ToadBrother Posted March 18, 2011 Report Share Posted March 18, 2011 And against heroism of people of Lybia, our non existent role isn't really worth mentioning. Bangling into wrong places or standing by idle in endless discussions seems to be the only choices we can take. The UN Security Council has given the go-ahead for a no fly zone and other military action as required. In other words, the coalition of states that goes in (if it's necessary now that Gaddafi has suddenly had a conversion to peace again) will be given pretty much a blank cheque. To start with, a no-fly zone is going to mean bombing runways, blowing up fuel depots, destroying hangars, destroying radar installations; basically destroying the infrastructure of the Libyan Air Force. That is a pretty damned considerable action that in some cases is probably (though no one is actually saying it) going to require special forces on the ground to identify targets. I think part of the reason for the delay (and I'm not necessarily defending it) was in part to convince Russia and China to either agree (remember, they are permanent members of the Security Council and have a veto that could scuttle the whole damned thing, at least as a UN-sanctioned action) or to abstain. In fact, I'd say the decision yesterday is remarkable in that China essentially agreed not to block military action against a the government of a sovereign state that is not committing beligerant acts of war against another sovereign state. This suggests a rather enormous shift in Beijing's foreign affairs philosophy. The other reason for the delay was likely a helluva lot of feverish diplomacy to convince some Arab states in the region to take the lead on this, so that the US and its allies wouldn't once again be accused of all manner of imperialism and other evils. It strikes me that some folks want things both ways. They want the West, and in particular the US, to go in to stop humanitarian crises and rogue governments who start using segments of their own populations for target practice... until they don't want any interference in stopping humanitarian crises and rogue governments who start using segments of their own populations for target practice. I mean, Saddam Hussein killed a helluva lot of his own people, gassing Kurds and the like, and yet that invasion was declared as an evil American imperialistic operation. Some day someone will have to explain to me how the same people who thought that invading Iraq was bad (putting aside the extraordinary incompetence of the post-invasion period), and yet are casting condemnation on the United States for not going into Libya sooner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted March 18, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2011 (edited) I find your use of this and the Kurds problematic because in both instances these were armed rebellions. The US used the military against Branch Davidians - Canada conquered Red River, and killed the FLQ. Unfortunately western responses are no different. In this case Libya was a coupe - the big shift here is that a lot of Libya's government, ambassadors including the one to the UN seemed to be questionable in regard to who they recognized. For instance Gaddafi not having a "position" since he is quoted as resigning from all his official posts. Meanwhile the Justice Minister heading the rebel government. Overall it is a problematic, because EU ICC for instance seems to be pursueing de facto control thus the UN would not be able to take the action it is taken. So it is a problematic and convoluted situation. The Kurds tried to assasinate Sadam, and were engaged in civil war with Iraq when the events happened. Sadams responses were not unequal, they would have been drastically reduced from what a nation such as Israel might have done. Or even the US with millions starved, and hundreds of thousands of civilians killed to "catch someone" The west seems to be ignorant of the idea of killing civilains using gag words like "collatoral damage" Well unfortunately civlians were in the wrong area when the kurds were gased too - only I'm sure since it is your people you choose to be ignorant. That is why discussion with such ignorant people is mostly senseless. You use examples like Iraq when you have home brewed examples such as Canada's actions against Serbia (or others) you seem to omit. What about shoot to kill orders in Somolia to stop petty theft? What about rapes in Afghanistan. You are being oblivious and ignorant. It would save a lot of time if the west just said - we are a bunch of war criminals and we want to take over libya and its oil. Rather than all this bs. Edited March 18, 2011 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted March 18, 2011 Report Share Posted March 18, 2011 I find your use of this and the Kurds problematic because in both instances these were armed rebellions. The US used the military against Branch Davidians - Canada conquered Red River, and killed the FLQ. Unfortunately western responses are no different. In this case Libya was a coupe. You seem to mixing a lot of things together. The FBI, CSIS and the RCMP are not military organizations. The FBI and the RCMP do indeed use weapons, but that does not make them a military. As to uprisings, rebellions and revolutions, about the only thing I can say is that, in general, the suppression of the Red River uprising was targeted. Hussein did not specifically target and Gaddafi has not been explicitely targeting rebels. In both cases, general populations, unlucky enough to be near or in the line of fire were indiscriminately attacked, and more to the point it appears in both cases the strategy has been to cause sufficient casualties of both armed rebels and unarmed civilians to crush armed revolts. No one, I think, is arguing that a sovereign state has no right to defend its territorial integrity against rebellions, but you can't just march your tanks up and open fire on everything and everyone in sight, and you can't just dump poison gas that is utterly indiscriminate in who it kills on an area because there are or may be armed rebels nearby. Obviously, no matter how careful an armed force is in the application of force, there will be civilian casualties, but, and perhaps the concept is used too much, that is collateral damage. It's become very clear that Gaddafi's forces are not just accidentally hitting civilian areas, he's very much trying to terrorize the populations of these rebel areas by the direct application of force against all and asunder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted March 18, 2011 Report Share Posted March 18, 2011 Liberating occupied countries (like Tibet) ought to come before taking sides in civil war. What you propose would likely trigger a nuclear war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted March 18, 2011 Report Share Posted March 18, 2011 Liberating occupied countries (like Tibet) ought to come before taking sides in civil war. Riiiight. Canada's going to lead the way in that fight.