The Libyan Crisis

Who even knows who these "rebels" are, and what they are about. They could be takfiris, Al Qeida types, or anything for all we know. This is an unprecedented attack, where a small group of bandits and criminals can get the West to bomb a country and dispose of its leader. This is all about regime change, because they sure the hell aren't protecting any civilians by bombing them. I can't recalll a news story making my blood boil like this one. They just showed a bunch of burned out tanks, SUV's, and other vehicles after they were bombed by the French on CNN, there bodies too, burned beyond recognition. The crusader armies of the West not only kill Muslims, they protect and arm the most militant of Muslims, that in return subjugate and kill their fellow Muslims, like the Taliban, Saudis, Algerian salafist, Chechen "rebels" etc.

Boehner says Obama must explain Libya mission | Reuters

Boehner says Obama must explain Libya mission

"House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner on Sunday called on President Barack Obama to explain the U.S. mission in Libya and how his administration intends to achieve its goals.

"The president is the commander-in-chief. But the administration has a responsibility to define for the American people, the Congress and our troops, what the mission in Libya is," Boehner, a Republican, said in a statement.

"Before any further military commitments are made, the administration must do a better job of communicating to the American people and to Congress about our mission in Libya and how it will be achieved," he said."

An merkin that actually wants an answer and not bullshit, there may be hope for that country.

its like Serbia , when NATO attacked the Serbians demandinmg they give the province of Kosovo to the ethnic Albanians.
The Kosovo Liberation Army , said nato was thier air force,
when it was over the Albanians de facto ethnically cleansed the Serbs from Kosovo.

These things always end badly
better to not get involved

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muadib

whereas the coalition interpretation was to knock out air defense capabilities

---

https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2011/03/4043.jpg

Looks to me more like a road than either a AA or radar site.

https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2011/03/4044.jpg

This one is an APC, not an AA or radar site.

https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2011/03/4045.jpg

This one is a tank, a couple of dead "civilians" and some "terrorists" feeling a little sorry.


https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2011/03/4046.jpg

Ah this is an AA / Radar site, no silly me it's a Tank.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Gribbs

Who even knows who these "rebels" are, and what they are about. They could be takfiris, Al Qeida types, or anything for all we know. This is an unprecedented attack, where a small group of bandits and criminals can get the West to bomb a country and dispose of its leader. This is all about regime change, because they sure the hell aren't protecting any civilians by bombing them. I can't recalll a news story making my blood boil like this one. They just showed a bunch of burned out tanks, SUV's, and other vehicles after they were bombed by the French on CNN, there bodies too, burned beyond recognition. The crusader armies of the West not only kill Muslims, they protect and arm the most militant of Muslims, that in return subjugate and kill their fellow Muslims, like the Taliban, Saudis, Algerian salafist, Chechen "rebels" etc.

---

Gaddafi is a lunatic criminal with serious mental problems and he is in control of 6 million people and lots of light sweet crude.

There is no logical reason not to help this revolution and knock Gaddafi off.

Aside from your antisemitic reasons, why wouldn't you knock him off ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muadib

The Arab League "thought" the resolution was to simply prevent the Libyan Air Force from launching attacks on rebels,

---

Same as the Iraqi resolution, the French and the Russians "thought" a second resolution was required for military action.

Maybe they need some TEFL bods to teach them English, having said that the UNSC resolutions appears to be available in many languages. Lost in translation no doubt.

Libyan regime's claim to abide by ceasefire cannot be verified – UN chief

Libyan regime's claim to abide by ceasefire cannot be verified – UN chief

"19 March 2011 – Libya's claim that it will abide by this week's Security Council resolution, which calls for an immediate ceasefire and a halt to all attacks against civilians, still has to be verified, and the regime's current actions are unclear, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said today.
Mr. Ban told reporters in Paris, where international leaders met to discuss the situation in Libya, that he received a phone call last night from Libyan Prime Minister Baghdadi Mahmudi, who said the regime would “strictly abide” by the terms of resolution 1973.

That resolution, imposed by the Council on Thursday, authorizes the use of “all necessary measures” to protect civilians in Libya, where the regime of Muammar al-Qadhafi has conducted a fierce military offensive against a popular uprising.

