The Real Reason for NATO Attacking Libya ?

Jeboa Safari

Hopefully the rebels can stamp out the last of Gadaffis resistance and create a stable government. The majority of cities are free from Gadaffi at least

Jonny7

jackiebaron wrote: »

You "believe"?

And what does your statment "Rape is common in many conflicts" have to do with anything? How does that irrelevant and trite comment have any bearing on the media insisting that Gaddafi was issuing viagra to his troops to go and rape people? Please can you give me the relevance.

Wakeup was right. All you do is throw back some completely irrelevant nonsense when presented with something that you can't explain.

It's akin to me falsely stating that Mr X was plying Mr Y with alcohol and cocaine so that he would go home and beat his wife and then you coming out with the infantile statement "Hey, domestic violence is a fact of life"

Such drivel!

You didn't answer my questions or address my points.

You took one of the stories from the conflict and made a presumption I "swallowed" it.

Rape has been used as a tool of war since the dawn of man, if rape has occurred in Libya, then I wouldn't be surprised. As I said, quite clearly, I'm not that familiar with the story, if memory serves me correct, I "believe" the sources were captured pro-gaddafi troops.

You probably believed the pathetic crap that the media puked out about Gaddafi giving his troops Viagra to rape people. I bet you swallowed that nonsense without batting so much as an eyelid.

frackingishell

Jonny7 wrote: »

in Congo there are an average 45 rapes an hour

This number was actually just surpassed by the over 60 nations at the 'friends of libya' conference looking to rape Libya in every way possible.

1 how much money will we start charging the Libyans for their loans?

2 how will we tell them that they can't have interest free laons anymore?

3 Which rebel leader do we need to bribe?

4 When will we tell them theyll have to pay for their water now?

5 Which country is gong to head up the central banking, to keep Rothschild happy?

6 How are we going to cut up the oil contracts?

These and many more rapes are occurring RIGHT now between shameless little bent-over, hypocritical worms inside a big conference hall. Pigs and sows all lined up at the trough to secure their little private swiss bank accounts, and their after political-career board of director positions.

This world makes me so f*cking sick to my stomach.

And the NATO apologists are the people i feel the most sorry for, more than the Libyans. The apologists and defenders on here are actually kidding hemselves for no reason. Its really very very sad.

jackiebaron

Jonny7 wrote: »

You didn't answer my questions or address my points.

You took one of the stories from the conflict and made a presumption I "swallowed" it.

Rape has been used as a tool of war since the dawn of man, if rape has occurred in Libya, then I wouldn't be surprised. As I said, quite clearly, I'm not that familiar with the story, if memory serves me correct, I "believe" the sources were captured pro-gaddafi troops.

J7,

Your postings of irrelevant and meaningless rubbish, your avoidance of clear situations and points that fly in the face of your blinkered worldview have deemed that you are irrelevant.

If you want to be taken seriously then post something that you've thought out. Post something relevant and intelligent, otherwise just go away.

Penn

jackiebaron banned for one week.

I suggest people worry about what they post and not what other people post.

Jonny7

jackiebaron wrote: »

J7,

Your postings of irrelevant and meaningless rubbish, your avoidance of clear situations and points that fly in the face of your blinkered worldview have deemed that you are irrelevant.

If you want to be taken seriously then post something that you've thought out. Post something relevant and intelligent, otherwise just go away.

Then debate the subject, it is a forum after all.

Also Jonny7, this current incarnation of trying to topple Gadaffi and occupy Libya began back in October 2010 so please don't insult us with your "protecting civilians" horse****.

That's a pretty big claim, can you back it up somehow?

I had fairly simple questions about Eni and special forces that you don't seem to want to address either.

Look, you can't just claim anything you want with no evidence then attack another poster simply because they don't buy it.

