De-demonising Gaddafi - what you don't know

digme · 26-06-2011 05:23PM

wes wrote: »

Have you heard some of the stuff he said, he was going do to protesters. Nothing in that video changes any of that, and as such the video is pointless.

We know what governments are like ,it doesn't excuse an invasion to save protesters while bombing the sh1t out of the country .The invasion is wrong.

mattjack · 26-06-2011 05:25PM

digme wrote: »

We know what governments are like ,it doesn't excuse an invasion to save protesters.The invasion is wrong.

what invasion ?

digme · 26-06-2011 05:26PM

mattjack wrote: »

what invasion ?

Are you serious?

mattjack · 26-06-2011 05:29PM

digme wrote: »

Are you serious?

yeah...have NATO invaded ?

digme · 26-06-2011 05:33PM

mattjack wrote: »

yeah...have NATO invaded ?

They have troops flooding into the country from neighbouring countries and arming them to the teeth.I call that an invasion.
Add to that they are bombing it to bits from the sky.If you want to be pedantic and petty that's fine.

mattjack · 26-06-2011 05:35PM

digme wrote: »

They have troops flooding into the country from neighbouring countries and arming them to the teeth.I call that an invasion.
Add to that they are bombing it to bits from the sky.If you want to be pedantic and petty that's fine.

any takers for a follow up comment...?

craggles · 26-06-2011 05:36PM

I'm lost for words.

mattjack · 26-06-2011 05:39PM

MV Eksund , Pan Am 103 ?

Duffy the Vampire Slayer · 26-06-2011 05:44PM

Although most of Digme's claims are silly, I believe hes right about America supplying arms to shady groups and dictators around the world.

jumpguy · 26-06-2011 05:47PM

Gaddafi is merely a repeat of a sad, familiar story in Africa. He started out with noble roots, but then overstayed his welcome, and he cleverly engineered his country so any revolt would be very difficult. He weakened the military and instead used militias, so a repeat of Egypt couldn't happen to him.

Media exaggeration is rampant, but he is no hero. Just don't watch Fox News, or pretty much any Rupert Murdoch controlled media.

mattjack · 26-06-2011 06:10PM

jumpguy wrote: »

Gaddafi is merely a repeat of a sad, familiar story in Africa. He started out with noble roots, but then overstayed his welcome, and he cleverly engineered his country so any revolt would be very difficult. He weakened the military and instead used militias, so a repeat of Egypt couldn't happen to him.

Media exaggeration is rampant, but he is no hero. Just don't watch Fox News, or pretty much any Rupert Murdoch controlled media.

Egypt and a lot of other North African Countries had at the very least limited opposition groups that could in the event of election offers field candidates.Libya as you said Jumpguy has nothing of the sort ,so even Gadaffis most recent offer of elections is pointless.Like you said his use of militias and also tribes is his strength.

goose2005 · 26-06-2011 06:13PM

charlemont wrote: »

Whatever people think of Gadaffi, He is the most progressive leader in Africa, What im trying to say is basically is his country isn't a dump, With regard to his threats and use of violence, In those parts of the world you have to be hard/mad to stay in power.

Im not making excuses for him but id rather Gadaffi than the rest of the leaders in that region.

He's not progressive at all. Even the Arab League condemned him, which is really saying something.

end a eknny · 27-06-2011 09:25PM

wes wrote: »

While, its true, there are plenty of people who are as bad a Gaddafi, but in this case, there are people in Libya who asked for help, as they would have been murdered by Gaddafi. I think in this instance, that Nato has got it mostly right. Gaddafi is scum, and there in a position to do something about it.

Now, I don't believe there helping them out of the goodness of there hearts or anything, but then I don't really care, as there helping the Libyan people, and the people who I know who are from Libya are also against Gaddafi, and I have received several emails highlighting how the Libyan people need help against Gaddafi, and my friend isn't working for the US or anyone else, but it just trying to show that his people needs help.

and nato are not killing any libyians and when gadafi is removed peace and harmoy will reign and the people of libyia will have democracy and live in peace like the iraqis got when saddam was killed and you are you are supporting tommy tiernan on his new tour when?

Nodin · 27-06-2011 09:30PM

digme wrote: »

They have troops flooding into the country from neighbouring countries and arming them to the teeth........

You've a source for that? And by source I mean a household name news organisation.....

end a eknny · 27-06-2011 10:20PM

mattjack wrote: »

Gaddafi, Gaddafi..? armed the IRA Ido believe ......

no charlie haughey and the americans i believe

end a eknny · 27-06-2011 10:23PM

its a pity nato werent about to help the rebels in northern ireland when the local dictators were trying to wipe them off the face of the earth

mattjack · 27-06-2011 10:50PM

end a eknny wrote: »

its a pity nato werent about to help the rebels in northern ireland when the local dictators were trying to wipe them off the face of the earth

what a bizarre and odd world you live in....

mattjack · 27-06-2011 10:52PM

end a eknny wrote: »

and nato are not killing any libyians and when gadafi is removed peace and harmoy will reign and the people of libyia will have democracy and live in peace like the iraqis got when saddam was killed and you are you are supporting tommy tiernan on his new tour when?