The Libyan Prime Minister “asked me to intervene to stop military action on the part of the international community,” Mr. Ban said. “Frankly he sounded rather desperate. It is not clear what they are doing. He called for a monitoring team to observe the ceasefire. The Libyan claim has to be verified. There is no doubt the Libyans are trying hard to ward off military action under [resolution] 1973.

“I have spoken with the Foreign Minister of Libya [Musa Kusa] several times to urge the Government to stop the violence and cease fire immediately.”

Media reports state that Libya's armed forces have attacked the eastern city of Benghazi, where rebel forces are headquartered, in the past 24 hours, despite the regime's claim it would abide by a ceasefire.

Mr. Ban said that, “given the critical situation on the ground, it is imperative that we continue to act with speed and decision,” adding that the United Nations would work closely with regional organizations and individual Member States “to coordinate a common, effective and timely response.”"

Is there a UN procedure for "verifying" a cease fire claim?

"Media reports state that Libya's armed forces have attacked...." Is the "media" his only source of what is going on?

Mr. Ban obviously didn't stop the war mongers from ignoring his request. If he did request them to stop, and they ignored his request, it confirms the illegality of this whole thing.

Does Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon have any power in this regard? His obligations are spelt out:

"Resolution 1973, adopted by the 15-member Security Council with 10 votes in favour and five abstentions, requests Mr. Ban to inform the Council immediately of any actions taken by Member States as well as to appoint an eight-member expert panel to monitor implementation of its terms, including an arms embargo."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by socal

this revolution

---

this revolution....:confused:

Some would call "civilians" raising arms against the government "terrorists", others "insurgents" or "enemy combatants".

US opposition to a different group of "insurgents" in Iraq.

"The Mahdi Army forces began an offensive in Najaf, Kufa, Kut, and Sadr City, seizing control of public buildings and police stations while clashing with coalition forces. The militants gained partial control of Karbala after fighting there. Other coalition forces came under attack in Nasiriyah, Amarah and Basra. Najaf and Kufa were quickly seized after a few firefights with Spanish troops, and Kut was seized after clashes with Ukrainian troops soon afterwards.

After sporadic clashes, coalition forces temporarily suppressed most militia activity in Nasiriyah, Amarah, and Basra. Mahdi rebels expelled Iraqi police from three police stations and ambushed U.S forces in Sadr City, killing seven U.S troops and wounding several more. U.S forces subsequently regained control of the police stations after running firefights with the fighters, killing dozens of Mahdi militiamen."

Embassy of the United States Valletta, Malta - Press Releases

"Dealing with captured terrorists is a difficult challenge. They are not soldiers. They do not adhere to the rules of war. They do not represent any state or government......"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by socal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Gribbs

Who even knows who these "rebels" are, and what they are about. They could be takfiris, Al Qeida types, or anything for all we know. This is an unprecedented attack, where a small group of bandits and criminals can get the West to bomb a country and dispose of its leader. This is all about regime change, because they sure the hell aren't protecting any civilians by bombing them. I can't recalll a news story making my blood boil like this one. They just showed a bunch of burned out tanks, SUV's, and other vehicles after they were bombed by the French on CNN, there bodies too, burned beyond recognition. The crusader armies of the West not only kill Muslims, they protect and arm the most militant of Muslims, that in return subjugate and kill their fellow Muslims, like the Taliban, Saudis, Algerian salafist, Chechen "rebels" etc.

---

Gaddafi is a lunatic criminal with serious mental problems and he is in control of 6 million people and lots of light sweet crude.

There is no logical reason not to help this revolution and knock Gaddafi off.

Aside from your antisemitic reasons, why wouldn't you knock him off ?

---

Funny, he wasn't a lunatic six months ago when he was considered "reformed" and in the process of changing the image of Libya. He wasn't a lunatic when various European politicians (Tony Blair, Nicholas Sarkozy, and Silvio Berlusconi to name a few) were visiting him, and inking deals for big money. He wasn't a lunatic when he was allowing European citizens to work there and make more money then they could in their own countries. He surely wasn't an idiot when he was flooding Europe with cheap gas and oil. He was stabbed in the back by his so called Western friends. What he does on Libya soil is his business too, the West is setting a helluva precedent here by getting involved in regime change because a percentage of the population doesn't like the leader. Anti semite my ass, everyone with half a brain knows the Jews and Israel wants a Middle East and Islamic world that's friendly to them.

