Gaddafi To NATO: "You Will Be Defeated"

BERLIN (Reuters) -

Libyan TV aired an audio speech from leader Muammar Gaddafi on Friday in which he vowed to defeat the NATO alliance trying to dislodge him from Tripoli. "This is the first time they are facing an armed nation of a millions," he said. "They will be defeated, the alliance will be defeated." The TV station said the speech was from "a telephone call from the brother leader on June 17."

(Reporting by Joseph Nasr; Writing by Tim Cocks; Editing by Jon Boyle)

(visit The Link for the full news article)

Should be interesting to see how this plays out in the end...

While I love to cheer for the little guy I gotta say I dont really like his chances

unfortunately his armed nation of millions will be no match for the depleted uranium that will be strewn about the nation. I dont agree with that tactic however this is what they are really doing in these nations to prevent them from ever producing a normal civilization ever again. Again disgusting tactic but sorry ms. ghaddafi we can take your "nation" off the map before lunch break so I would not preach your threats too loudly.

he sounds like little kim of NK.... give it a couple more months and gaddafi will be history

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
While I love to cheer for the little guy I gotta say I dont really like his chances

Lmao stole the words right out me mouth!!

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
While I love to cheer for the little guy I gotta say I dont really like his chances

I really think Nato, ( america and the rothchilds) might have to many wars on to many fronts to win them all.
I think Nato needs the watch what it bites off, as i think its more than Nato can chew so to speak.

Just think, if the Italians would have kept their big mouths shut, we would have smoked him in 1986 and wouldn't be having this discussion now and there would be a whole bunch of people would still be alive.

reply to post by meathed


I don't know about that buddy, NATO is fairly big

Originally posted by David291
reply to post by meathed

 

I don't know about that buddy, NATO is fairly big

NATO might be big. SO WHAT
Who cares , they send children in to wars to kill children. Nato is Pathetic.
Nato will get there ass kicked its Just a matter of when/

Originally posted by meathed

Originally posted by David291
reply to post by meathed

 

I don't know about that buddy, NATO is fairly big

NATO might be big. SO WHAT

Who cares , they send children in to wars to kill children. Nato is Pathetic.
Nato will get there ass kicked its Just a matter of when/

i thought they already did in the 70's.

It would be pretty tough to defeat an entire country of millions of armed citizens in a land war. But MG simply doesn't stand a chance against our technology and bombing-the-piss-out-of-him capabilities. Personally, I think Obama and Ghadafi should settle it in a steel cage match. All wars should be fought leader against leader, mano a mano.


Ghadafi should have said this instead:

"Ha ha! You fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in a land war in [Africa]" - but only slightly less well-known is this: "Never go against a [Libyan] when death is on the line"! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha..."

I like this man! I really do! However, I do not like Islam in what role it is about to take and yes I do believe "millions" of them will crush NATO!

Then the purge of Christianity will begin under the guise of the AC, the False Prophet, and the Mahdi; no one will be outside of the hands of what is to come!

He is such a snappy dresser! I like him! He has Huevos!

I am most certain the man would take my head if given the chance but I would give it freely if I can keep my Soul!

gaddafi has a chance people think bout it

who makes up the nato countries?

they all broke and have little armies thats why they gang up.


cant stand the guy tho

reply to post by neo96


Apart from the fact NATO combined makes up more tha 75% of global defence spending, has the highest standards of equipment and training and is generally regarded as the most powerful Alliance on the planet..

And not so sure your right about "little Army's".. Go look 'em up...

reply to post by stumason


so then why does the us finance them?

and why did the us get involved in libya?

if they were the baddest kids on the block seems to me they wouldnt need help

Unfortunately NATO has lost even the preception of the illusion of having the moral high ground...
the rot begins within.

Nato is a tool of an elite that has less respect for it
then they do for those that show the manhood to stand up...

debt slave are debt slaves...

reply to post by neo96


How does the US finance NATO? They don't. Every country in NATO has to spend a certain proportion of their GDP on defence, they then offer up their forces for NATO missions.

The US is a NATO member.

The US isn't that involved in Libya, actually. Most of the aircraft and ships are UK and France, with a smattering of other nations.

reply to post by stumason


yeah ok

According to NATO, members' contributions are made in accordance with an agreed-upon formula based on relative Gross National Income. The largest direct contributors to NATO in absolute terms are the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom and France. In 2005 a review of burdensharing arrangements led NATO's Senior Resource Board to recommend a new formula that seeks to be "fair, equitable, stable, and objectively based." However, the United States negotiated a ceiling for its cost share percentages at the then-existing rate, and which would decline if other countries joined NATO. Read more: www.cbsnews.com...

www.cbsnews.com... ng+%28CBS+News%3A+The+Early+Show%3A+Living%29

Anyone who thinks Gaddafi (hows he spell it this week?) has 'millions' behind him need to wake the eff up and do some real research. This guy is in the throes of delusion. He is clinging to his fallen empire out of derangement. IF he had ANY sense he would have exited gracefully a few months ago and retired on a beach somewhere a happy, wealthy man.

Anyone who thinks they 'support' gaddaffi might want to carefully consider their ideology. Being skeptical of the stated goals of the 'libyan action' is one thing, but reactively supporting NATO's opposition is not a side one can defend well.

reply to post by rstregooski


gee
maybe he saw those couple of posts of mine
where i explained how simple it would be for him to win this war,
by converting all the oil in libya to fertilizer.


naaah.