Thread: The Libyan Crisis

Originally Posted by Mr Gribbs

Obama is a real idiot, his wanting to renew old ties has got himself into the type of war he swore he wouldn't get the country in. This is a criminal war with no objective, all it is doing is wasting money. He better pull out of this coalition as quick as he can. While Obama is busy kissing the ass of the half Jew Sarkozy his fellow black Africans are being slaughtered like sheep by the same people he was duped into supporting.

afrol News - Africans hunted down in "liberated" Libya

Fellow black Africans?

So its to be a Canadian in charge of the NATO force.

Brilliant move by Obama to stick around long enough to get rid of some old munitions, then cut and run as the dirty work is about to start. If the things get bad the Euros will have to come crawling back to Obama's feet begging for help, and he comes to save the day. That will make a great story, eh?

Originally Posted by Bower

So its to be a Canadian in charge of the NATO force.

The last time a Canadian was in charge of a military/peace keeping operation like this over 800K Africans were slaughtered like lambs on Eid Al Adha. The Europeans and Anglo satellie states don't have the stomach to go through with these type missions anymore.

Originally Posted by Mr Gribbs

Originally Posted by Bower

So its to be a Canadian in charge of the NATO force.

The last time a Canadian was in charge of a military/peace keeping operation like this over 800K Africans were slaughtered like lambs on Eid Al Adha. The Europeans and Anglo satellie states don't have the stomach to go through with these type missions anymore.

Yes but it was those peaceful and civilized "black Africans" slaughtering each other....actually they do it a lot in case you missed some of the other slaughters that take place in Africa almost daily.

The "Canadian" general heading up a small and ill equipped UN peacekeeping force advised the UN over and over that a massacre was going to happen if they did not
sent some serious help. He was ignored by the UN and Bill Clinton dismissed him as "over reacting".

His mandate and rules of engagement were so restricted that he could do nothing but watch and try to save as many lives as he could. The fucking UN actually order a Belgian unit to hand over their firearms....the Belgians complied and were then murdered by some friendly "black Africans". Belgium then told the UN to fuck off and pulled out the rest of their troops, because nobody can operate effectively with monkeys running the program.

If anyone on the outside needed blaming for shirking responsibility, it was Kofi Annan...(who happens to be one of those wonderful black Africans you feel such an attachment to) and Bill Clinton.....it sure as hell was not Gen Romeo Delaire.

A military commander of any rank can only operate within the rules of engagement laid down by whoever is heading up the operation....but they make excellent scapegoats when their political masters and diplomats fuck up....and that is exactly what happened when your 800K black Africans decided to slaughter each other.

Rebel forces claim victory in key Libyan city - CNN.com

Rebel forces claim victory in key Libyan city

By the CNN Wire Staff
March 26, 2011 5:26 a.m. EDT


A Gadhafi soldier speaks

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• NEW: An opposition spokesman says rebel forces took control of Ajdabiya overnight
• Refugees fill makeshift camps outside the city, a gateway to oil-rich eastern Libya
• "We saw bodies in the street, but no one can bury them," one civilian says
• Coalition leaders say their mission is protecting civilians and enforcing a no-fly zone

Tripoli, Libya (CNN) -- Rebel forces claimed to control a strategically located city in eastern Libya on Saturday, a week after coalition troops began airstrikes aimed at protecting civilians.

Opposition fighters took control of Ajdabiya overnight after allied fighter jets bombed Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's tanks that were entrenched at the city's gates, opposition spokesman Jalal al-Gallal said.

CNN was not able to independently verify who controlled the city, and Libyan government officials could not be immediately reached for comment.

On Friday government officials said coalition airstrikes were providing cover for rebels to advance toward Ajdabiya. The city is a gateway to oil-rich eastern Libya and a key stopping point on the way to the rebel stronghold of Benghazi.

"This is immoral, illegal and it was not authorized by the (UN) Security Council," government spokesman Ibrahim Mussa told reporters.

Coalition leaders maintained that their mission was enforcing a no-fly zone and protecting civilians.

"When we see regime force attacking civilians, we will do everything we can to stop those attacks," said Gen. Carter Ham, commander of the U.S. Africa Command.

Coalition fighter planes in a 24-hour period took out seven Libyan tanks threatening civilian populations, including in Ajdabiya, authorities said Friday.