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted March 18, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 18, 2011 (edited) You seem to mixing a lot of things together. The FBI, CSIS and the RCMP are not military organizations. The FBI and the RCMP do indeed use weapons, but that does not make them a military. FBI is DHS DHS is DOD (the department of justice has some interconnection but both the FBI and DHS are within the DOD control structure thus are under the administration of the secretary of defence) RCMP is the royal gendarme - a military orgnaization (although it is more associated with policing - it provides security operations and sovereignty operations they are not DND but they are military (it also works with jtf on certain operations) It is complex because the RCMP is a "commission" CF is also "commissioned" - they are officers. (the CF is complex though because it is founded under an act - that altered the "natural state" of the militia. The Militia itself was under the command of the governor (lt. and general) (with local commanders) however it has morphed over time, but technically its role is sovereignty enforcement. CSIS is problematic to describe, but more or less this is a civilian operation - however since 2001 they have been associated with military operations - especially domestically with the national security enforcement taskforce You are just spreading more lies. As to uprisings, rebellions and revolutions, about the only thing I can say is that, in general, the suppression of the Red River uprising was targeted. Hussein did not specifically target crack much and Gaddafi has not been explicitely targeting rebels. crack much, where do you get this bag of lies? In both cases, general populations, unlucky enough to be near or in the line of fire were indiscriminately attacked, and more to the point it appears in both cases the strategy has been to cause sufficient casualties of both armed rebels and unarmed civilians to crush armed revolts. Oh it just collatoral right like the 35=40 councellors killed in pakistan a something like yesterday? No one, I think, is arguing that a sovereign state has no right to defend its territorial integrity against rebellions mmmhmmm. , but you can't just march your tanks up and open fire on everything and everyone in sight, They arn't. and you can't just dump poison gas that is utterly indiscriminate indiscriminate - being in the same area as rebel held positions? in who it kills on an area because there are or may be armed rebels nearby. Obviously, no matter how careful an armed force is in the application of force, there will be civilian casualties, but, and perhaps the concept is used too much, that is collateral damage. It's become very clear that Gaddafi's forces are not just accidentally hitting civilian areas, he's very much trying to terrorize the populations of these rebel areas by the direct application of force against all and asunder. You standard is biased, it only applies to the people you want to kill. ------- Also in terms of Hussien "targetting people" it seems that there was targetting, the role of hussien is unknown- and at best in terms of Iraq it was a another person within the government if it was Iraq that caused that event to transpire. Hussien gave the directive I recall to put down the uprising, not the means to do so. Although I am open to more secure primary source information in this regard. This site seems to see Churchills position in that poison gas is good as long as it shortens a war by atleast a year. http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHU407A.html Edited March 18, 2011 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted March 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obamas-shift-toward-military-action-in-libya/2011/03/18/ABiClIs_story.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted March 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 (edited) Frech now attacking ground forces http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/19/libya.civil.war/ This as those in support of the No fly zone meet in france to discus how to proceed. Edited March 19, 2011 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted March 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 (edited) http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/World/20110319/libya-fighting-saturday-110319/ us Libya claims US missles killed civilians Edited March 19, 2011 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 19, 2011 Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/World/20110319/libya-fighting-saturday-110319/ us Libya claims US missles killed civilians Yes...and since it is Daffy claiming this...you believe it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted March 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 Yes...and since it is Daffy claiming this...you believe it. based on the norm of US missle strikes yes I do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 19, 2011 Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 based on the norm of US missle strikes yes I do. Allahu Akbar! