Big Guy Posted July 26, 2014 Report Posted July 26, 2014 http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/07/26/libyan-embassy-evacuated/13195671/ It sure is fortunate that America and Canada got involved in Libya. Our bombs assisted the rebels to overthrow those monsters who had the country in a death grip. We helped the rebels get rid of Gaddafi and his followers who were subjugating their citizens. This proves that we were right. Those Libyans are very fortunate that the Western powers got involved in something that was clearly not a civil war but an attempt by freedom fighters to win back their country. They owe a debt of thanks to us for again helping them to do what we want them to do and finally attain a stable and productive society. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
-TSS- Posted July 26, 2014 Report Posted July 26, 2014 (edited) Gaddafi and Europe had a deal that there were no illegal immigrants coming from Libya starting from the ports of Libya. Under Gaddafi that deal was honoured. Now that Gaddafi is dead and there's a new regime in Libya we constatntly get the news how so and so many people drowned while they attempted to traverse the Mediterranean on their unseaworthy vessels. However, the very premise that mass-immigration is like a force of nature which can not be tackled, only adapted to, was proved as BS under Gaddafi. It's a totally another thing that the elite in Europe wants our continent to be inundated by millions of Africans. Cheap labour and all that. All this "unstoppable" immigration stops the very moment when it no longer benefits the elite. Edited July 26, 2014 by -TSS- Quote
Shady Posted July 26, 2014 Report Posted July 26, 2014 Getting rid of him as well as Mubarek in Egypt was not good policy. They were allies. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted July 27, 2014 Report Posted July 27, 2014 Apparently then, so was getting rid of Sadam. Quote
Shady Posted July 27, 2014 Report Posted July 27, 2014 Apparently then, so was getting rid of Sadam. No he wasn't an ally. It had been 2 decades since. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted July 27, 2014 Report Posted July 27, 2014 No he wasn't an ally. It had been 2 decades since. Well he was when it suited the US and he was no less a murderer than your two boys. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 27, 2014 Report Posted July 27, 2014 We certainly know when and why Gaddafi suited Canada....oil service contracts. Reagan bombed him...Martin hugged him. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted July 27, 2014 Report Posted July 27, 2014 We certainly know when and why Gaddafi suited Canada....oil service contracts. Reagan bombed him...Martin hugged him. And where was the oil going? Quote
waldo Posted July 27, 2014 Report Posted July 27, 2014 We certainly know when and why Gaddafi suited Canada....oil service contracts. Reagan bombed him...Martin hugged him. uhhh... you've got an 8 year timeline difference there between Reagan and PM Paul Martin, hey! In that same 2004, it was the Shrub that re-established relations with Libya... it was the Shrub that removed sanctions on Libya. More pointedly, the big winners for Libya's oil were Anglo-Americans BP and Exxon Mobil, France's Total and Italy's Eni. you're welcome! Quote
Shady Posted July 27, 2014 Report Posted July 27, 2014 Well he was when it suited the US and he was no less a murderer than your two boys. Yes, that's what I said. He wasn't ally anymore, and hadn't been for a couple of decades. However, Mubarek definitely was, and never should have been pushed out of power. I don't think Gaddafi should have been either. Quote
eyeball Posted July 27, 2014 Report Posted July 27, 2014 No he wasn't an ally. It had been 2 decades since. It'll be another two decades before in sinks in just how FUBAR the world really is due to the geo-political vandalism of the super-powers and their harems of middle eastern dictators. The sheer moral dissonance of the shiniest most powerful beacons on the planet diddling it's smaller weaker nations makes this depravity all the more shocking - like when priests diddle kids. The resulting long-term damage to the victims of this abuse is the profound cultural, social and economic pain, suffering and dysfunction that is now gripping the world. The real injustice is that much of the generations most responsible will likely be nearing dementia and death by the time it really does sink in - just about the time it starts sinking in that maybe a little climate alarmism wasn't such a bad idea after all. Quite the god-awful mess we're leaving behind. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 27, 2014 Report Posted July 27, 2014 .....Quite the god-awful mess we're leaving behind. Yes...the world was such a paradise of love and peace before the "diddling" began. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Shady Posted July 27, 2014 Report Posted July 27, 2014 It'll be another two decades before in sinks in just how FUBAR the world really is due to the geo-political vandalism of the super-powers and their harems of middle eastern dictators. The sheer moral dissonance of the shiniest most powerful beacons on the planet diddling it's smaller weaker nations makes this depravity all the more shocking - like when priests diddle kids. The resulting long-term damage to the victims of this abuse is the profound cultural, social and economic pain, suffering and dysfunction that is now gripping the world. The real injustice is that much of the generations most responsible will likely be nearing dementia and death by the time it really does sink in - just about the time it starts sinking in that maybe a little climate alarmism wasn't such a bad idea after all. Quite the god-awful mess we're leaving behind. This statement is quite nonsensical. Which dictators do you prefer, the ones that worked against us, or the ones that leave us alone? Because those are the only options when it comes to the Middle East. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted July 28, 2014 Report Posted July 28, 2014 This statement is quite nonsensical. Which dictators do you prefer, the ones that worked against us, or the ones that leave us alone? Because those are the only options when it comes to the Middle East. You seem to have conveniently forgotten about the ones that worked with/for us. Quote
GostHacked Posted August 26, 2014 Report Posted August 26, 2014 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-28933070 US officials say Egypt and the UAE were behind air strikes in Libya last week that targeted Islamist-linked militia. A senior US official told the BBC that Washington was not consulted about the attacks and was "caught off-guard". The air strikes on militia positions around Tripoli's international airport were reportedly carried out by Emirati fighter jets using bases in Egypt. The Egyptian authorities have denied involvement, and there has been no direct comment from the UAE. The strikes failed to stop militias from Misrata and other cities, which operate under the banner Libya Dawn and include some Islamist groups, seizing the airport from a militia from Zintan that had controlled it since 2011. Good thing there is no more terrorism in Libya after Gaddafi was taken out. Quote
eyeball Posted August 26, 2014 Report Posted August 26, 2014 This statement is quite nonsensical. Which dictators do you prefer, the ones that worked against us, or the ones that leave us alone? Because those are the only options when it comes to the Middle East.Of course it's nonsensical to you. you're a right wringer.I prefer no dictators. I prefer supporters of dictators even less. They're worse than the dictators. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
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.