The problem is the "West," or should I say white people, who seem to can't keep their big snoots out of the business of brown and black people. They want to tell the world how to live through their selective morality, human rights, feminist, gay rightist, NGO's, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muadib

The question is the interpretation of the term "no fly zone"... It is obvious that the US is in tactically in control of the operation... When you leave something up to the US military, they are going to attack... The Arab League "thought" the resolution was to simply prevent the Libyan Air Force from launching attacks on rebels, whereas the coalition interpretation was to knock out air defense capabilities so they can carry out air operations without threat...

---

It was discussed in detail on many international news programmes prior to the UN resolution. 'The no fly zone' would require the disablement of Gaddafi's radar,and air defence systems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bower

It was discussed in detail on many international news programmes prior to the UN resolution. 'The no fly zone' would require the disablement of Gaddafi's radar,and air defence systems.

---

The media pictures released, so far, show the result of attacks on roads, tanks and APC's, none of which are of any use against airplanes. There was also no evidence, presented so far, of any use of these assets against "civilians".

Were they moving towards the "civilians" or were they being withdrawn from the area? Were the British, Americans and French governments just itching to murder some Libyans to show each other that they had some balls?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Gribbs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by socal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Gribbs

Who even knows who these "rebels" are, and what they are about. They could be takfiris, Al Qeida types, or anything for all we know. This is an unprecedented attack, where a small group of bandits and criminals can get the West to bomb a country and dispose of its leader. This is all about regime change, because they sure the hell aren't protecting any civilians by bombing them. I can't recalll a news story making my blood boil like this one. They just showed a bunch of burned out tanks, SUV's, and other vehicles after they were bombed by the French on CNN, there bodies too, burned beyond recognition. The crusader armies of the West not only kill Muslims, they protect and arm the most militant of Muslims, that in return subjugate and kill their fellow Muslims, like the Taliban, Saudis, Algerian salafist, Chechen "rebels" etc.

---

Gaddafi is a lunatic criminal with serious mental problems and he is in control of 6 million people and lots of light sweet crude.

There is no logical reason not to help this revolution and knock Gaddafi off.

Aside from your antisemitic reasons, why wouldn't you knock him off ?

---

Funny, he wasn't a lunatic six months ago when he was considered "reformed" and in the process of changing the image of Libya. He wasn't a lunatic when various European politicians (Tony Blair, Nicholas Sarkozy, and Silvio Berlusconi to name a few) were visiting him, and inking deals for big money. He wasn't a lunatic when he was allowing European citizens to work there and make more money then they could in their own countries. He surely wasn't an idiot when he was flooding Europe with cheap gas and oil. He was stabbed in the back by his so called Western friends. What he does on Libya soil is his business too, the West is setting a helluva precedent here by getting involved in regime change because a percentage of the population doesn't like the leader. Anti semite my ass, everyone with half a brain knows the Jews and Israel wants a Middle East and Islamic world that's friendly to them.

The problem is the "West," or should I say white people, who seem to can't keep their big snoots out of the business of brown and black people. They want to tell the world how to live through their selective morality, human rights, feminist, gay rightist, NGO's, etc.

---

No, he has always been a lunatic. Just because he was better to be allied with strategically for a period of time doesn't mean the world liked him. Stalin was insane but the whole western world cut deals with him all through ww2. He was never flooding the world with cheap oil either.

Quote:

---

They want to tell the world how to live through their selective morality, human rights, feminist, gay rightist, NGO's, etc.