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted March 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 Allahu Akbar! go to hell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 19, 2011 Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 go to hell. Before or after you behead me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted March 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 (edited) Before or after you behead me? Take your bs talk elsewhere. If I were killing someone technicalities wouldnt be in question. If you think I have a good reason to kill you why dont you share it. Are violating my rights somehow? I have my own faith, Im not pro or anti anything other than reason and the common good. The principles are all Im following, and I dont agree with the acts to date on a generalized non biaed principle. the situation is disguting and oppourtunistic and it is escalating the death toll and damages not reducing it. Edited March 19, 2011 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 19, 2011 Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 Take your bs talk elsewhere. If I were killing someone technicalities wouldnt be in question. If you think I have a good reason to kill you why dont you share it. Are violating my rights somehow? I have my own faith, Im not pro or anti anything other than reason and the common good. I think you need to calm down and crack a smile on occasion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted March 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 (edited) I think you need to calm down and crack a smile on occasion. I think you need to exit from existence and maybe the world wont be as tainted with inhumane jerks. This is a bs situation and you are advocating the indiscriminate unneeded killing of civilians. You are also advocating reckless damage such as the fuel that was feeding one of the "rebel" towns. They are attacking both sides, it is simply a war against libya and the cover is total bs. I find it disgusting they are perpetuating these sorts of actions. It is a little contradictory when Obama says, give them fuel or we attack, then he attacks the fuel supply. If you have a critical view of more of the situation then you see the backwardness of countries especially the US right now. This is based on the running situation that I've been following daily since the algeria uprising. This has been a vicious play and one that set up a lot of dead people and a lot of dead civilians the US has been advocating for civil disobediance and armed uprising, while countries like france and britain have been stoking it. Now they are bombing both sides. You also need to understand US monetary funding of some of the militaries in question.. Edited March 19, 2011 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 19, 2011 Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 I think you need to exit from existence and maybe the world wont be as tainted with inhumane jerks. So my neck goes here on this block? Kinda uncomfortable... This is a bs situation and you are advocating the indiscriminate unneeded killing of civilians.You are also advocating reckless damage such as the fuel that was feeding one of the "rebel" towns. I pointed out that Daffy made the 'dead civilian' claim...you're obviously a fan as you believe him. It is Daffy killing the people...or did you miss that bit of the media coverage? They are attacking both sides, it is simply a war against libya and the cover is total bs.I find it disgusting they are perpetuating these sorts of actions. In you mind, anything is possible... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted March 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 (edited) So my neck goes here on this block? Kinda uncomfortable... I tend to think people will be held accountable for the sentiment they perpetuate - Im not compelled humans need to act independent of this and that god will resolve all things. As a decent human being I wouldnt be against eradicating your culture of hate and insult. Although like I said I wouldn't play with technicalities of a choping block. Personally in terms of people that are not able to be rehabilitated to civil peace and desiring death as a means of compassion rather than instigating physical conflict they can't defend agaist, I would be more prone to just chucking people off a high structure or out the back of a plane on to jagged rocks, such as a pit that can have a lid on it as to not require cleanup or atleast able to have acces to wolves or wild animals that would make the remains more sanitarily disposed. If I were vindictive, such compassion wouldn't be resolved but instead perhaps just setting people loose into an area with a pack of wolves - with lots of caltrops - broken glass razor wire - except in the area of the wolves. Having the razor area with alternating temperatures from extreme heat to extreme cold, as well as sprinklers o that it sprayed hot water then froze onto the person. Or something of the sort. Hanging people from trees by their intenstines and their hands nailed to the branches - I'm not that sort of person though - however if I were predisposed to assist people in their deserved afterlife it wouldnt necisarily be contrary to my neutrility in regard to creating an environment suitable for people who are without morals. Afterall even the depraved can acheive psychosis and be desensitized even to those sorts of things. Someone who has lost their humanity may be able to respect its loss more, or simple annihilation is really the only answer for those sorts of individuals. Unforutnately you seem to be one of them. I pointed out that Daffy made the 'dead civilian' claim...you're obviously a fan as you believe him. It is Daffy killing the people...or did you miss that bit of the media coverage? What were the US targets, can you beleive the US military, I don't. US federal offiers have lied to me repeatedly I place no credibility in them, I place far more credibility in Libyian state television than the US military. When you have confirmed reports of massive amounts of war crimes, rapes, and admited torture by the president of the US the nation