It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Neocrusader
Ok
The west didn't like Qaddafi, knew the rebels were small in number and going to loose, so helped them and aimed to put someone else in power
Egypt was obviously going to have the Muslim brotherhood ( the ones that have orchestrated the spring out of what was an localised uprising in Tunisia ) as its power base and America wants to be friends with them, as the muslim brotherhood is going to be a very large influence in the mid east when the dust settles
And the added benefit of advertising the rebellion on msn drew all the jihadist fighters to Libya and away from other countries
For example there was a dramatic drop in insurgent activity in Afghanistan ( thats insurgent - foreign fighters NOT Taliban )
Which has allowed for some breathing space in some countries see afghans elections
And the chance to ID track and infiltrate a large amount of the 'foreign fighter' groups and individuals
It may have been hoped the Muslim brotherhood might have moved in but that may yet unfoldedit on 10-4-2012 by Neocrusader because: Addededit on 10-4-2012 by Neocrusader because: Autoedit on 10-4-2012 by Neocrusader because: Added
Originally posted by Koffee
The rebels: en.wikipedia.org...
Also here is a pretty interesting article about what Libya looked like before the Civil War: www.michaeltotten.com...
If good old Gadaffi was widely loved as you said, he would of been able to hang onto power much much easier, then you know being on a losing side of a civil war. Now I can understand confusion the entire Libya Civil War and NATO's involvement was not exactly the greatest planned out endeavor, being pushed primarily by Britain and France with a reluctant US tagging along to give them support. They had no plan for a end game and that's why got this mess, and coincidentally this ended up causing the problems in Mali now that Gaddafi's hired Tuareg's goons went back with their Libyan trained weapons and start an insurrection there.
Anyway why the West was bombing Libya and not Egypt is that Egypt didn't errupt into a civil war and had a relative bloodless change of leadership that looks like it might (might) be more democratic, as oppose to a city revolting and the army crushing it. Plus its also far more dangerous to the entire Middle East to destabilize one way or another, and lets face it the current foreign policy with regards to the Middle East in the States is pretty reactive and trying to keep things calm especially during an election year.
Originally posted by Koffee
A response about the popularity.
A video showing a dictator getting support in his capital city with marches and people showing up, is no real good indicator of how popular he is when the guns and the state security apparatus are looking. Do you really think everybody who was at the giant crowds for North Korea's Dear Leader funeral was really sad that he passed?
www.youtube.com...
And one would argue that in a police state that massive anti-government protests don't emerge, and when the fighting started, they were too busy trying not to die military strikes and fighting back, then pose for youtube to convince paranoid people on the net in a similar manor as your videos.
Originally posted by Wonderer2012
Originally posted by Koffee
A response about the popularity.
A video showing a dictator getting support in his capital city with marches and people showing up, is no real good indicator of how popular he is when the guns and the state security apparatus are looking. Do you really think everybody who was at the giant crowds for North Korea's Dear Leader funeral was really sad that he passed?
www.youtube.com...
And one would argue that in a police state that massive anti-government protests don't emerge, and when the fighting started, they were too busy trying not to die military strikes and fighting back, then pose for youtube to convince paranoid people on the net in a similar manor as your videos.
Well if you want evidence of mass protests against the government, I provided that in the OP- look at Egypt- hundreds of thousands of repressed people taking to the streets in spite of the danger of being killed by the police. I even posted a video of police firing live bullets at protestors.
Non of this evidence exists for Libya, it is a sad summary of people that they can't accept the whole Libya NATO campaign on humanitarian grounds was a complete sham, with the only aim of removing a country that was a threat to America simply because they never played by 'their' rules. Had nothing to do with Gaddaffi supposedly killing innocent protestors.
Originally posted by Koffee
Originally posted by Wonderer2012
Originally posted by Koffee
A response about the popularity.
A video showing a dictator getting support in his capital city with marches and people showing up, is no real good indicator of how popular he is when the guns and the state security apparatus are looking. Do you really think everybody who was at the giant crowds for North Korea's Dear Leader funeral was really sad that he passed?
www.youtube.com...
And one would argue that in a police state that massive anti-government protests don't emerge, and when the fighting started, they were too busy trying not to die military strikes and fighting back, then pose for youtube to convince paranoid people on the net in a similar manor as your videos.