---

Its not that simple. I wished they stayed out of it though,so all the peace mongers and isolationists of the world could watch on TV, Gaddafi level crowds of people with fighter jets and hellifire missiles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by socal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Gribbs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by socal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Gribbs

Who even knows who these "rebels" are, and what they are about. They could be takfiris, Al Qeida types, or anything for all we know. This is an unprecedented attack, where a small group of bandits and criminals can get the West to bomb a country and dispose of its leader. This is all about regime change, because they sure the hell aren't protecting any civilians by bombing them. I can't recalll a news story making my blood boil like this one. They just showed a bunch of burned out tanks, SUV's, and other vehicles after they were bombed by the French on CNN, there bodies too, burned beyond recognition. The crusader armies of the West not only kill Muslims, they protect and arm the most militant of Muslims, that in return subjugate and kill their fellow Muslims, like the Taliban, Saudis, Algerian salafist, Chechen "rebels" etc.

---

Gaddafi is a lunatic criminal with serious mental problems and he is in control of 6 million people and lots of light sweet crude.

There is no logical reason not to help this revolution and knock Gaddafi off.

Aside from your antisemitic reasons, why wouldn't you knock him off ?

---

Funny, he wasn't a lunatic six months ago when he was considered "reformed" and in the process of changing the image of Libya. He wasn't a lunatic when various European politicians (Tony Blair, Nicholas Sarkozy, and Silvio Berlusconi to name a few) were visiting him, and inking deals for big money. He wasn't a lunatic when he was allowing European citizens to work there and make more money then they could in their own countries. He surely wasn't an idiot when he was flooding Europe with cheap gas and oil. He was stabbed in the back by his so called Western friends. What he does on Libya soil is his business too, the West is setting a helluva precedent here by getting involved in regime change because a percentage of the population doesn't like the leader. Anti semite my ass, everyone with half a brain knows the Jews and Israel wants a Middle East and Islamic world that's friendly to them.

The problem is the "West," or should I say white people, who seem to can't keep their big snoots out of the business of brown and black people. They want to tell the world how to live through their selective morality, human rights, feminist, gay rightist, NGO's, etc.

---

No, he has always been a lunatic. Just because he was better to be allied with strategically for a period of time doesn't mean the world liked him. Stalin was insane but the whole western world cut deals with him all through ww2. He was never flooding the world with cheap oil either.

Quote:

---

They want to tell the world how to live through their selective morality, human rights, feminist, gay rightist, NGO's, etc.

---

Its not that simple. I wished they stayed out of it though,so all the peace mongers and isolationists of the world could watch on TV, Gaddafi level crowds of people with fighter jets and hellifire missiles.

---

Who gives a fuck if the guy is a lunatic and likes to dress in weird clothing? It didn't matter to the leaders of various European nations who went to Libya and visited him. They were more then willing to take his money and oil. The West has no right to meddle in the internal affairs of Libya. So you want to invade people because the leader of a country is a lunatic. I bet you don't want to invade Israel when they call for the killing of Arabs, or when Sarkozy acts like a lunatic and wears elevator shoes because he is a dwarf. Don't act like a Cuntnadian that has been hit in the head with too many hockey pucks, this isn't about Gadhafi being a lunatic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Gribbs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by socal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Gribbs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by socal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Gribbs

Who even knows who these "rebels" are, and what they are about. They could be takfiris, Al Qeida types, or anything for all we know. This is an unprecedented attack, where a small group of bandits and criminals can get the West to bomb a country and dispose of its leader. This is all about regime change, because they sure the hell aren't protecting any civilians by bombing them. I can't recalll a news story making my blood boil like this one. They just showed a bunch of burned out tanks, SUV's, and other vehicles after they were bombed by the French on CNN, there bodies too, burned beyond recognition. The crusader armies of the West not only kill Muslims, they protect and arm the most militant of Muslims, that in return subjugate and kill their fellow Muslims, like the Taliban, Saudis, Algerian salafist, Chechen "rebels" etc.

---

Gaddafi is a lunatic criminal with serious mental problems and he is in control of 6 million people and lots of light sweet crude.

There is no logical reason not to help this revolution and knock Gaddafi off.

Aside from your antisemitic reasons, why wouldn't you knock him off ?