WakeUp

I wonder how the NATO apologists feel about the civilian population of Sirte who are currently under siege from the "rebels" surrounded and being pounded from the air by NATO bombs. Cut off from food, fuel and basic supplies what about them? Where is their humanitarian "protection">??. This entire NATO/US humanitarian farce is beyond fcking ridiculous now at this stage and if you cant see through it you need your head examined. The rebels led by British special forces are waiting for the planes to bomb whatever resistance is in the city to dust then they will move in and it will be a bloodbath. The imperialist powers in London, Washington, Rome and Paris must be rubbing their hands in glee as their current colonial conquest/insertion of a puppet regime comes to fruition. So when can the civilian population of Sirte expect a UN resolution "protecting" their right to life? There is going to be a massive loss of civilian life when the "rebels"/ Al Qaeda fighters move into for the final kill. What about them?

hooradiation

WakeUp wrote: »

I wonder how the NATO apologists feel about the civilian population of Sirte who are currently under siege from the "rebels" surrounded and being pounded from the air by NATO bombs. Cut off from food, fuel and basic supplies what about them? Where is their humanitarian "protection">??. This entire NATO/US humanitarian farce is beyond fcking ridiculous now at this stage and if you cant see through it you need your head examined. The rebels led by British special forces are waiting for the planes to bomb whatever resistance is in the city to dust then they will move in and it will be a bloodbath. The imperialist powers in London, Washington, Rome and Paris must be rubbing their hands in glee as their current colonial conquest/insertion of a puppet regime comes to fruition. So when can the civilian population of Sirte expect a UN resolution "protecting" their right to life? There is going to be a massive loss of civilian life when the "rebels"/ Al Qaeda fighters move into for the final kill. What about them?

The nirvana fallacy never fails to show up in these situations.

You know what, it's shitty for the people caught in the crossfire, it always is. This doesn't make the NATO actions up to now worthless - your enhancing of the situation to make compelling prose, aside.

WakeUp

hooradiation wrote: »

The nirvana fallacy never fails to show up in these situations.

You know what, it's shitty for the people caught in the crossfire, it always is. This doesn't make the NATO actions up to now worthless - your enhancing of the situation to make compelling prose, aside.

Thats not what Im asking your compelling prose aside. Im asking where is the UN resolution protecting the right to life for the people of Sirte?? Or is it just certain civillian populations who deserve to be "protected"? Saying "its sh1tty for people caught in the crossfire" is lame in the extreme and a complete cop out. Why does one cities population get a UN resolution and the other doesnt? is that fair? Where is their "humantarian" protection? or do they not matter because they are on the receiving end of the "rebel" onslaught aided and abated by the West? By the way I havent enhanced anything the situation is and will be as I described it.

Jonny7

WakeUp wrote: »

I wonder how the NATO apologists feel about the civilian population of Sirte who are currently under siege from the "rebels" surrounded and being pounded from the air by NATO bombs. Cut off from food, fuel and basic supplies what about them? Where is their humanitarian "protection">??. This entire NATO/US humanitarian farce is beyond fcking ridiculous now at this stage and if you cant see through it you need your head examined. The rebels led by British special forces are waiting for the planes to bomb whatever resistance is in the city to dust then they will move in and it will be a bloodbath. The imperialist powers in London, Washington, Rome and Paris must be rubbing their hands in glee as their current colonial conquest/insertion of a puppet regime comes to fruition. So when can the civilian population of Sirte expect a UN resolution "protecting" their right to life? There is going to be a massive loss of civilian life when the "rebels"/ Al Qaeda fighters move into for the final kill. What about them?

Tripoli is peaceful today, in fairness, Gaddafi should just step down and stop calling for his people to kill each other over him.

WakeUp

Jonny7 wrote: »

Tripoli is peaceful today, in fairness, Gaddafi should just step down and stop calling for his people to kill each other over him.