Well if you want evidence of mass protests against the government, I provided that in the OP- look at Egypt- hundreds of thousands of repressed people taking to the streets in spite of the danger of being killed by the police. I even posted a video of police firing live bullets at protestors.
Non of this evidence exists for Libya, it is a sad summary of people that they can't accept the whole Libya NATO campaign on humanitarian grounds was a complete sham, with the only aim of removing a country that was a threat to America simply because they never played by 'their' rules. Had nothing to do with Gaddaffi supposedly killing innocent protestors.
Egypt was far more open a government and wealthier country then Libya when their revolts broke out, it was a dictatorship, but it wasn't a constant police state Libya was. Then there is the fact that it wasn't the US for once wanting to do anything but the French and the British, and the result was a muddled foreign policy that left the situation probably worst had if the US decided it had a interest in taking down Gaddafi.
The situation brings to mind Napoleon's maxim of never attributing to malice what you can attribute to stupidity.
Originally posted by jibeho
The world is sitting back as Egypt is about to fall into the hands of the radical Muslim Brotherhood and we helped by pushing for Mubarek's ouster.
The MB was founded in Egypt in 1928 and they are about to get their homeland back. At the expense of all of Egypts civilians. The MB is has now been temporarily rebranded as the Freedom and Justice Party which will function as the governing arm of the MB.
Look out!! Libya will fall to the MB next. The power vacuum is mighty.
Originally posted by Wonderer2012
The whole gist of my post is that we BOMBED Libya and funded 'rebels' in order to remove the 'tyrant' that was Gaddaffi- we intervened on 'humanitarian' grounds, even though my OP shows no evidence of Gaddaffi's forces killing innocent civilians, and in fact he had a lot of support- almost 2 million people marched in his support in Tripoli- that is almost 1/3 of the entire population of Libya.
There is also direct evidence the West was sending in terrorists to cause instability in the country- such as the video I linked showing armed rebels setting fire to a police station! There were no Libyan protestors there!
The killing and bombing by NATO in Libya was unjustified, and as the OP shows, the Al Quada flag flies in the government now- so all we did was put terrorists in charge of a country.
Yet we have real evidence of police bruality still going on in Egypt- this whole post is highlighting the sick double standards of US foreign policy- the fact that they leave Egypt to suffer because at the moment, the Mumbarek regime (without its figurehead) still thrives and the US supported it for 30 years.
Originally posted by MrSpad
Originally posted by Wonderer2012
The whole gist of my post is that we BOMBED Libya and funded 'rebels' in order to remove the 'tyrant' that was Gaddaffi- we intervened on 'humanitarian' grounds, even though my OP shows no evidence of Gaddaffi's forces killing innocent civilians, and in fact he had a lot of support- almost 2 million people marched in his support in Tripoli- that is almost 1/3 of the entire population of Libya.
There is also direct evidence the West was sending in terrorists to cause instability in the country- such as the video I linked showing armed rebels setting fire to a police station! There were no Libyan protestors there!
The killing and bombing by NATO in Libya was unjustified, and as the OP shows, the Al Quada flag flies in the government now- so all we did was put terrorists in charge of a country.
Yet we have real evidence of police bruality still going on in Egypt- this whole post is highlighting the sick double standards of US foreign policy- the fact that they leave Egypt to suffer because at the moment, the Mumbarek regime (without its figurehead) still thrives and the US supported it for 30 years.
The Libyan would beg to disagree with you. They are very pleased at how things have turned out. They would also happily show you the tons of memorials they have to relatives that were killed under the old regime. They numbers are staggering and seem effect every family. You can visit you know they are very friendly to the West and more than happy to share their stories. As for Egypt the population the military on the same side who would you have attacked?
On this day two years ago, Libyan rebels were transferring their government to Tripoli. However, the anniversary is marred by an acute parliamentary crisis, a severe economic slump and the country becoming the main base for Al-Qaeda in the Maghreb.
“I am not sure that it will be right to assume that there is a government in Libya. There is no army, no police, armed militias are in control. There is violent chaos,” Yehudit Ronen, professor of political science at Bar Ilan University, told RT.
Human Rights Watch (HRW) says a wave of assassinations has killed dozens of politicians, activists, judges and members of security agencies.
“At least 51 people have died in a broadening wave of apparent political assassinations in the cities of Benghazi and Derna in volatile eastern Libya. Authorities have not prosecuted anyone for these crimes,” an HRW report of August 8 states.