Nato strike 'kills Saif al-Arab Gaddafi', Libya says

Reply to post by stumason

Amen! Im glad that there are at least a few here who live in the real world!


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by dontdrinkthewater


Well there you go. I honestly didn't think that anyone could be as desensitised to human death than I.

Obviously not.

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by wonderworld

 

Exactly how is it a breach of the Geneva Conventions and a War crime?

Strong words, better back them up.

Yes they were strong words and yes I can back them up. Read on

Rule 135. Children affected by armed conflict are entitled to special respect and protection.

State practice establishes this rule as a norm of customary international law applicable in both international and non-international armed conflicts.

U.N. General Assembly

Document A/RES/44/25 (12 December 1989)

with Annex

Recalling its previous resolutions, especially resolutions 33/166 of 20 December 1978 and 43/112 of 8 December 1988, and those of the Commission on Human Rights and the Economic and Social Council related to the question of a convention on the rights of the child,

Taking note, in particular, of Commission on Human Rights resolution 1989/57 of 8 March 1989, by which the Commission decided to transmit the draft convention on the rights of the child, through the Economic and Social Council, to the General Assembly, and Economic and Social Council resolution 1989/79 of 24 May 1989, •

Reaffirming that children's rights require special protection and call for continuous improvement of the situation of children all over the world, as well as for their development and education in conditions of peace and security,

Profoundly concerned that the situation of children in many parts of the world remains critical as a result of inadequate social conditions, natural disasters, armed conflicts, exploitation, illiteracy, hunger and disability, and convinced that urgent and effective national and international action is called for,

Mindful of the important role of the United Nations Children's Fund and of that of the United Nations in promoting the well-being of children and their development,

Convinced that an international convention on the rights of the child, as a standard-setting accomplishment of the United Nations in the field of human rights, would make a positive contribution to protecting children's rights and ensuring their well-being,

Bearing in mind that 1989 marks the thirtieth anniversary of the Declaration of the Rights of the Child and the tenth anniversary of the International Year of the Child,

1. Expresses its appreciation to the Commission on Human Rights for having concluded the elaboration of the draft convention on the rights of the child;

2. Adopts and opens for signature, ratification and accession the Convention on the Rights of the Child contained in the annex to the present resolution;

3. Calls upon all Member States to consider signing and ratifying or acceding to the Convention as a matter of priority and expresses the hope that it will come into force at an early date;

4. Requests the Secretary-General to provide all the facilities and assistance necessary for dissemination of information on the Convention;

5. Invites United Nations agencies and organizations, as well as intergoverrunental and non-governmental organizations, to intensify their efforts with a view to disseminating information on the Convention and to promoting its understanding;

6. Requests the Secretary-General to submit to the General Assembly at its forty-fifth session a report on the status of the Convention on the Rights of the Child;

7. Decides to consider the report of the Secretary-General at its forty-fifth session under an item entitled "Implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child".


Geneva Convention focuses on the rights of individuals

Originally posted by stumason
Gaddafi is not a saint, has killed thousands during his rule and contrary to what you some other oddjobs are claiming, he does not enjoy popular support.

Really? So why could the propaganda machine not show us any images of any number of people protesting him? The only images of crowds coming out of Libya, even with all the crap propaganda, were in support of him.

Edit to add;

And even if what you say is true, which it isnt, how is it our business? When England was terrorizing Ireland would you have wanted NATO or America to come in and bomb you?

reply to post by backinblack


Thank you and yes you are right! that is why we have a set of rules called the Geneva Convention to avoid anything goes in War, and you are also correct in saying NO war has even been declared yet. Same rules apply to children and civilians.

RIP SON GADDAFI!


Time is not on your side you murdering POS Gaddafi,,,,'
REspect for the dead ALWays,


It is over the people of libya have spoken!!!

reply to post by stumason

Indeed. Especially as Iranian media carried a story weeks ago claiming this particular son had defected to the rebels along with his brigade of troops.. Whether there is truth to that is one thing, but it isn't coming from a Western "propoganda" mouthpiece that's for sure. Then he turns up dead at his fathers house after an alledged air strike? And now you're saying that Gaddafi survives the blast but others in the room did not?

Fishy indeed.

Remember the bomb that was supposed to kill Hitler? it killed a number of people he was having a meeting with, be he emerged with only minor scratches.

Plus, The Gaddaffi compound is quite massive, and Gaddaffi may not of been in the same "room" per say.