---

Funny, he wasn't a lunatic six months ago when he was considered "reformed" and in the process of changing the image of Libya. He wasn't a lunatic when various European politicians (Tony Blair, Nicholas Sarkozy, and Silvio Berlusconi to name a few) were visiting him, and inking deals for big money. He wasn't a lunatic when he was allowing European citizens to work there and make more money then they could in their own countries. He surely wasn't an idiot when he was flooding Europe with cheap gas and oil. He was stabbed in the back by his so called Western friends. What he does on Libya soil is his business too, the West is setting a helluva precedent here by getting involved in regime change because a percentage of the population doesn't like the leader. Anti semite my ass, everyone with half a brain knows the Jews and Israel wants a Middle East and Islamic world that's friendly to them.

The problem is the "West," or should I say white people, who seem to can't keep their big snoots out of the business of brown and black people. They want to tell the world how to live through their selective morality, human rights, feminist, gay rightist, NGO's, etc.

---

No, he has always been a lunatic. Just because he was better to be allied with strategically for a period of time doesn't mean the world liked him. Stalin was insane but the whole western world cut deals with him all through ww2. He was never flooding the world with cheap oil either.

Quote:

---

They want to tell the world how to live through their selective morality, human rights, feminist, gay rightist, NGO's, etc.

---

Its not that simple. I wished they stayed out of it though,so all the peace mongers and isolationists of the world could watch on TV, Gaddafi level crowds of people with fighter jets and hellifire missiles.

---

Who gives a fuck if the guy is a lunatic and likes to dress in weird clothing? It didn't matter to the leaders of various European nations who went to Libya and visited him. They were more then willing to take his money and oil. The West has no right to meddle in the internal affairs of Libya. So you want to invade people because the leader of a country is a lunatic. I bet you don't want to invade Israel when they call for the killing of Arabs, or when Sarkozy acts like a lunatic and wears elevator shoes because he is a dwarf. Don't act like a Cuntnadian that has been hit in the head with too many hockey pucks, this isn't about Gadhafi being a lunatic.

---

It is all about Gaddafi being a lunatic. He really is a lunatic. Lunatics are dangerous. Look at Hilter for fuck sakes. There is every good reason to eliminate lunatics from the world stage. If you have the oppertunity to take out lunatics, you do it.

What right does the Gaddafi family have to rule 6 million people by force for another 50 years or 100 years ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by socal

What right does the Gaddafi family

---

None at all.

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia sends troops into help Baharain put down its internal revolt and the world does nothing. There is clearly a double standard at work here. 3 weeks ago Obama was against a no fly zone then France recognized the rebels as the legitimate govenment of Libya and the US and Britain caved in. Let these people sort out their own problems without our interference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Humbert

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia sends troops into help Baharain put down its internal revolt and the world does nothing. There is clearly a double standard at work here. 3 weeks ago Obama was against a no fly zone then France recognized the rebels as the legitimate govenment of Libya and the US and Britain caved in. Let these people sort out their own problems without our interference.

---

Got that right. B. Hussien is the ultimate tool and fool...

You know, it's really all Dubya's fault Gaddaffi don't have any WMD, eh? Check these contrasts:

Iraq – blood for oil, war for neocon corporate interests and U.S. hegemony only
Libya – no blood, no oil. Obama’s motives pure because, well, good women are running the show for him – Hillary, Susan, Samantha – and everyone knows that when women (and the French of course) run a war good things happen!

Iraq – weapons of mass destruction what weapons of mass destruction?
Libya – no weapons of mass destruction because, well, okay, because Bush invaded Iraq and Gaddafi shit his pants and gave up his nukes.

Iraq – benign dictator who never hurt anyone, wasn’t a threat to his neighbors, did not support terrorists, and, through the Oil for Food program, only wanted to share his oil with Europe in exchange for food and medicine for his long suffering people.

Material ripped from here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by socal

It is all about Gaddafi being a lunatic. He really is a lunatic. Lunatics are dangerous. Look at Hilter for fuck sakes. There is every good reason to eliminate lunatics from the world stage. If you have the oppertunity to take out lunatics, you do it.

What right does the Gaddafi family have to rule 6 million people by force for another 50 years or 100 years ?

---

Hmm. The problem comes with who is in charge of deciding who is a lunatic, and who not. Very slippery slope there. As noted elsewhere, one mans lunatic is another mans valued ally.

