So how did we end up in another...

[Magician]

Re: So how did we end up in another...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Q3210</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Mek sure you no fly over the no fly zone, bro. </div></div>

Dem lock it off fi wi a few weeks back.
All now de flight de from S.America, and West Africa affi reroute over the Med or Sudan and it cost extra time for which dem nuh pay we. &lt;kissteet&gt;

[Magician]

Re: So how did we end up in another...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Natral</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Magix</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Well the imminent problem is that he's a madman who's bombing civilians and destroying his country. </div></div>
That is not entirely true,that is simply part of the propaganda being waged to justify military action,...was gadaffi supposed to sit back quietly while the so-called &quot;rebels&quot; wage a military campaign against him,would the US do it,would the UK do it,...what would be the response of the united states if a group of &quot;rebels&quot; with sophisticated weaponry took over los angeles,and a couple other major cities.</div></div>

There is no need for anti-Gaddafi propaganda. He's been sawing his own for decades. Everybody know seh de man head no good.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Natral</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Magix</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
But the ongoing problem is that it's a rich country that has so much potential and for 41 years has been stifled under his rule.
Tripoli is a dump, the people live in diapilated buildings. The infrastructure is crumbling. There are weekly near misses over Libya as the air traffic control does not have basic equipment.

The road from his palace to the airport is of course very nice, and there are beautiful new apartment buildings that he gives to people born on any September (the anniversary of the revolution).

</div></div>
So you are saying that the solution to libya,s infrastructure and dilapidated buildings is to get a UN charter to support air strikes on Libya,..that is just crazy,if we are to use the same yardstick to justify military action then even Jamaican airspace would be due for a no fly zone and military action sagainst the JDF.</div></div>

No, there are two issues we're discussing here. First is the bombing of civilians by the air force. That's what the UN (much too late) charter is for.
Now to make Libya live up to its potential you need to get rid of Gaddafi. Now I know that what comes after might not be desirable either, but you'll never know unless you try.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Natral</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Magix</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Libya will be better off without Qaddafi</div></div>
It is not for us to decide which country is better off under which ruler,we cant judge other leaders and societies by using our own model of democracy,it was widely accepted before the invasion of Iraq that Iraq would be better off without saddam,we now know that wasnt true,thousands have died since,the country is still undivided and people are still dying.
<span style="font-weight: bold">If the Libyan people think their country deserves a better leader then it is them that should be making the changes</span>,not the UN,who was cajoled into it by countries who are blinded by their own self interests. </div></div>

They tried to make a change. But unlike in Tunisia and Egypt where the rulers realised they have overstayed their welcome and left, this guy is delusional and is
using a force that the people can't stand up to. I don't agree with the motives why all these countries agreed to participate in the action, but I do agree with its intent.

[Derek]

Re: So how did we end up in another...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Magix</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Natral</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Magix</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Well the imminent problem is that he's a madman who's bombing civilians and destroying his country. </div></div>
That is not entirely true,that is simply part of the propaganda being waged to justify military action,...was gadaffi supposed to sit back quietly while the so-called &quot;rebels&quot; wage a military campaign against him,would the US do it,would the UK do it,...what would be the response of the united states if a group of &quot;rebels&quot; with sophisticated weaponry took over los angeles,and a couple other major cities.</div></div>

There is no need for anti-Gaddafi propaganda. He's been sawing his own for decades. Everybody know seh de man head no good. </div></div>


Excuse me, but why is anyone who disagrees with America, mad?

[Magician]

Re: So how did we end up in another...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Derek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Excuse me, but why is anyone who disagrees with America, mad?
</div></div>

<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/aF6tipZDs4k&amp;feature=related"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/aF6tipZDs4k&amp;feature=related" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>

[jah_yout]

Re: So how did we end up in another...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Q3210</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Natral</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Q3210</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Gadhaffi wasn`t exactly being nice with his opposition protestors.
Comparing the Egyptian rebellion, Mubarak didn`t let all hell loose on those in Cairo`s square. Perhaps he couldn`t, having lost support on an apparent much larger scale than Gadhaffi.</div></div>

Gadaffi wasnt being nice because the rebels werent being nice either,in egypt the protesters were peaceful,they didnt posess anti-tank missiles and ak 47,s...and the protesters in egypt gathered peacefully in a tahrir square,..not take over whole major cities at the end of guns....what was gadaffi supposed to do.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The UN were responding to SOS no fly zone to prevent genocide in Benhazi as Gadhaffi`s troops zeroed in from Tripoli to liquidate all opposition rebels to dust and ash</div></div>

In my opinion gadaffi responded to the rebel,s in exactly the same way any other countries respond to armed agression,foreign or domestic.
The us was happy for the Jamaican government to fire on it,s own people in tivoli gardens in the pursuit of 1 single man,.....as it turned out more people probably died in tivoli than as yet in benghazi,....where was the calls for a no fly zone over kingston when the jamaican army invaded a small civilian community.