I don't find it fishy at all that this could be true

reply to post by wonderworld


A non-binding resolution by the UN Human Rights Commision is your proof that the Geneva Conventions have been breached? Hmmm... Not quite. Try again.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
Really? So why could the propaganda machine not show us any images of any number of people protesting him? The only images of crowds coming out of Libya, even with all the crap propaganda, were in support of him.

What? Now your just talking out of your arse. The only images coming out of Libya are in support of him? What channels have you been watching? There have been litterally hundreds of hours of footage from Libya showing supporters of both sides coming out. In fact, this whole thing started because demonstrations in Benghazi over the detention of a lawyer who defended political prisoners were met with gunfire. Again, there are many video's online showing this.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
And even if what you say is true, which it isnt, how is it our business?

Because, as "liberal, western democracies" we should care and help those people who are clearly being abused. Plus, they asked.

(EDIT: And also, are you now denying the Abu Salim massacre took place? You are claiming what I said isn't true, after all....)

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
When England was terrorizing Ireland would you have wanted NATO or America to come in and bomb you?

When was "England" terrorising Ireland? Kind of shows your level of intellect if you're going to go down this route and then use the label "England". Come on then, let's see if your knowledge of what has happened in Ireland is as good as you think it is.

Reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

Gaddaffi supplied arms to the gangster ira (drug dealers, kiddie and adult pimps, protection racketeers) killed many on both sides in Northern Ireland and England including kids and a few mates of mine. Karma x


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Gaddafi was already known to have a presence of civilans, AKA non-combatants around him for some time now.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

There is no longer any excuse for so called "clinical strikes" not that there ever was anyway. There are no excuses for the pilots either, they will have known that there would be innocents destroyed, no matter what. Such noble hypocrisy.

Originally posted by stumason
There have been litterally hundreds of hours of footage from Libya showing supporters of both sides coming out. In fact, this whole thing started because demonstrations in Benghazi over the detention of a lawyer who defended political prisoners were met with gunfire. Again, there are many video's online showing this.

Great. Then you wont have any trouble posting them.

Those of you here that keep thinking America is the Great Satan for starting wars I must remind you that Saudi Arabia was scared and begged us to help get rid of Saddam Hussein or he’d come after all their oil. They owe us some dang oil! We get ripped off. .

The US intelligence service has been informed, that China wants us to remain strong! Like I told the guy from Belfast, if it wasn’t for us he would be speaking German. Afghanistan invited us, Japan, Arabs, All of Europe, basically the whole world has invited us or asked for our help. We are the ones they call when they can’t defend themselves.

We were called on by the Rebels but this time France jumped in first. No one likes war but the goal is peace, in most cases. Yes sometimes it’s purely political but that is how the world turns. I still defend the Geneva Convention and think ALL should follow the rules. I prefer peace, not War, just saying,,

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


One my original memories of all this, is the footage of the 'rebels' shooting skyward at jets coming in to wipe them out. Whoever it was captured it quite well. The defenders all shooting upwards with their AK's. This footage was used quite a lot to show how terrible events were developing. Something was wrong though. Maybe the camera was old and very heavy. Maybe there was a low hanging roof just above the cameraman's head. Who knows. All I now is that it was splendid footage of the defenders but for some reason the camera could not point upwards. You know, to show the actual jets.

I never found out if they hit anything. Maybe there wasn't anything to hit?

Smoke and mirrors people.

I even read a report yesterday that Gaddafi was giving his troops Viagra to encourage mass rape. I'll let the Captain America fans do a bit of googling to find out where this particular masterpiece came from. I have to say that I have watched all the Rambo movies. If he ever used that as an excuse you would know he's in trouble.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


And you won't have trouble finding them, chap.

I am not going to do something I have done time and time again on these Libya threads, to you included, all over again.

Besides, when I do post links to video's, people like you who were so vociferous in claiming this is all propoganda never address the video's and merely skip over them as they are inconvenient truth when it comes to your blatant piss-poor handle on what is going on. So essentially it is a waste of time. You won't believe them, no matter what. Tell me, why should I bother?

reply to post by BattleFieldPredator


Quid Pro Quo.

Originally posted by JohnGeeTee
One my original memories of all this, is the footage of the 'rebels' shooting skyward at jets coming in to wipe them out. Whoever it was captured it quite well. The defenders all shooting upwards with their AK's. This footage was used quite a lot to show how terrible events were developing. Something was wrong though. Maybe the camera was old and very heavy. Maybe there was a low hanging roof just above the cameraman's head. Who knows. All I now is that it was splendid footage of the defenders but for some reason the camera could not point upwards. You know, to show the actual jets.