Outside the city, refugees who fled the violence filled campsites scattered across the harsh terrain.

"We were driving and the rounds were landing around us. Rockets were hitting our roof," Hussein Othman said. "We saw bodies in the street, but no one can bury them. Even the ambulances were getting shot at."

Families said they did not want to leave the area, clinging to the hope that Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's army will be defeated and they will be able to return home. Parents and children slept on thin mats in hastily built, makeshift huts made from branches and shrubs lashed together.

"We didn't have the fuel to go any farther. The car stopped when we got here," a woman named Nuria said, sitting beside her 7-year-old daughter. "We were hearing that the soldiers were searching homes and taking the men away. That's why we left."

Meanwhile, about 530 miles (850 kilometers) away in suburbs outside Tripoli, officials escorted international reporters to farmlands where Gadhafi's government claims airstrikes killed civilians.

At the farm site, missile fragments lay scattered about a palm orchard and shrapnel had peppered walls of still-standing farm buildings.

Reporters found no evidence of civilian deaths. But along the way, they saw evidence of other damage from coalition strikes, and signs of how Gadhafi's forces are fighting back.

Two military bases that had been bombed were still smoldering Friday. Anti-aircraft guns were buried in bunkers along the roadside. Small missiles were hidden under trees.

Gadhafihas been keen to put out the word on collateral damage from the coalition's airstrikes.

Libyan health ministry official Khaled Omar told reporters Friday that 114 people had been killed during the coalition's campaign, but he did not specify whether they were civilians.

Earlier this week, government officials escorted international reporters to a seaside cemetery in Tripoli where the funerals of 33 people allegedly killed in airstrikes were taking place. CNN could not independently verify the circumstances of the deaths or who the victims were.

In Tripoli, CNN reporters go on government-organized tours in an effort to do their own reporting; Libyan authorities forbid independent movement by international journalists in Tripoli.

The reports of civilian deaths have been given little credence by coalition forces.

"The only civilian casualties we know of for certain are the ones that the Libyan government itself has caused," U.S. Navy Vice Adm. Bill Gortney has said.

NATO this weekend is expected to take over control of the no-fly zone from the United States and finalize procedures on protecting civilians.

Not long after allies unleashed cruise missiles against Gadhafi air defenses last Saturday, U.S. President Barack Obama told Americans he wanted the United States, which has headed the military campaign, to hand over control of the enforcement of a U.N. Security Council resolution.

The resolution called for the protection of Libyan civilians as Gadhafi attacked the opposition, and the enforcement of the no-fly zone.

NATO, which includes the United States, will lead both efforts.

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

"They (the West) think it’s a matter of a civil movement, a matter of democracy," he said. "What’s going on in Bahrain is much beyond our Western allies to understand it. It is a complete conspiracy of the Iranians."

I just love all these double-standards in play at one time - and watching the Americans and their royal raghead allies squirm as they try to justify attacking Libyan Dictator forces, but not Bahrain Dictator forces, or Yemen Dictator forces.

That quote from towelhead above could be applied to Thailand and the American blind-eye to events last year here in LOS. Just change a couple of words and PRESTO:

"They (the West) think it’s a matter of a civil movement, a matter of democracy," he said. "What’s going on in Thailand is much beyond our Western allies to understand it. It is a complete conspiracy of Thaksin."

Quite right there TS. Western powers take the high moral ground for political purposes at home when it suits them and turn their backs on the very principles they purport to support when it suits them.

I guess thats one of the problems in a democracy for leaders. They have to convince the voters that what they are doing is right, fair and just. Not unlike the propaganda Gaddafi is feeding his own supporters.

Its not too difficult for thinking people to see through the tainted western media and see that our own governments are indeed morally corrupt themselves. Unfortunately, the bulk of western voters are too busy munching on their junk food and watching TV soap operas to bother to question what is fed to them on the mainstream 6'Oclock news.

For the vast bulk of people in the west, its only when their own standard of living and/or safety is threatened that they start to sit up and take real notice of whats going on. Governments prey on this apathy in both dictatorial and democratic regimes alike.

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

"They (the West) think it’s a matter of a civil movement, a matter of democracy," he said. "What’s going on in Bahrain is much beyond our Western allies to understand it. It is a complete conspiracy of the Iranians."

