keeping them in poverty?

Again,I think it's argueable that all of Gadaffi's administration has been despotic or neglectful of his people.

Individual wealth is but one element of the tale,but that may well be balanced by projects such as The Great Manmade River Project to bring sustainable irrigation to the greater body of the country.

In a vast sparsely populated,desertified country such as Libya the importance of a guaranteed,sustainable water source and supply cannot be underestimated,and in many cases will beat possession of a bank-account hands down.

Poverty may well have been the byword of Gadaffis rule for most Libyans,but the country was well up there in the other less quantifiable (to Western sensibilities) areas such as Health,Educationn and Water.

It's interesting that whilst many take issue with Gadaffi seizing power and his lack of democratic principles,his accession to power was bloodless with the deposition of King Idris and the then ruling clique.

Lack of democracy in Libya goes back a lot further than Gadaffi,and may well endure long after he is gone from the Libyan scene too.

Indeed it is interesting to note that some Rebels have been seen carrying the old Libyan Royal Standard and pictures of the long dead King ...where's that all leading ..?

I also don't too readily accept the grace and favour arguement as being a unique Libyan or Gadaffi tool of governance.

It is,after all,a pretty robust and well tried method of governance Worldwide...just look at the hoo-hah we had some months back with the outgoing FF'rs stuffing their supporters onto the boards of the numerous Quango's,a process which will doubtless be repeated when it comes FG/Lab's time to fold their tents and wander.

Jonny7

AlekSmart wrote: »

Not all of the News Coverage is reporting totally anti-gadaffi rhetoric and one item of this mornings batch even has locals referring to Gadaffi by his first name....:eek:

Sure it's not a fully researched report from an NGO,but the divil is often in the detail,and small details such as how the locals speak of their much despised,feared and lunatic dictator can tell every bit as much as a thousand MI6 cables to Whitehall.

Saddam

Again,I think it's argueable that all of Gadaffi's administration has been despotic or neglectful of his people.

You've been posting this silliness for months now, I keep saying we are worse for responding to it

AlekSmart

Jonny7 wrote: »

You've been posting this silliness for months now, I keep saying we are worse for responding to it

You may well say that Jonny7,but thank you for the interest nonetheless as it at least shows a broadmindedness of regard.:)

BlaasForRafa

Jonny7 wrote: »

Saddam



You've been posting this silliness for months now, I keep saying we are worse for responding to it

He's either delusional or trolling.

JustinDee

AlekSmart wrote: »

It may yet prove to be a rush-to-judgement to flippantly cast aside reportage which does'nt fit in with the considerable spin

On those two channels I mentioned, it is hardly "reportage".

AlekSmart wrote: »

One thing is clear the Russian Government's wait n see approach may yet prove to be the saner one....

I really don't care which is "saner". Russia pontificating on human rights or colonisation is hypocrisy.

nacho libre

Amnesty International said on Thursday a delegation it had sent to Libya received reports of abuses by both sides in the conflict, including of rebels detaining and beating black African migrants suspected of being mercenaries.

Also the NTC council chairman declared that they can't say who killed Younes just yet as it might harm the revolution.

bk

Alex you are seriously trying to say that the people of Libya are happy being unemployed and living in poverty in a country where if the natural resources where fairly shared they would have one of the highest standards of living in the world!!!

After hearing that I just can't take anything you say about this matter seriously.

Corsendonk

bk wrote: »

Alex you are seriously trying to say that the people of Libya are happy being unemployed and living in poverty in a country where if the natural resources where fairly shared they would have one of the highest standards of living in the world!!!

After hearing that I just can't take anything you say about this matter seriously.

One thing very noticeable at the start of the conflict was the number of high and low skilled migrant workers from all over Africa and the India subcontinent that Libya depended on. The BBC reported that Libya had 1.6 million migrant workers in a population of 6.4 million. It seemed that the Libyans were happy up to a point to sit at home and take payments from Gadaffi while letting others do the work.

Corsendonk

HellsAngel wrote: »

Maybe Gaddafi's old friends will come to help him ??

"The dirty secret of British arms sales to Libya " -
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1373444/Libya-The-dirty-secret-UK-arms-sales-Gaddafi.html#ixzz1VlOa4FDm

Another of his old mates

cyberhog

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

He's either delusional or trolling.

Yet another worthless contribution from our resident spammer. :rolleyes:

Unlike you (and your ilk), he doesn't engage in mudslinging, he's offering his thoughts on the topic, and has responded to various replies since. He's not trolling, he expresses his opinion and does so with some clarity. That's interesting even if you disagree.

AlekSmart

bk wrote: »

Alex you are seriously trying to say that the people of Libya are happy being unemployed and living in poverty in a country where if the natural resources where fairly shared they would have one of the highest standards of living in the world!!!

After hearing that I just can't take anything you say about this matter seriously.

No,bk,I'm not "trying" to say that at all,but I am saying that the "poverty indices" of themselves may not reflect the actual situation on the ground.

I'm afraid that as the Libyan affair grinds slowly to what looks like being a pretty unsatisfactory end,we are going to witness quite a few such contradictory elements.

