Thread: Who are we backing in Libya?

I know nothing can justify the brutal attack. I cannot believe the administration got talked into intervening. I know it's quid pro quo for France, England and Italy helping us in Iraq and Afghanistan, but I cannot see a favorable outcome. England cannot afford to extend themselves much more than they have for us, Italy is just letting us use their bases and France, well, you know what a famous
Sec of Def said, "going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an accordian"-nuff said. Definately a turd sandwich.

"Hey, everybody, some crazy guy is paying people to go down the street and shout at some duffus who's hanging upside down with ketchup on his head. All we have to do is open our cell phones and point them at him."

This is ridiculous as shit. In a month Qaddafi will pay off his opposition, agree to "talks" with the Western powers (which mean he will pay them off too) and everyone can go home, all courtesy of several billion dollars worth of US Ordnance and some thousands of dead Libyans.

Sounds like a good day in LA.

Ah yes. Finally found it : Alma - Let's arm Libya then dodge... - #13 I'm not denying that violence occurred, especially as Alma made notice since protesters attacked police headquarters. But my comment back then didn't change and I keep wondering how one would base his opinion on a few short one month old youtube videos - that are second-hand information. What they offer are a tiny few particular events in a whole revolution, and my comparison with vandalism in protests still holds - it cannot be generalized.
I would also advise to find another source than Pajamas Media, that's just me being suspicious. Especially given it's conclusion, I wonder what the article tried to demonstrate. As I told Alma, a lot of people share the opinion, "just not for the same reasons".

This guy

Again.

Originally Posted by Vuld Edone

Ah yes. Finally found it : Alma - Let's arm Libya then dodge... - #13 I'm not denying that violence occurred, especially as Alma made notice since protesters attacked police headquarters. But my comment back then didn't change and I keep wondering how one would base his opinion on a few short one month old youtube videos - that are second-hand information. What they offer are a tiny few particular events in a whole revolution, and my comparison with vandalism in protests still holds - it cannot be generalized.
I would also advise to find another source than Pajamas Media, that's just me being suspicious. Especially given it's conclusion, I wonder what the article tried to demonstrate. As I told Alma, a lot of people share the opinion, "just not for the same reasons".

Pajamas media is & has been since its inception, a HIGHLY reliable source of factual information, regardless of the author's opinion offered in the rest of any article. Also, I offered no opinion at all. Hence the question mark in the subject line.

Originally Posted by Bearman

Pajamas media is & has been since its inception, a HIGHLY reliable source of factual information, regardless of the author's opinion offered in the rest of any article. Also, I offered no opinion at all. Hence the question mark in the subject line.

Your lack of opinion looked a lot like Alma's one. The factual information did look familiar too. I can't say if those sites are as reliable as Pajamas Media :
- The New Yorker - Who are the rebels ?
- CLP - Who are the rebels ?
- And this one because it contains factual information
To be honest I don't even know the criteria with which to answer the question, and I'm not sure even intelligence services from different countries can truly answer it. If a few youtube clips are relevant, so be it.

Originally Posted by Vuld Edone

Your lack of opinion looked a lot like Alma's one. The factual information did look familiar too. I can't say if those sites are as reliable as Pajamas Media :
- The New Yorker - Who are the rebels ?
- CLP - Who are the rebels ?
- And this one because it contains factual information
To be honest I don't even know the criteria with which to answer the question, and I'm not sure even intelligence services from different countries can truly answer it. If a few youtube clips are relevant, so be it.

I think the utube's are relevant. Even if they're isolated incidents, if no real leaders come forward & take charge, those guys will by default.

I read all 3 links. 2 of the writers claim to have actually been on the ground. Cal Thomas was bloviating from his office. Meh. It's what he gets paid to do.

One writer said no, nuh-uh, no al queda types around here. The other guy said yes, but only a few. I've read other articles that say there are platoons of a.q. types coming back from Iraq & Afghanistan.

McCain has been there for a few days, supposedly meeting with rebel leaders. I think it could be real easy to make a huge mistake here.

Who are we backing in Libya?

Who do you think?

Originally Posted by John Drake

This guy

Again.

Of course, I often wonder at people that feel sympathy for that piece of trash.

Nguyễn Văn Lém was a member of the Vietcong, and the commander of a VC Death Squad. They targeted military officers and police officers. And if they could not find any of those, they targeted their families.

In fact, while the execution is famous, his actual arrest is much less well known. It seems that Mr. Lém was captured while he was trying to fill in a mass grave, that contained the bodies of at least 7 family members of police officers.

Even Mr. Lém's widow admitted that her husband was the leader of the Death Squad. And because he was the member of a foreign military operating under the guise of a civilian, he is legally considered to be a spy. And anybody that knows the Geneva Conventions knows, Spies have no protections as POWs.

I am a pacifist. But if he was placed in front of me for commanding a hit squad that killed family members, I would put a bullet in him myself.

Does it really matter who they are? To be quite honest, I don’t care who the rebels are; I want to know who is going to lead them, and where they’re being led. I could support US involvement to oust Qaddafi for a more Western-friendly government, but I don’t think we should waste our money and resources to replace Qaddafi with, say, the Muslim Brotherhood. That’s one of the problems with this sort of Immaculate Intervention, we don’t know who we’re supporting until it’s too late. To put it another way, "We rushed into this without a plan, now we're out in the middle, going in circles."

Originally Posted by hairballxavier

Who do you think?

I don't know, but I wonder




REPORT: Kissinger Calls For US Ground Invasion Of Libya... ^
From the April 22, 2011 16:43:10 GMT edition of the Drudge Report.

Kissinger warns on Afghan exit strategy; Must prepare for 'long struggle'... ^
From the June 28, 2010 22:34:39 GMT edition of the Drudge Report.

Originally Posted by Bearman

I don't know, but I wonder

And soon we will be in no doubt as to who they are: Gaddafi announced he is washing his hands of Misurata and from now on local tribes can deal with the "revolutionaries" how they see fit.