And my original memories of this, being the length of a humans and not a goldfish with a brain disfunction, is of footage of unarmed protests in Benghazi being fired upon by men with machine guns and pick-up mounted AA guns. Then came the helicopter and jet attacks, of which there was ample footage. Then came the defections by Libyan pilots because they refused to carry out their orders to attack the protestors. Even Libyan army units defected for the same reason and at least 120 Libyan soldiers were executed for not carrying out their orders.

There is a chain of events here that goes back further than a few weeks. This started as a simple protest over the arrest and detention of a lawyer in February and spiralled from there. Had Gaddafi not gone in heavy, he wouldn't have this problem now.

reply to post by wonderworld

The implication of a regime change in Libya would be extremely negative. Whatever your view on Gaddafi is(brutal tryrant or national hero) he has kept Libya together and functioning prior the the outbreak of civil war through a complex bureaucracy. Libya will be unable to sustain a functioning democracy due to the absence of bureaucrats if the rebels take control. Not only this but the required infastructure to run the country will be almost non-existent. Much like the de-Baathification of Iraq, Libya wiill most likely have the largest rebel opposition removed from any governing body. Opposition is a requirment for democracy to function.

So democracy will fail- who cares? You should care as it means another pro-U.S dictator will be in-power who will most likely be even more brutal then Gaddafi ever was especially becuase of the IMF and WBO backed economic reforms that will be undergone under a pro-U.S leadership. These reforms will severly damage or destroy the public infastructure(that Libyan rely on) and luanch a huge section of the 6 million Libyans into desperate poverty. They will oppose this and will be brutaly repressed as was the case in Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Brazil, Indonesia, Iraq, China and Russia as they all implemented U.S backed economic reform. This war will cause more repression and more violence not to mention more terrorism- the exact things the U.S says they want to prevent. I predict that if the west succeeds Libya will become another Iraq. An anti-American populated country with rampant terrorism and a radicilization of the people.

Originally posted by JohnGeeTee

One my original memories of all this, is the footage of the 'rebels' shooting skyward at jets coming in to wipe them out. Whoever it was captured it quite well. The defenders all shooting upwards with their AK's.

I saw that too. Footage of a handful of people shooting into the empty sky. Smoke from a burning something in the background. And the noise of a jet in the background, and the camera man never ONCE panned up. Nor did anyone standing around look all that alarmed. And they all just stood there in the flat open desert while they were supposedly being attacked by air.

Thats what I would do. Wouldnt you?

Originally posted by JohnGeeTee
All I now is that it was splendid footage of the defenders but for some reason the camera could not point upwards. You know, to show the actual jets.

I never found out if they hit anything. Maybe there wasn't anything to hit?

Smoke and mirrors people.

It was pure, and crappy, propaganda.

Originally posted by JohnGeeTee
I even read a report yesterday that Gaddafi was giving his troops Viagra to encourage mass rape.

The level of ridiculousness in this whole Libya propaganda campaign has astounded me.

Im just waiting for the video of Gaddafis men eating rebel babies.

Originally posted by Skerrako
reply to post by moonpie86

 

After the airstrike, apparently gunshots of celebration were let off. SICK!

How do u know they were gunshots of celebration? did they have smiley faces on them?

They could be gunshots of rage my friend

? Do gunshots of rage have angry faces on them? Do neon signs appear in the air saying REALLY ANGRY GUNSHOTS? I wasnn't talking about the Libyans who were celebrating. I was talking about us.

Im 24 years old. I may not know everything about our war history, but I do know this. In my life, nobody has ever come into my town, my state, my country and committed war crimes, yet we are involved in so much bloodshed elsewhere. Who are the terroists? When the English came here they had no respect for the aboriginess and we still don't. One day they may uprise, and they may commit terrible crimes, and if they do... Who is to blame? If somebody leads them to rebel, should we kill their son? At what point is a white flag not a white flag?

It will always be SICK when someone goes into somebody elses territory and kills the child for crimes of their bloodlines, and celebrates when young children are hurt or killed.

Its not about supporting propaganda, it is about respecting Human Rights.

I have viewed your posts in this thread, and whilst you obviously have informative opinions and may very well be right ( I do not know Gaddafi personally. Nor did I know his son , I was not there to hear our soldiers celebrate myself) , I must say that you are rude in the way you put your opinions across and I would like to ask if it is lonely up there?

Reply to post by JohnGeeTee

Karma.. "Those who allow themselves to be duped because they are far away from trouble, thus can pass judgement on things they have not experienced nor think they would. Will become slaves themselves and their children shall be scarred by the lash"... Sounds like you huh?


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com