For one,we may have to resolve this moral conflict between Gadaffi=Always Bad vs Freedom Fighter= Always Good.

Since the inception of the U.N./NATO adventure,the media organs have gone hell-for-leather in their attempts to Double Demonise Gadaffi and all those associated with him and his regime.

I still stick to my own belief that we are being treated to nothing less than significantly successful media management,quite often be agencies whose real interest and grá for Libya and it's people is minimal to say the least.

For me it's the small items,often only treated to a single line or paragraph....

The release of the (armed) Dutch Military Helicopter Crew,the facilitation of Red Cross evacuations in Benghazi,the early stage prisoner exchanges,again under Red Cross supervision and consistently over the past six-months the marked reluctance of the "ordinary" Libyan to get stuck in behind the "Rebels" in any mass way points my simpleton's brain towards a notion that we in the West don't actually have an affinity for the real Libyan at all.....

We do however readily assume that the things we want will automatically be wanted by our newly accquired Libyan friends.

Although at this juncture I see Gadaffi as now merely an animal being hunted,just as the Cockroaches he spoke of, I also see his departure as leaving Libya in a someahat vulnerable and easily manipulated position on the World Stage....time perhaps for the next-phase ?

SamHarris

cyberhog wrote: »

Yet another worthless contribution from our resident spammer. :rolleyes:

Unlike you (and your ilk), he doesn't engage in mudslinging, he's offering his thoughts on the topic, and has responded to various replies since. He's not trolling, he expresses his opinion and does so with some clarity. That's interesting even if you disagree.

Seems to me this post was equally worthless.

Why is the ending unsatifactory to you Alek?

Jonny7

AlekSmart wrote: »

I still stick to my own belief that we are being treated to nothing less than significantly successful media management,quite often be agencies whose real interest and grá for Libya and it's people is minimal to say the least.

Which media? all of it or just some of it, if some, which media outlets?

Or is this just another factless baseless hunch or hypothesis

I've just seen other posters gloss over this casually and I'd really like to know how it works.

AlekSmart

Jonny7 wrote: »

Which media? all of it or just some of it, if some, which media outlets?

Or is this just another factless baseless hunch or hypothesis

I've just seen other posters gloss over this casually and I'd really like to know how it works.

I'd see most,if not all,of the media reporting from Libya as requiring caution when viewing/reading their reportage.

The arrival of the 24 Hour Rolling News format as the Global standard for news dissemenation is also tending to see greater editorial need for a "big-bang" every hour to keep the adrenalin pumping.

My own workaround is to graze as many of the media sources as I can take-in,but to spend somewhat more time looking into the middle distance of the camera shot,rather than focusing on whatever talking-head is on-air.

I suppose it's a bit like spotting the Jet-Ski passing behind Cap'n Onedin in a 19th Century seascape.

I fully accept and respect other poster's desires,requirements or fixations with seeking quantifiable, statistical confirmation of Gadaffi's evilness index.

I'm not suggesting that Gadaffi or his regime is acceptable to in any modern Western theme'd forum,but Im still not buying into the scale of broad Libyan sentiment against the regime,particularly at the beginning of the "revolt".

I'm suggesting that a time frame of over six-months to fully stimulate a sustainable broad based rebellion could be said to be suspiciously lacking in the spontaniety which the 24 hr News Gatherers appear to crave.

I find it entirely plausible that the U.N./ NATO/USA economic strangulation of the Libyan Administration has at least as much to do with the evaporation of popular support for Gadaffi as any supposed widespread hatred for the fellah.

Hope this is'nt too "glossy" ?

Overheal

Hm. So you're thinking is that the media is drumming up this idea that theres a major rebellion where there isnt one?

SamHarris

AlekSmart wrote: »

I'd see most,if not all,of the media reporting from Libya as requiring caution when viewing/reading their reportage.

The arrival of the 24 Hour Rolling News format as the Global standard for news dissemenation is also tending to see greater editorial need for a "big-bang" every hour to keep the adrenalin pumping.

My own workaround is to graze as many of the media sources as I can take-in,but to spend somewhat more time looking into the middle distance of the camera shot,rather than focusing on whatever talking-head is on-air.

I suppose it's a bit like spotting the Jet-Ski passing behind Cap'n Onedin in a 19th Century seascape.

I fully accept and respect other poster's desires,requirements or fixations with seeking quantifiable, statistical confirmation of Gadaffi's evilness index.

I'm not suggesting that Gadaffi or his regime is acceptable to in any modern Western theme'd forum,but Im still not buying into the scale of broad Libyan sentiment against the regime,particularly at the beginning of the "revolt".

I'm suggesting that a time frame of over six-months to fully stimulate a sustainable broad based rebellion could be said to be suspiciously lacking in the spontaniety which the 24 hr News Gatherers appear to crave.

I find it entirely plausible that the U.N./ NATO/USA economic strangulation of the Libyan Administration has at least as much to do with the evaporation of popular support for Gadaffi as any supposed widespread hatred for the fellah.

Hope this is'nt too "glossy" ?