</div></div>

Our influence of Ja$100 a stick ganja smokers pales in comparison to the oil that they have and what the UN Peace Council will fight for.
Plus the Tivoli invasion was a one out of one intraction used to drive fear on Tivolites into giving up loyalty to a one Don, unlike the multitudes involved in the cause to rid themselves of this tyrant Don of the Desert </div></div>


wow!
another customer...sold!

you really buy this stuff?
yeah- and sadam had weapons of mass...oh never mind;

amazing how people just swallow whatever story the propaganda machine feeds them;

just ask yourself if any sovereign nation's leader will just lay down &amp; allow rebels to overthrow the gov't...
would america the u.k. or france do it?

if khadaffy is a madman, guess who else is

[jah_yout]

Re: So how did we end up in another...

i guess no one learned anything from iraq;

it's sad how people just accept this stuff without looking deeper...
as long as the u.s labels someone as a madman the droids follow -arms outstretched like zombies in a monotone drone...

&quot;khadaffy is a madman...must kill khadaffy....&quot;

[johnnycakes]

Re: So how did we end up in another...

Smoothy,
come on over to the thread &quot;The Most Amazing Article.....&quot; in this forum and we can continue this.

[Magician]

Re: So how did we end up in another...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jah_yout</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

it's sad how people just accept this stuff without looking deeper...
as long as the u.s labels someone as a madman the droids follow -arms outstretched like zombies in a monotone drone...

&quot;khadaffy is a madman...must kill khadaffy....&quot; </div></div>

Mi nuh folla fashion sah. Yuh nuh affi look deep fi si seh him head no good.
Yuh si de speech him mek to de UN one time? No wonder people who normally nuh vote come in an vote. You know how hard it is to get the UN to approve anyting? De is one wukliss set a beurocrats. And if UN is unanimous bout seh Gaddafi mad a nuh mus!

[johnnycakes]

Re: So how did we end up in another...

AND here is Noam Chomsky on the intervention in Libya:

News »
Strikes will ‘antagonise’ many in Arab world, says Chomsky
Mar 21st, 2011 +
Libya, Noam Chomsky, United States, War
Military intervention in Libya is a serious mistake, activist Noam Chomsky tells SAUNDRA SATTERLEE

NOAM CHOMSKY wrote about the Spanish Civil War at the age of 10 for his school newspaper, was briefly jailed with Norman Mailer in 1967 for an anti-Vietnam protest at the Pentagon, and last May was detained by the Israelis when he tried to enter the West Bank via Jordan.

A world-renowned scholar and retired professor of linguistics at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, he remains, at age 82, a robust political activist and a stinging critic of US foreign policy.

Chomsky warns that direct military intervention in Libya will turn out to be a serious mistake.

“When the United States, Britain and France opt for military intervention, we have to bear in mind that these countries are hated in the region for very good reasons. The rich and powerful can say history is bunk but victims don’t have that luxury,” he says.

“Threatening moves, I’m sure, evoke all sorts of terrible thoughts and memories in the region – and many people across Africa and the Arab world will be seriously antagonised by military intervention.”

Chomsky adds that in Egypt public opinion polls have shown about 90 per cent of the population thinks the US is the worst threat they face.

He stresses that Libya is a humanitarian problem. “It is also a civil war and intervening in a civil war is a complicated business,” he says. “We may not like it, but there is support for Gadafy.”

On the subject of Palestine, recent events in North Africa do not bode well if a reported request by the Israeli government for $20 billion from the US – as a force for stability in the region – is anything to go by.

“This would, predictably, be used to establish more firmly Israel’s control over what is left of Palestine and maintain Israel’s capacity to carry out aggressive actions. It doesn’t mean that Israel will succeed in obtaining these funds from the US but the intent is clear,” says Chomsky.