The West has decided to get involved and pick a side in what is in the main a civil war. Tripoli may well be peaceful which Im of course happy about no one wants war but the battle has now moved to Sirte, home to Gaddafi's tribe and a massive civilian population. Libya is a tribal country were allegiance to ones tribe is in many instances more important than allegiance to ones country as much as either side might say they are doing it for all "Libyans" tribal loyalty means a lot. Whatever fighters left in Sirte are not going to surrender the "rebels" are already carrying out reprisals against people captured and taken prisoner the majority of Sirte can expect the same be they fighters or civillians. The NTC have given the city an ulitimatum "surrender by tomorrow or the city will be on the end of a full scale assault" Now if this is the case then where is the UN resolution protecting the civillians of that city??? where is it??? are the civillians of that city somehow different to the civillians of other cities?? This is a "humanitarian" intervention after all? So where is their "humanitarian" protection???,...

WakeUp

hooradiation wrote: »

This doesn't make the NATO actions up to now worthless - your enhancing of the situation to make compelling prose, aside.

According to the NTC some 50,000 people have died since this all kicked off far exceeding the death toll prior to NATO involvement/bombs. This was supposed to be a " humanitarian effort to protect lives". NATO/US The West have failed miserably so and contributed massively to that death toll and their "intervention" "protecting" of lives has been a complete farce and disaster. But it was never about "protecting" anyone we all know that.

frackingishell

BAHAHAHAHA!

this gets more and more pathetic every day.

kay Burley, the c*nt, on Skynews (and she's an opinionated biased c*nt for many reasons, not just this...) is no longer referring to the rebels as 'The rebels'.

They are now, 'the anti-ghaddafi' forces. This is really turning into the psychological hard sell from the bought right wing medias of NATO. They said 'anti-ghaddafi' about five times in a 1 minute segment. This is brainwashing at it's most blatant. Hilarioous, and quite sad really.

Sky news is a joke. maybe we'll get them banned soon like the canadians banned Murdoch's Fox news in Canada.

Jonny7

WakeUp wrote: »

According to the NTC some 50,000 people have died since this all kicked off far exceeding the death toll prior to NATO involvement/bombs. This was supposed to be a " humanitarian effort to protect lives". NATO/US The West have failed miserably so and contributed massively to that death toll and their "intervention" "protecting" of lives has been a complete farce and disaster. But it was never about "protecting" anyone we all know that.

Where did you get that 50,000 figure from? and what does it refer to exactly, those killed in combat?

frackingishell

Jonny7 wrote: »

Where did you get that 50,000 figure from? and what does it refer to exactly, those killed in combat?

Jonny, i think it'll be ghard to pin down exact numbers, but ther ehave been thousands of civilian deaths.

how do you feel about the impending bombing of Sirte and the civilian polulation there?

hooradiation

WakeUp wrote: »

Thats not what Im asking your compelling prose aside. Im asking where is the UN resolution protecting the right to life for the people of Sirte?? Or is it just certain civillian populations who deserve to be "protected"? Saying "its sh1tty for people caught in the crossfire" is lame in the extreme and a complete cop out. Why does one cities population get a UN resolution and the other doesnt? is that fair? Where is their "humantarian" protection? or do they not matter because they are on the receiving end of the "rebel" onslaught aided and abated by the West?

The UN resolution isn't a magic spell, they can't save everyone. Sucks to be living in Sirte, but lets not pretend either of us actually care beyond a mild and generic sense of empathy.
They're just a debating point to be knocked around.

Oh and "it's shitty" isn't a cop out.
It's an accurate reflection. Life isn't fair, you can't save everyone and it's almost always a choice between the two least bad options.

WakeUp wrote: »

By the way I havent enhanced anything the situation is and will be as I described it.

Seeing as a good chunk of your last post has yet to pass and is lazy caricaturing i think calling it "enhanced" was about as kind as i could reasonably be.

frackingishell

hooradiation wrote: »

The UN resolution isn't a magic spell, they can't save everyone. Sucks to be living in Sirte, but lets not pretend either of us actually care beyond a mild and generic sense of empathy.
They're just a debating point to be knocked around.

Oh and "it's shitty" isn't a cop out.
It's an accurate reflection. Life isn't fair, you can't save everyone and it's almost always a choice between the two least bad options.