I just love all these double-standards in play at one time - and watching the Americans and their royal raghead allies squirm as they try to justify attacking Libyan Dictator forces, but not Bahrain Dictator forces, or Yemen Dictator forces.

That quote from towelhead above could be applied to Thailand and the American blind-eye to events last year here in LOS. Just change a couple of words and PRESTO:

"They (the West) think it’s a matter of a civil movement, a matter of democracy," he said. "What’s going on in Thailand is much beyond our Western allies to understand it. It is a complete conspiracy of Thaksin."

Are we beginning to see a connection yet? The selected international head-turning and hypocritical justifications are rife in contemporary times.

Originally Posted by Panda

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

"They (the West) think it’s a matter of a civil movement, a matter of democracy," he said. "What’s going on in Bahrain is much beyond our Western allies to understand it. It is a complete conspiracy of the Iranians."

I just love all these double-standards in play at one time - and watching the Americans and their royal raghead allies squirm as they try to justify attacking Libyan Dictator forces, but not Bahrain Dictator forces, or Yemen Dictator forces.

That quote from towelhead above could be applied to Thailand and the American blind-eye to events last year here in LOS. Just change a couple of words and PRESTO:

"They (the West) think it’s a matter of a civil movement, a matter of democracy," he said. "What’s going on in Thailand is much beyond our Western allies to understand it. It is a complete conspiracy of Thaksin."

Quite right there TS. Western powers take the high moral ground for political purposes at home when it suits them and turn their backs on the very principles they purport to support when it suits them.

I guess thats one of the problems in a democracy for leaders. They have to convince the voters that what they are doing is right, fair and just. Not unlike the propaganda Gaddafi is feeding his own supporters.

Its not too difficult for thinking people to see through the tainted western media and see that our own governments are indeed morally corrupt themselves. Unfortunately, the bulk of western voters are too busy munching on their junk food and watching TV soap operas to bother to question what is fed to them on the mainstream 6'Oclock news.

For the vast bulk of people in the west, its only when their own standard of living and/or safety is threatened that they start to sit up and take real notice of whats going on. Governments prey on this apathy in both dictatorial and democratic regimes alike.

Well constructed, Panda. There might be some circles that suggest the only reason that these said cultures have such a fanciful standard of living is singularly derived from the continued overseas ventures - 75% of which tends to be covert, where the masses are totally ignorant of.

Obama’s Unconstitutional War

"In taking the country into a war with Libya, Barack Obama's administration is breaking new ground in its construction of an imperial presidency -- an executive who increasingly acts independently of Congress at home and abroad. Obtaining a U.N. Security Council resolution has legitimated U.S. bombing raids under international law. But the U.N. Charter is not a substitute for the U.S. Constitution, which gives Congress, not the president, the power "to declare war."

After the Vietnam War, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution, which granted the president the power to act unilaterally for 60 days in response to a "national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces." The law gave the chief executive an additional 30 days to disengage if he failed to gain congressional assent during the interim.

But, again, these provisions have little to do with the constitutionality of the Libyan intervention, since Libya did not attack our "armed forces." The president failed to mention this fundamental point in giving Congress notice of his decision on Monday, in compliance with another provision of the resolution. Without an armed "attack," there is no compelling reason for the president to cut Congress out of a crucial decision on war and peace."

Continues ...

Obama

Originally Posted by OhOh

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links - Telegraph

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links
Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi's regime.


"In an interview with the Italian newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore, Mr al-Hasidi admitted that he had recruited "around 25" men from the Derna area in eastern Libya to fight against coalition troops in Iraq. Some of them, he said, are "today are on the front lines in Adjabiya".
Mr al-Hasidi insisted his fighters "are patriots and good Muslims, not terrorists," but added that the "members of al-Qaeda are also good Muslims and are fighting against the invader".
His revelations came even as Idriss Deby Itno, Chad's president, said al-Qaeda had managed to pillage military arsenals in the Libyan rebel zone and acquired arms, "including surface-to-air missiles, which were then smuggled into their sanctuaries".
Mr al-Hasidi admitted he had earlier fought against "the foreign invasion" in Afghanistan, before being "captured in 2002 in Peshwar, in Pakistan". He was later handed over to the US, and then held in Libya before being released in 2008.
US and British government sources said Mr al-Hasidi was a member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, or LIFG, which killed dozens of Libyan troops in guerrilla attacks around Derna and Benghazi in 1995 and 1996"

They now have a reason to invade Libya.