Temporally you are off then, did the rebellion not begin before the sanstions etc?

Did you have the same feeling concerning Mubarak?

AlekSmart

Overheal wrote: »

Hm. So you're thinking is that the media is drumming up this idea that theres a major rebellion where there isnt one?

Nope Overheal,not my thinking at all...there was for sure dissent and dissatisfaction with Mr G's regime...however what level that stood at is,as yet,somewhat unclear.

My belief is that,at some point,the most committed of the Rebels decided to make a solo run and rise up in armed revolt.

This "armed revolt" element was the tipping-point in involving the "greater world community" via the U.N.

The line which is now being reinforced in daily News Programmes from Libya is to confirm just how despised Gadaffi himself and everything associated with him was/is.

I'M suggesting that this universal Libyan hatred for Gadaffi has taken the combined efforts of U.N./NATO and the Transitionals some 6 Months to bring to marketable condition.

For six months,with his Airforce totally grounded,his Air Defence Capability neutralized,His Administrative Ability virtually crushed,this Gadaffi lad and his (Considerable) Libyan support manage to resist the Armed Rebellion and come close to suppressing it entirely.....I contend that's not possible using just Fear and Mercenaries alone....That can only be accomplished with broad internal support.

The floor is yours !

AlekSmart

SamHarris wrote: »

Temporally you are off then, did the rebellion not begin before the sanstions etc?

Did you have the same feeling concerning Mubarak?

The rebellion,as it's now described,was I suspect almost a constant feature in some form over 40 years of Mr G's rule.

Rebellion,festering dissent,local uprisings,disaffection were all quite common in the region even before Cap'n Gadaffi and his men locked good King Idris out of his Palace.

What interests me is the rather sudden interest which this particular version inspired in the U.N.

Gadaffi's response,somewhat typical in his wardrobe of the same,was'nt particularly out-of-character for him.

Whilst it was a set of blood curdling threats,they were directed specifically at the Rebel factions themselves and also in a time frame which allowed and saw many thousands of Benghazians flee their City.

Not a nice prospect for any population,but not quite the sudden mass extermination of this civilian population either ?

U.N. 1973 was quite specifically predicated upon the imminent attack by the Gadaffi Regime upon unarmed,non-combatant civilian Libyan people.

Thus far,I've only heard Col.G ranting and raving against those who held and bore arms against his regime ?

If this is to be the new defining standard for U.N./NATO military intervention then those agencies are going to be very busy indeed,perhaps even in the banluie's of Paris,the barrio's of Barcelona, or the high rises of good ol Blighty

As for Mubarak,like Assad and quite a few others in the region there's certainly a Thread or two which they can support on their own.

cyberhog

bk wrote: »

I know some people here don't trust western governments like the Brits. I absolutely understand and agree, I was 100% against them invading Iraq. But in this case they actually have done a good thing and should be praised for that, so hopefully in future they will continue to do the right thing.

You should do a bit of research on Libya's make up to understand what is really going on. There has long been bad blood between the people of Benghazi and Gaddafi. King Idris was from Cyrenaica. All NATO has done is given the rebels a chance to settle old scores.

27 August 2011

The Libyan rebels have been meting out brutal treatment to sub-Saharan Africans in Tripoli, suspecting that they are Gaddafi loyalists

The killings were pitiless.

The United Nations issued an urgent call for restraint by both sides in the bloody and bitter endgame to the civil war yesterday. But the thirst for vengeance has been difficult to control, to which the morgues, hospitals and the urban killings fields of the Libyan capital bore testimony.

...the mounting number of deaths of men from sub-Saharan Africa at the hands of the rebels – lynchings in many cases – raises disturbing questions about the opposition administration, the Transitional National Council (TNC) taking over as Libya's government, and about Western backing for it.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/rebels-settle-scores-in-libyan-capital-2344671.html

Western governments didn't get involved in this tribal feud to "protect civilians" they are in it for their own greedy agendas. EOS

frackingishell

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwXHJxOdfyA&feature=player_embedded

Kucinich , Ohio democrat, questions whether Libya was planned all along.
Of course it was.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwXHJxOdfyA&feature=player_embedded

Jonny7

frackingishell wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwXHJxOdfyA&feature=player_embedded

Kucinich , Ohio democrat, questions whether Libya was planned all along.
Of course it was.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwXHJxOdfyA&feature=player_embedded

Kucinich is staunchly anti-war, however when Gaddafi extended him an offer to come to Libya for a "peace mission", Kucinich backed out citing his own personal safety. Instead, he chose to go to Syria instead give a press conference stating how great Assad is.

You couldn't make it up.

frackingishell

Jonny7 wrote: »

Kucinich is staunchly anti-war, however when Gaddafi extended him an offer to come to Libya for a "peace mission", Kucinich backed out citing his own personal safety. Instead, he chose to go to Syria instead give a press conference stating how great Assad is.

You couldn't make it up.

so f**king what?! Kucinich is still talking about real things that happened you fool, doesn't matter whether he's pro or anti-war, likes brown bread or white, or went to Blackpool or santaponsa on his jollies 3 years ago. You Halfwit.