looses all credibility as being a trustworthy source of information on a basis of moral standards in not lying or lying about something, they lie. In you mind, anything is possible... -------- Torture and eternal damnation is only deserved for those who intentionally act against me with intent of wrongdoing. Note though thi has to be done after the mortal existence though, so yes, if we are in conflict either you will be subdued or destroyed or reemege in my afterlife when my venegence is enacted against you. Annihilation for those who are nonexistent to myself but wrong (they never were) Don't take this as a threat. Oh and don't be confused with me being muslim, as I stated I have my own faith - it just happens to be an amalgam of all world religions. Paint paint paint. must enrage him, and get an angry response, mut get nuty response and paint him as one of hte muslim people... yes we must do that... Your a jerk who is deriding goodwill. go to hell. Now back to the actual topic. You do no good in attacking morality, it only reserves harm for yourself, you are creating your own self victimization. Edited March 19, 2011 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 19, 2011 Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 I tend to think people will be held accountable for the sentiment they perpetuate - Im not compelled humans need to act independent of this and that god will resolve all things. As a decent human being I wouldnt be against eradicating your culture of hate and insult. Although like I said I woulnd't play with technicalities of a choping block. Personally in terms of people that are not able to be rehabilitated to civil peace and desiring death as a means of compassion rather than instigating physical conflict they can't defend agaist, I would be more prone to just chucking people off a high structure or out the back of a plane on to jagged rocks, such as a pit that can have a lit on it as to not require recleanup or atleast able to have acces to wolves or wild animals that would make the remains more sanitarily disposed. If I were vindictive, such compassion woulnd't be resolved but instead perhaps just setting people loose into an area with a pack of wolves - with lots of caltrops - broken glass razor wire - except in the area of the wolves. Having the razor area with alternating temperatures from extreme heat to extreme cold, as well as sprinklers o that it sprayed hot water then froze onto the person. Or something of the sort. Hanging people from trees by their intenstines and their hands nailed to the branches - I'm not that sort of person though - however if I were predisposed to assist people in their deserved afterlife it wouldnt necisarily be contrary to my neutrility in regard to creating an environment suitable for people who are without morals. Afterall even the depraved can acheive psychosis and be desensitized even to their things. Someone who has lost their humanity may be able to respect its loss more, or simple annihilation is really the only answer for those sorts of individuals. Unforutnately you seem to be one of them. What were the US targets, can you beleive the US military, I don't. US federal offiers have lied to me repeatedly I place no credibility in them, I place far more credibility in Libyian state television than the US military. When you have confirmed reports of massive amounts of war crimes, rapes, and admited torture by the president of the US the nation looses all credibility as being a trustworthy source of information on a basis of moral standards in not lying or lying about something, they lie. Well...I see why you're single. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted March 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 (edited) Well...I see why you're single. Another attempt to flame. Just more of an attempt to paint me as something I'm not because you don't like what I'm saying, and you have nothing that works against it, so you turn to attacking me. Get the hell out of here if you need to resort to ad hominem. Try sticking to the topic. You know nothing about my personal life so why don't you shut the hell up. Edited March 19, 2011 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted March 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/World/20110319/libya-fighting-saturday-110319/ us Libya claims US missles killed civilians Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 19, 2011 Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 Another attempt to flame. Just more of an attempt to paint me as something I'm not because you don't like what I'm saying, and you have nothing that works against it, so you turn to attacking me. Get the hell out of here if you need to resort to ad hominem. Try sticking ot the topic. lol...this rant after your 'fatwa' and threats of my death? There's still a future for you in stand-up comedy...you just need to work that joke down to a sentence or two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted March 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 (edited) lol...this rant after your 'fatwa' and threats of my death? There's still a future for you in stand-up comedy...you just need to work that joke down to a sentence or two. More painting at no point did I threaten your life, although that is what you attempted to bait for. Your the joker here. Why are you avoiding the fact US missle killed libyan civilians and bombed the guy's they are supposed trying to protect fuel supply? http://www.ctv.ca/CT...aturday-110319/ us Libya claims US missles killed civilians ------- Throwing words like fatwa just shows your absurdity in painting someone with Ethnic English French German and Dutch Ancestory and family has been in Canada for well over 100 years. Has never been in a mosque let alone performed any muslim ritual. Take your paint elsewhere you twit. Edited March 19, 2011 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 19, 2011 Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 Yup...no doubt hit a baby milk factory and an orphanage at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.