Which US president was it that said;-- "he may be an asshole, -- but he is OUR asshole". ? Or something similar.

Anyway, strange bedfellows emerge for short term mutual benefit occasionally.
Kinda undermines the good verses bad, black and white picture we are fed by politicians when it suits their needs.

Either the torture worked or he went from Afghanistan to Libya via the "road to Damascus"

The organisation the Rebel Commander works for.

In the Spotlight: The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG)

In the Spotlight: The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG)

"The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) is a band of radical Islamists dedicated to overthrowing the regime of Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi and replacing it with a government modeled on Sharia law, with special attention to the Sunna of the Prophet Muhammad. The LIFG believes that the Gadhafi regime is oppressive, corrupt and apostate.

Public information on the group is sparse and contradictory. Very little is known about its leader Anas Sebai, but it is estimated to have between 100 active members and 2,500 sympathizers. Funding for the LIFG likely comes from several sources including Islamic non-governmental organizations, wealthy individuals and criminal activities."

Originally Posted by koman

Originally Posted by Mr Gribbs

Originally Posted by Bower

So its to be a Canadian in charge of the NATO force.

The last time a Canadian was in charge of a military/peace keeping operation like this over 800K Africans were slaughtered like lambs on Eid Al Adha. The Europeans and Anglo satellie states don't have the stomach to go through with these type missions anymore.

Yes but it was those peaceful and civilized "black Africans" slaughtering each other....actually they do it a lot in case you missed some of the other slaughters that take place in Africa almost daily.

The "Canadian" general heading up a small and ill equipped UN peacekeeping force advised the UN over and over that a massacre was going to happen if they did not
sent some serious help. He was ignored by the UN and Bill Clinton dismissed him as "over reacting".

His mandate and rules of engagement were so restricted that he could do nothing but watch and try to save as many lives as he could. The fucking UN actually order a Belgian unit to hand over their firearms....the Belgians complied and were then murdered by some friendly "black Africans". Belgium then told the UN to fuck off and pulled out the rest of their troops, because nobody can operate effectively with monkeys running the program.

If anyone on the outside needed blaming for shirking responsibility, it was Kofi Annan...(who happens to be one of those wonderful black Africans you feel such an attachment to) and Bill Clinton.....it sure as hell was not Gen Romeo Delaire.

A military commander of any rank can only operate within the rules of engagement laid down by whoever is heading up the operation....but they make excellent scapegoats when their political masters and diplomats fuck up....and that is exactly what happened when your 800K black Africans decided to slaughter each other.

Yes, those black Africans who lived in relative peace until they were invaded by Europeans who messed up the natural balance of power by siding with one ethnic group over another. If a bunch of Africans invaded Belgium and gave the Wallons complete control over the Flemish how you think the would feel? Bill Clinton was right by not getting involved in the domestic affairs of a sovereign nation. If the Europeans would have done the same and not colonized Africa they wouldn't have to worry about the Africans blaming them for their problems.

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

"They (the West) think it’s a matter of a civil movement, a matter of democracy," he said. "What’s going on in Bahrain is much beyond our Western allies to understand it. It is a complete conspiracy of the Iranians."

I just love all these double-standards in play at one time - and watching the Americans and their royal raghead allies squirm as they try to justify attacking Libyan Dictator forces, but not Bahrain Dictator forces, or Yemen Dictator forces.

That quote from towelhead above could be applied to Thailand and the American blind-eye to events last year here in LOS. Just change a couple of words and PRESTO:

"They (the West) think it’s a matter of a civil movement, a matter of democracy," he said. "What’s going on in Thailand is much beyond our Western allies to understand it. It is a complete conspiracy of Thaksin."

Why shouldn't the US be allowed to have its allies like every other nation? Do you think the US should invaded every "undemocratic" nation in the world? Your argument is silly, because it implies people don't show favoritism towards their friends. I will loan a family member of good friend money, but I wouldn't do the same to someone I don't have a good relationship with, or barely know. You're judging the US by a standard no human could possibly live up to, it is absolutely absurd.