WTF..?

end a eknny · 27-06-2011 11:01PM

mattjack wrote: »

what a bizarre and odd world you live in....

same one as you but i have my eyes open

Merch · 27-06-2011 11:09PM

mattjack wrote: »

Gaddafi, Gaddafi..? armed the IRA Ido believe ......

But isnt that what The UK/NATO is doing now, kinda double standards really.
We fault you for arming our enemies in the past (in fact we never stopped holding it against you) so now we do ourselves what we claimed was wrong! strange double standards

mattjack wrote: »

same as you....Gaddafi armed the IRA ,your answer was to bring America into it,Gaddafis initial response to protesters was to use artillery and snipers..

Do you have evidence of this artillery and the snipers? and what makes you think most western countries wouldn't or already have not used snipers against people they consider enemies of their states, even if they happen to be its citizens also?

mattjack wrote: »

WTF..?

I believe that was sarcasm

Lets be honest, seems the yanks aren't really the big players here, France and the UK are falling over themselves to try out their military hardware, namely the eurofighter/suddenly bomber and the Rafale, Its a wargame to impress India which is one of the options to buy those airframes, the bonus is, I dont know, protracted war? oil? never really stopped hating gadaffi for standing up to them?? The west has a habit of supporting those in the short term who turn out to be their enemy in the future, and a history of deposing legitimate leaders.
I be;lieve the UN resolution here, http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/50/ares50-172.htm isnt being followed.
Whether I agree with Gadaffi or not, he seems no worse than Mubarak, Assad or the leaders of Saud??

end a eknny · 27-06-2011 11:09PM

mattjack wrote: »

WTF..?

its pretty simple at least i would have thought so. but can anybodyfor one minute say that libyia will really be a safer place without gadafi and that more live wont be lost as a result of natos actions

end a eknny · 27-06-2011 11:13PM

if gadafi sold arms to the ira does that make him responsible for their actions, if so america, france, the u.k and russia e.t.c have alot more questions to answer

Merch · 27-06-2011 11:17PM

end a eknny wrote: »

its pretty simple at least i would have thought so. but can anybodyfor one minute say that libyia will really be a safer place without gadafi and that more live wont be lost as a result of natos actions

I'd say look at Iraq, those poor bastards dont seem to be any better off with democracy than without. If a state is fractured it leaves it wide open for all sorts of problems.
At least there is a certain stability.
If the Irish governemt was as restricitive would I want someone to wade in and blow the hell out of the place? we hardly have democracy anyway, but I dont want someone bombimg the place to hell either.What will that solve? Damage the infrastructure, more water shortages, food/feul shortages, worse healthcare issues.

bk · 28-06-2011 12:39AM

Merch wrote: »

I'd say look at Iraq, those poor bastards dont seem to be any better off with democracy than without. If a state is fractured it leaves it wide open for all sorts of problems.
At least there is a certain stability.
If the Irish governemt was as restricitive would I want someone to wade in and blow the hell out of the place? we hardly have democracy anyway, but I dont want someone bombimg the place to hell either.What will that solve? Damage the infrastructure, more water shortages, food/feul shortages, worse healthcare issues.

Ah, sure in that case we should never have bothered fighting for independence from the British!!!!

After all, after winning our independence we fell straight into a civil war and decades of economic torture at the hands of Dev.

Wouldn't we have been better off under the gentle embrace of the British government and their blank and tan friends!!!

Some people here are utterly clueless. It is absolutely horrible that innocent civilians are being killed. It is a tragedy that the Libyans couldn't gain democracy they seemingly so strongly desire via peaceful means and are instead forced to fight for their freedoms.

Likewise, many innocent civilians died during the Irish war of independence and following civil war, but few would argue that we aren't better off now.

wes · 28-06-2011 12:53AM

end a eknny wrote: »

and nato are not killing any libyians and when gadafi is removed peace and harmoy will reign and the people of libyia will have democracy and live in peace like the iraqis got when saddam was killed and you are you are supporting tommy tiernan on his new tour when?

Nato are trying to stop Gaddafi's forces from killing a bunch of people. We all know what the mad man said.

Secondly, unlike Iraq, the situation in Libya had already kicked off before Nato got involved. Regardless of Nato's involvement, things would have went south one way or another, at least with them helping the rebels, Libya has some chance of democracy.

As for Iraq, that entire enterprise was utterly stupid, and based on a pack of lies, and those responsible should be in jail. The war against Iraq however is not comparable to what Nato is doing in Libya, and personally I think your reaching with such a comparison.

digme · 28-06-2011 12:58AM

wes not matter what facts anyone presents you with i doubt you will change your mind.

wes · 28-06-2011 01:01AM

digme wrote: »

wes not matter what facts anyone presents you with i doubt you will change your mind.