He envisages a repositioning of US power across North Africa, especially in Egypt.

He believes the Wall Street Journal accurately observed that the West – the US in particular – now has a problem.

“It hasn’t yet figured out how to control the new rising elements; the assumption is of course that we have to control them,” he says.

On shifts in western alliances with authoritarian regimes, Chomsky says that in a long series of cases it became impossible for the West to support its favourite dictators.

“At that point there’s a game plan that goes into operation. It’s being followed in the Arab world, basically to send dictators out to pasture when you can’t support them any longer and produce ringing declarations of your love of democracy,” he says.

Saudi Arabia provides an example of the contradiction in western policy, he says.

“Saudi Arabia is the centre of radical Islamism. It has also been the major ally of the United States and Britain, which have tended over the years to support radical Islam in opposition to secular nationalism. Saudi Arabia is a pretty harsh dictatorship. Prior to the recent Day of Rage the government made it clear that it would not be tolerated – and it wasn’t.”

Further to this, we have seen Saudi troops dispatched into Bahrain with grim consequences.

US secretary of state Hillary Clinton, EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton and British foreign secretary William Hague met in Geneva on February 28th to promote the case for the prosecution of Gadafy by the International Criminal Court (ICC).

“One question is whether that would interfere with a preferable option, namely getting Gadafy out of the country.

“Furthermore, as far as the ICC is concerned, we cannot overlook the fact that for most of the world it is regarded as a symbol of western hypocrisy,” he says.

He wonders why George Bush and Tony Blair were not taken to the ICC for invading Iraq.

“This is the rich and powerful exempting themselves. And that doesn’t mean that the ICC is worthless, but it certainly undermines its claim of integrity,” he says.

On the subject of oil and current events across North Africa and the Middle East, Chomsky says: “The overriding concern for control over oil has dominated British policy for a century and US policy for almost that long. Of course that will remain.”

[barosa]

Re: So how did we end up in another...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jah_yout</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i guess no one learned anything from iraq;

it's sad how people just accept this stuff without looking deeper...
as long as the u.s labels someone as a madman the droids follow -arms outstretched like zombies in a monotone drone...

&quot;khadaffy is a madman...must kill khadaffy....&quot; </div></div>

Jah_ yout, How about if he is accurately characterised as the &quot;Mad, Crazy Dictator&quot;? Dictators have never been my favourite type of leaders or politicians.. Somehow, I can't accept your attempt to make Khadaffi appear to be a normal rational human being... He is a murderous thug and the time is drawing near when he will have to answer to charges against humanity...
_______________________________

Just like oil, the truth always surface to the top..

[neutral]

Re: So how did we end up in another...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Magix</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Mi nuh folla fashion sah. Yuh nuh affi look deep fi si seh him head no good.
Yuh si de speech him mek to de UN one time? No wonder people who normally nuh vote come in an vote. You know how hard it is to get the UN to approve anyting? De is one wukliss set a beurocrats. And if UN is unanimous bout seh Gaddafi mad a nuh mus! </div></div>

Well,he cant be all that mad,he has managed to rule Libya for decades,in any case,did the members of the UN who drew up the charter for attacking Libya did it simply because they thought he was mad..?

[neutral]

Re: So how did we end up in another...



The UN has not given coalition forces the &quot;legal authority&quot; to remove Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi by military action, David Cameron has said.

The UK prime minister told Parliament a UN resolution allowing strikes on the country was &quot;limited in its scope&quot;.

The head of the armed forces said it &quot;absolutely&quot; did not allow the targeting of Colonel Gaddafi.

But there is some confusion, as Defence Secretary Liam Fox has said such action is &quot;potentially a possibility&quot;.

Coalition forces, including those from the UK, France and the US, say they are trying to protect civilians from attacks by the ruling regime.

BBC political editor Nick Robinson said the UK government was walking a &quot;legal tightrope&quot; with the UN resolution and wanted to reassure Arab countries that it was not about &quot;to topple&quot; Col Gaddafi - and that Libya would not become &quot;another Iraq&quot;.

On the other hand, the coalition did not want to risk &quot;telling Gaddafi what they will do&quot;, our correspondent added.

United Nations Resolution 1973, passed last week, authorises &quot;all necessary measures&quot; short of an occupying force to protect citizens - but there have been questions about exactly what that could mean

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12802749