Originally Posted by Mr Gribbs

Bill Clinton was right by not getting involved in the domestic affairs of a sovereign nation.

Perhaps not in Africa but , it was Bill Clinton and tony blare , who got very involved in a sovereign nation -Serbia , they used nato ,and were the air force for the Kosova Liberation Army , who wanted to annex Kosova from Serbia .

Originally Posted by Mr Gribbs

Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

"They (the West) think it’s a matter of a civil movement, a matter of democracy," he said. "What’s going on in Bahrain is much beyond our Western allies to understand it. It is a complete conspiracy of the Iranians."

I just love all these double-standards in play at one time - and watching the Americans and their royal raghead allies squirm as they try to justify attacking Libyan Dictator forces, but not Bahrain Dictator forces, or Yemen Dictator forces.

That quote from towelhead above could be applied to Thailand and the American blind-eye to events last year here in LOS. Just change a couple of words and PRESTO:

"They (the West) think it’s a matter of a civil movement, a matter of democracy," he said. "What’s going on in Thailand is much beyond our Western allies to understand it. It is a complete conspiracy of Thaksin."

Why shouldn't the US be allowed to have its allies like every other nation? Do you think the US should invaded every "undemocratic" nation in the world? Your argument is silly, because it implies people don't show favoritism towards their friends. I will loan a family member of good friend money, but I wouldn't do the same to someone I don't have a good relationship with, or barely know. You're judging the US by a standard no human could possibly live up to, it is absolutely absurd.

Gribbs, you're arguments are unwinnable because they are on a tactical level. When you face off against people like Panda, Butterfly and Tom Sawyer you are arguing with people who fundementally and philosophically see the US as their enemy. The Great Satan. They consistently align themselves and support brutal dictatorships like the ones in Iran and North Korea solely because they are enemies of the US. You cannot have a tactical discussion with these people because every argument ultimately goe to their core view that the US - its government, its culture and its people are the enemy.

Originally Posted by Mr Gribbs

Why shouldn't the US be allowed to have its allies like every other nation? Do you think the US should invaded every "undemocratic" nation in the world? Your argument is silly, because it implies people don't show favoritism towards their friends. I will loan a family member of good friend money, but I wouldn't do the same to someone I don't have a good relationship with, or barely know. You're judging the US by a standard no human could possibly live up to, it is absolutely absurd.

Showing favour to allies is one thing. Supporting and funding brutal dictatorships for national gain is another.

As Gerald Celente put it "would they have attacked if their major export was broccoli?"

Originally Posted by Humbert

Gribbs, you're arguments are unwinnable because they are on a tactical level. When you face off against people like Panda, Butterfly and Tom Sawyer you are arguing with people who fundementally and philosophically see the US as their enemy. The Great Satan. They consistently align themselves and support brutal dictatorships like the ones in Iran and North Korea solely because they are enemies of the US. You cannot have a tactical discussion with these people because every argument ultimately goe to their core view that the US - its government, its culture and its people are the enemy.

Here we go. The debate now reduced to personal attacks once again.
Anyone who doesnt back your point of view is anti-USA eh?
No middle ground. No intelligent analysis of the facts. Just the old black and white line;-- you are either for us or agin us.

No point even debating with such narrow minded fools.
The fact is that there are many Americans who are now starting to question the ethics, legality and value of US foreign policy. Senator Ron Paul for one.

Panda, every one of your so called intelligent debates disintegrates into an attack on the american media, american TV habits, american loudness etc. If you stick to the facts I will. Go back and review your own posts.
I have consistently been critical of all US military involvement so don't accuse me of being black and white.

Originally Posted by Humbert

Panda, every one of your so called intelligent debates disintegrates into an attack on the american media, american TV habits, american loudness etc. If you stick to the facts I will. Go back and review your own posts.
I have consistently been critical of all US military involvement so don't accuse me of being black and white.

Thankyou for giving me the privilege of having my posts reviewed by you, Heir Fuhrer.

I call it as I see it. You want to debate those issues, fine with me.
Personal attacks (as you continue with above) do nothing to change my point of view and only convince me you have no genuine substance in your rebuttals.

If you think shit canning me personally and others who disagree with your point of view will sway the discussion in your favour then please continue.