'it's ****ty' is a cop out in the present situation. Because if NATO wasn't bombing, we wouldn't have this ****ty situation now manifesting itself in Sirte. You can't save everyone? Who are NATO saving exactly? The many thousands of dead so far (close to 50k by some estimates)

Cop out almighty. Get a grip.

hooradiation

frackingishell wrote: »

'it's ****ty' is a cop out in the present situation. Because if NATO wasn't bombing, we wouldn't have this ****ty situation now manifesting itself in Sirte.

And we're back to the Nirvana Fallacy.
Given the choice between the continued reign of a dictator who reacted to protests for democracy with military force and the current situation, i'll pick the current one.
Every time.
It's not a perfect solution but it's the best.
Complaining because it's not perfect is a waste of my time and yours.

frackingishell wrote: »

You can't save everyone? Who are NATO saving exactly? The many thousands of dead so far (close to 50k by some estimates)

Cop out almighty. Get a grip.

Well, if that's what you want to go with, feel free.
Far be it from me to stop you.

hmmm

The French had plenty of oil contracts in Libya with Gadaffi, as did the Italians. Only the Italians were getting any significant amount of oil, Libya is not a major oil exporter.

What made the French change their mind and support the rebels was two things:
1. Sarkozy needs some good news for the upcoming election, and he thought this would be a short convenient war to save the Libyan people
2. The French had been behind the curve in what they consider their own backyard (North Africa) with the Arab Spring. The previous French foreign minister was seen cosying up to the dictators and was caught on the wrong side of history. Sarkozy replaced his Foreign Minister, and immediately the policy changed to supporting the inevitable tide of the Arab Spring uprisings.

WakeUp

Jonny7 wrote: »

Where did you get that 50,000 figure from? and what does it refer to exactly, those killed in combat?

http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2011/08/30/164758.html

WakeUp

hooradiation wrote: »

The UN resolution isn't a magic spell, they can't save everyone.

The two facedness of that comment is astounding. The UN/NATO/US only care about their "rebel" buddies and civilians and if they wanted too could try save the population of Sirte who at this moment in time and in the future are under attack. The majority of NATO defenders are hypocrits its so god damn obvious it would be funny if it wasnt so serious.

Sucks to be living in Sirte, but lets not pretend either of us actually care beyond a mild and generic sense of empathy.
They're just a debating point to be knocked around.

For a start you can speak for yourself there but dont be speaking for me thank you very much, Im not pretending anything I know the majority of NATO defenders are watery at best and two faced at worst but like I said dont be speaking for me, I would disagree with your above statement.

hooradiation wrote: »

Oh and "it's shitty" isn't a cop out.
It's an accurate reflection. Life isn't fair, you can't save everyone and it's almost always a choice between the two least bad options.

It is a cop out and its two faced. Like I said the majority of the NATO defenders are hypocrits, in my opinion.

Seeing as a good chunk of your last post has yet to pass and is lazy caricaturing i think calling it "enhanced" was about as kind as i could reasonably be.

Which "good chunk" would this be now?

Jonny7

WakeUp wrote: »

http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2011/08/30/164758.html

To break it down, the rebels have accounted for 11,000 or so people released from the prisons, but they say tens of thousands are still missing (in the above report the source has included this number)

Deaths during the protests and just after, estimates vary widely on this, up to 2,000 on both sides.

NATO strikes killing civilians (I hate the term collateral damage) accounts for about 50 to 100 deaths.

They are discovering some mass graves, but I'll hold out for more independent views of the "ten's of thousands missing".

shadowninty

You are proposing a NATO ground attack on Sirte WakeUp??
That's not what the Libyan government wants, or what the West wants

Boo Radley

Haven't really been following this thread so not sure how relevant this will be:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14774533

Jonny7

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d22_1314916981

someone on another forum posting this of an Irish fella fighting down in Libya, no point being made here, just a good insight

Duiske

Boo Radley wrote: »

Haven't really been following this thread so not sure how relevant this will be:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14774533

Story is breaking all over the news sites tonight. Not in the least bit surprised by any of this. Its not hard these days for a friend to become an enemy/dictator/mass murderer/regime leader/despot. All he has to do is threaten to pull the oil exploration licences from the major oil companies.

