Libya’s transitional leader declares liberation, sets Islamist tone for future

reply to post by Fractured.Facade


An Islamist Empire that was initiated put in power by us is not in my best interests, nor is it in the interests of Africans.

So yes - since they did it with our "help" I would suggest that I have ever right to state my opinion and suggest that I think this whole exercise is stupid, and actually puts everyone on the planet at significantly more danger. And that makes it my business.

reply to post by Aeons


I think it's our business as well. Considering what this means or the country, the region etc. I think it is definitely worth discussing.

reply to post by Aeons

You don't understand. We didn't help them. We protected them. The UN passed a resolution in 2005 named Responsibility to Protect. It requires the UN to act when a nation breaks humanitarian law. In this case, it was expected that Gaddafi was going to massacre his own people to silence them. The international community acted with the rule of law and fought against him to prevent him from doing so. We cannot tell them whether they will create a government under Sharia law or not. Our only duty was to protect them from Gaddafi.

Oh. I feel much better about setting up an Islamist Empire now. Thank you.

reply to post by Aeons

I bet you go to bed grateful that you did not live under the rule of Gaddafi for 40 years.

Soon, the 'Arab Spring' will have resulted in the majority Islamic nations being governed under Sharia. The 'West' will voice concerns but be magnaminous in acceptance of the sovereign and 'democratic' right of 'self rule'.

Then, when all the pieces are in play, the stage is set for the planned global conflict.

Originally posted by teapot
Soon, the 'Arab Spring' will have resulted in the majority Islamic nations being governed under Sharia. The 'West' will voice concerns but be magnaminous in acceptance of the sovereign and 'democratic' right of 'self rule'.

Then, when all the pieces are in play, the stage is set for the planned global conflict.

I got the same impression. What will this all lead to, a power block of Sharia countries? Maybe once those countries are more organized they will trade different. Afterall those people will need oil to grow economically just as western countries need it. Someday someone there must realize by selling it to other countries they are doing themselves short in the long run as the money they receive might not live up to all it's promises. I just hope things will settle there eventually instead of Arab countries uniting for a 'payback' scenario, which conveniently would fit in the idea of an Islam world based on Sharia law.

reply to post by CasiusIgnoranze


So you believe that the CIA has installed an Islamic fundamentalist as the transitional leader of Libya?

Why?

Will you still be saying this when Libya continues to ban all American citizens from entering the country?

reply to post by Chadwickus


That is the question. Why are we funding an Islamist take over of all of North Africa?

And the answer is..... as a tertiary power to compete with Iran and Saud for control the Islamic Empire.

In the meantime, corporations can continue to work in the area without being directly linked to the USA. Since they operate on a global level, why would they need to be limited to bringing in people from *your* country?

This basic doctrine approach has been in use by the USA, and then adopted by other governments since Monroe. It has been adapted, and I would have to say that Kissinger really brought it into a whole new level. However, I would suggest that the lack of a long term plan has serious drawbacks.

Originally posted by jonnywhite
reply to post by Aeons

 

I bet you go to bed grateful that you did not live under the rule of Gaddafi for 40 years.

Just because I don't like Gaddafi, doesn't mean I love Islamist with domination in their blood.

But I always appreciate yet another opportunity to bust this piece of emotional illogic. Thank you.

Originally posted by neo96
everyone who was paying attention already knew the outcome was going to be an Islamic Theocracy which is par for the course of all the "arab spring" uprisings.

Indeed... was discussing this with someone yesterday and we were saying that all of these liberated nations will probably be worse off now and we were saying that It's not much of a choice.


What do you want.... A relatively brutal dictator who suppresses the people...

Or a relatively brutal religious law which seeks to suppress and control people.


In either one, if you disagree or speak out of turn and try and be free or rebel, you will be killed and/or imprisoned and tortured.


We were trying to work out which was best and which the people would be best under....


Couldn't decide.