Wait one second. Gaddafi is supposed to just let the rebels tear Libya apart? Is that what Netanyahu would do if the Palestinians take up arms against the Israeli government?

Doesn't matter if it's Washington, london, moscow, israel or saudia arabia...shameless double standards, you can count on it!



I just hope the false prophet d.p. doesn't turn out to be a true prophet after all, therefore I'm hoping against this libya conflict actually being a trap that America/Europe has just been roped into.

Originally posted by CordDragonzord
It's funny how similar Obama is to Bush, hell, they even look the same to me.

Instead of taking troops out of the middle east he is sending more, great.

Wait...Obama is president of the earth? this was the UN, not the US.

Its amazing how much italian president mario is like bush...or etc etc etc (name all members of world politics here).

Originally posted by Romanian
The purpose of UN is NOT to create jobs . Lets see what the purpose if UN is:

The purpose of the United Nations is to bring all nations of the world together to work for peace and development, based on the principles of justice, human dignity and the well-being of all people

I see. The purpose of the UN is to write nicely worded mission statements and decree letters of seemingly benevolent nature. How noble of them.

Originally posted by Romanian
Really, do you think this would be the way the people are debating this issue?

They can debate it all their want, but there is little realistic outcome. It is more like each sides states their own opinion over and over again, rather than an actual debate.

Originally posted by Romanian
Do you realise that the reputation of the 5 could go down the drain if Gaddafi is removed and population will surface horror stories on how bad the dictator was? I guess they did not laugh!

No, they won't go down anywhere. Rational explanations can always be found for why they didn't support the "no fly zone". Reputation in international politics is a complex thing, factoring in economics, alliances, and of course politics. The people boo a country one day, cheer it the next day, based on what they hear in the nightly news. Impact on the country from these mood swings = zero.

Originally posted by Romanian
Not having a no-fly zone would help more?

No, but cheering this decree as if it will magically save the Libyan people is premature at best.

Originally posted by Romanian
The resolution had some provisions, allowing some extra steps to protect the civilians .

How realistic are they, and even if executed will they work as planned?

I am not saying that this resolution by the UN is not nice or benevolent in theory. But there is a big gap between theory, even if on paper, and real outcome. Who is going to fill the gap?

Originally posted by Romanian
I did not meant EU as an entity , we hardly agree each-other down here I meant EU states. France will take the lead this time, UK will help.

And what is France going to do? Send Sarkozy to Libya to tell Gadhafi that he has been a bad boy? And do you really think UK is itching to get its hands dirty in this quagmire?

Yep, its official - it is not 2011, but 1981!!!

I'm going to go listen to "Ceremony" by Joy Division on cassette. Anybody see Reagan's latest poll numbers?

Originally posted by Snappahead
So, are they still civilians if they have guns? One thing that puzzles me about the whole Libya thing is how the media continues to call the people fighting the government civilians, even though they have clearly armed themselves, have mutinous elements of the Libyan army.

It's all about the image the media wants to portray. If the media were to call these people "armed militants hell-bent on overthrowing their government", people would naturally feel less inclined to be supportive of their cause. Calling them innocent civilians makes it easier for Libya to be invaded under the guise of helping them, when in reality, TPTB could care less about who lives and dies as long as it serves their goals.

PS Also how are the rebels going to call in an air strike when they will be in very close proximity to Libyan forces?


THIS IS AN ALL AROUND VERY BAD DEAL FOR US!

Originally posted by trollz

Originally posted by Snappahead
So, are they still civilians if they have guns? One thing that puzzles me about the whole Libya thing is how the media continues to call the people fighting the government civilians, even though they have clearly armed themselves, have mutinous elements of the Libyan army.

It's all about the image the media wants to portray. If the media were to call these people "armed militants hell-bent on overthrowing their government", people would naturally feel less inclined to be supportive of their cause. Calling them innocent civilians makes it easier for Libya to be invaded under the guise of helping them, when in reality, TPTB could care less about who lives and dies as long as it serves their goals.

Very true.