WakeUp

shadowninty wrote: »

You are proposing a NATO ground attack on Sirte WakeUp??
That's not what the Libyan government wants, or what the West wants

No not a ground attack. Since NATO took over air operations they have flown some 20,000 air sorties in 145 days as of 22nd August and that figure would have increased up unto and including today. Of those 20,000 air sorties 7,500 of them have been strike sorties. NATO is now focusing its air power on the city of Sirte and bombarding it heavily and in effect is acting as the airforce of one side of a civil war. Personally I dont think we are being given accurate numbers of civillians killed in those sorties as dropping that many bombs in plenty of built up areas would have to result in massive loss of civillian life.

The "Rebels" have surrounded Sirte and extended a dead line to the 10th of Sept for the city to surrender or face a full out assault. They say the reason they have extended the dead line is to give time for negotiating the surrender of the city with the city elders. I dont believe that I think they know the people of Sirte will not surrender and the reason they have extended the deadline is for a couple of reasons..

a) to give NATO more time to bomb the fck out of whatever resistance is left making it easier for the "rebels" to advance into the city.
b) to give the "rebels" more time to resupply their front lines, move more fighters into position along with their heavy weapons & tanks.

The city is completely cut off nobody is allowed in and nobody is allowed out and when they begin the assault a week from today it is going to be a bloodbath if it isnt already considering the amount of NATO bombs being dropped on them.

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/22/how-many-missions-has-nato-flown-over-libya/
http://arabnews.com/middleeast/article497073.ece
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/08/2011830133244699250.html

Jonny7

WakeUp wrote: »

No not a ground attack. Since NATO took over air operations they have flown some 20,000 air sorties in 145 days as of 22nd August and that figure would have increased up unto and including today. Of those 20,000 air sorties 7,500 of them have been strike sorties. NATO is now focusing its air power on the city of Sirte and bombarding it heavily and in effect is acting as the airforce of one side of a civil war. Personally I dont think we are being given accurate numbers of civillians killed in those sorties as dropping that many bombs in plenty of built up areas would have to result in massive loss of civillian life.
[/URL]

Not each sortie is a bombing run. NATO have been very forward about civilian casualties, its between 50 and 100 so far.

However if someone wants to point out that Sirte is beyond their mandate (to protect civilians), then I'd agree, we're into a grey area here.

Weapons are being handed out to men of fighting age in the city to fight the rebels, its sad stupid stuff.

WakeUp

Jonny7 wrote: »

Not each sortie is a bombing run. NATO have been very forward about civilian casualties, its between 50 and 100 so far.

However if someone wants to point out that Sirte is beyond their mandate (to protect civilians), then I'd agree, we're into a grey area here.

Weapons are being handed out to men of fighting age in the city to fight the rebels, its sad stupid stuff.

I accept that not every sortie is a bombing run for sure but I find it hard to believe that from all the muntions dropped and targets bombed that only 50-100 civillians have lost their lives I just dont believe that myself I really dont. The bombing of Sirte is in total breach of the UN resolution its beyond ridoculous at this stage they are supposed to be "protecting" civillians yet they are bombing a civillian population that is under siege and surrounded - the very reason they "told" us to justify them getting involved in the first place, to stop such a thing happening in Benghazi - and killing them its wrong. Its very sad alright I think the "rebels" know they will be attacking in a week this will probably be the most costly battle of them all with the biggest loss of life unless somehow a peaceful surrender is agreed but I just dont think thats going to happen neither do they judging by the reports.

Daithi 1

Radio interview on IRRB French service of Thierry Meyssan who was one of the Journalists in TRIPOLI during the night of the fall of Tripoli.
He describes the events that he witnessed and gives us a perspective that completely contradicts what we have been hearing on mainstream media.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8Sdc0wmUWk