Personally, I would have thought that Western powers would have by now learnt the folly of intevening in North African/Middle eastern/ "Arab" (used loosely) world matters. I can't off hand think when it has ever gone well in the long run for those same western powers.

I would, again personally, stand around, look on and go "tut, tut. What a terrible thing", because, I know sure as fuck, that whatever the outcome, it won't be good for the west.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nidhogg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by socal

It is all about Gaddafi being a lunatic. He really is a lunatic. Lunatics are dangerous. Look at Hilter for fuck sakes. There is every good reason to eliminate lunatics from the world stage. If you have the oppertunity to take out lunatics, you do it.

What right does the Gaddafi family have to rule 6 million people by force for another 50 years or 100 years ?

---

Hmm. The problem comes with who is in charge of deciding who is a lunatic, and who not. Very slippery slope there. As noted elsewhere, one mans lunatic is another mans valued ally.

Personally, I would have thought that Western powers would have by now learnt the folly of intevening in North African/Middle eastern/ "Arab" (used loosely) world matters. I can't off hand think when it has ever gone well in the long run for those same western powers.

I would, again personally, stand around, look on and go "tut, tut. What a terrible thing", because, I know sure as fuck, that whatever the outcome, it won't be good for the west.

---

Having Saddam Hussian out of Iraq and Binladen out of Aftsan are good long term for the west. Gaddafi gone will be no diffrent.

from Stratfor

The structure through which the Libyan opposition is represented is the National Transitional Council. The first man to announce its creation was former Libyan Justice Minister Mustafa Abdel-Jalil, who defected from the government Feb. 21 and declared the establishment of a “transitional government”

The National Transitional Council officially came into being March 6, and — for the moment, at least — has settled the personal and regional rivalry between Abdel-Jalil and Ghoga, with the former named the council’s head and the latter its spokesman. Despite the drama that preceded the formal establishment of the council, all members of the opposition have always been unified on a series of goals: They want to mount an armed offensive against the government-controlled areas in the west; they want to overthrow Gadhafi; they seek to unify the country with Tripoli as its capital; and they do not want foreign boots on Libyan soil. The unity of the rebels, in short, is based upon a common desire to oust the longtime Libyan leader.

Read more: Libya's Opposition Leadership Comes into Focus | STRATFOR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by socal

They want to mount an armed offensive against the government-controlled areas in the west; they want to overthrow Gadhafi; they seek to unify the country with Tripoli as its capital; and they do not want foreign boots on Libyan soil. The unity of the rebels, in short, is based upon a common desire to oust the longtime Libyan leader.

---

Stating the obvious... but unfortunately the so called rebels and Gadhafi opponents wants and desires are nothing more than pipedreams unless they get off their fat arab arses and do something about it, i.e. get of the fence and to date the "lunatic" is proving to be far tougher than his adverscaries thought.

All the crap about "foreign boots on Lybian soil" is posturing and political manouvering and nothing more by ignorant and tribal arabs. One thing that arab politicians are not known to be famous for is..."standing up and being counted".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhOh

this revolution....:confused:

Some would call "civilians" raising arms against the government "terrorists", others "insurgents" or "enemy combatants".

---

US and their allies are playing both sides of the field again - they never have to kick into the wind.

When the Libyans rise up the combtants are 'civilians' who must be protected from the Government forces 'killing their own people'

When the Thais rise up they are demonstrators 'who need to show restraint' and 'foreswear' not to resort to violence. When the Government forces kill their own people - there ain't a peep out of Washington except to hope it all ends soon.

When the non-sunni arabs rise up in Bahrain and the Government forces - and neighbouring ruthless dictators from Saudi send in troops to kill the civilians, just more 'concern' out of Washington that it will all end soon.

Pathetic - and the West wonders why no one trusts them. The West has lost the moral high-ground for good I fear. Does this mean we shouldn't go and kick Gaddafi's ass? Not necessarily - he's a prick for sure. But to be believable - one needs to show some consistency. As Westerners, we've lost all integrity thanks to our governments' thinly veiled true objectives.

Didn’t Obama say the mission was to protect innocent civilians in Libya?
Then why are the coalition bombing the shit outa the place after Gaddiffi offered a ceasefire?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiliJ...embedded#at=20

youtube.com