What facts exactly? Gaddafi made himself very clear what he was going to do to protesters, and personally I think its a good things some people decided to stop him.

I think it would be great if similar action was taken against the regimes in Bahrain, Israel and Syria, when the nutters running those countries decide to go on a killing spree, but sadly that won't happen.

AlekSmart · 28-06-2011 01:03AM

Merch wrote: »

But isnt that what The UK/NATO is doing now, kinda double standards really.

Do you have evidence of this artillery and the snipers? and what makes you think most western countries wouldn't or already have not used snipers against people they consider enemies of their states, even if they happen to be its citizens also?

Thus far,there has been no actual evidence of this unearthed by UN/NATO,despite its actions being predicated entirely upon that very occurrence.

Lets be honest, seems the yanks aren't really the big players here, France and the UK are falling over themselves to try out their military hardware, namely the eurofighter/suddenly bomber and the Rafale, Its a wargame to impress India which is one of the options to buy those airframes, the bonus is, I dont know, protracted war? oil? never really stopped hating gadaffi for standing up to them?? The west has a habit of supporting those in the short term who turn out to be their enemy in the future, and a history of deposing legitimate leaders.
I be;lieve the UN resolution here, http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/50/ares50-172.htm isnt being followed.
Whether I agree with Gadaffi or not, he seems no worse than Mubarak, Assad or the leaders of Saud??

The entire UN/NATO roadshow is looking more and more like a big-boys-toys game play that is gfoing horribly wrong.

At this point in proceedings,having rather comprehensively failed to spur those restive Libyan natives into deposing Gadaffi,the "Allies" are prehaps realising that their initial reasoning won't wash any longer.

Which explains to some extent the opinions being reported on here....

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/africa/us-admits-nato-trying-to-kill-colonel-gaddafi-2806357.html

Admiral Locklear and his collection of Eurofighter Generals are,as ever,keen to be allowed to do the "Military Stuff" without the bothersome Politicking which can often get in the way of a bloody good war.

The Admirals comments also need to be considered in the light of some fundamental differences between Prez Obama and the Pentagon's Top Level regarding the President's rather comprehensive decision to retreat from Afghanistan,some might say without having achieved much in the first place.

There is now no longer any doubt that the UN/NATO mission is now "Kill Gadaffi", which many posters here see as something quite acceptable in the democratic context.

Oddly enough,whilst absent mindedly gazing at the window display of the Irish Aid office in Dublin earlier,I read through the display regarding the positives of aid to Africa.....Availability of Health Services,Availability of Education,Availability of Water and Sanitation,Basic Human Rights for Women.....and a few more.....all quantifiably present in Gadaffi's Libya.

These attributes of modern Libya alone would cause me to question the rather too easy option proffered by UN/NATO that our bould Colonel is Mad,Bad and about to press the destroy-my-own-country button...It's still not ringing true

digme · 28-06-2011 01:04AM

wes wrote: »

What facts exactly? Gaddafi made himself very clear what he was going to do to protesters, and personally I think its a good things some people decided to stop him.

I think it would be great if similar action was taken against the regimes in Bahrain, Israel and Syria, when the nutters running those countries decide to go on a killing spree, but sadly that won't happen.

Ok can we drop this protester nonsense?
Do you honestly believe that is the reason? Seriously i find this insulting to your intelligence.

Merch · 28-06-2011 01:04AM

bk wrote: »

Ah, sure in that case we should never have bothered fighting for independence from the British!!!!

After all, after winning our independence we fell straight into a civil war and decades of economic torture at the hands of Dev.

Wouldn't we have been better off under the gentle embrace of the British government and their blank and tan friends!!!

Some people here are utterly clueless. It is absolutely horrible that innocent civilians are being killed. It is a tragedy that the Libyans couldn't gain democracy they seemingly so strongly desire via peaceful means and are instead forced to fight for their freedoms.

Likewise, many innocent civilians died during the Irish war of independence and following civil war, but few would argue that we aren't better off now.

I've heard a few people say that in the last few years alright,
and if that was the case the Black and tans wouldnt have turned up.

I agree, some people are utterly clueless, does saying that make you feel right? believing the tripe I've seen spouted by the BBC gives me concern, they couldnt even corroborate where (if even in Libya) the events they were showing were happening, I dont take for gospel anything a mainstream media or any media spouts, none of us here knows exactly what is going on, but if iraq is anything to go by, I'd say the Libians are better off under gaddafi.
The UN specifies that a sovereign nation should be free from foreign intevention, if the west really want to undermine Gaddaffi why dont they issue trade embargoes?? cut off the money, because we know that wont happen.

Generally people are better off than in the past, but we are better off now than those from richer nations of the same time of our independence (20's) not just our own country. Perhaps we would be better even still if we had never gained our so called Independence.

De-demonising Gaddafi - what you don't know

Comments