june gloom on 21/10/2011 at 03:47
Or maybe it's not as black and white as you fucking think it is.
Don't you have algebra homework to do?
Azaran on 21/10/2011 at 03:50
Quote Posted by dethtoll
Or maybe it's not as black and white as you fucking think it is.
Don't you have algebra homework to do?
I'm going by past events, like the bullshit stories of Iraq's chemical weapons as an excuse to invade. And like I tried to explain before, the current intervention would be more believable if they had also intervened in Syria, where many more people have been killed.
So no, I didn't just pull this theory out of my ass.
Tocky on 21/10/2011 at 03:52
I'm just laughing because right now SD is looking in a time warp mirror.
Muzman on 21/10/2011 at 04:07
It is funny how Gaddafi had managed to partially rehabilitate his image in the last 15 years or so. Perhaps only if you weren't paying close attention, but still. People were thinking, he might be a dictatorial nut and once terrorist houser etc, but at least today he seems concerned with building a decent prosperous nation. Then the riots and rebellion starts up, which would be pretty easy to quell if he was as reasonable and stable as he seemed, but...nup, same old Gaddafi.
Although I do have to laugh at this story as only last night there was an Aus media comedy show making jokes about how many times his son had "been killed" in the last few months, according to the media. So I guess we'll see.
june gloom on 21/10/2011 at 05:06
Quote Posted by Azaran
So no, I didn't just pull this theory out of my ass.
Maybe not, but you don't know where it's been either.
Illuminatus on 21/10/2011 at 06:03
Quote Posted by Azaran
the current intervention would be more believable if they had also intervened in Syria, where many more people have been killed.
I'm not sure if you catch anything other than Russia Today down there in the Alarus extension, but even a casual look at the Mediterranean should reveal how different the two countries are in terms of Western geopolitical importance. No one in their right mind would go near Syria with a ten foot pole right now unless they want to risk a failed state in-between Israel, Lebanon, Iraq and Turkey.
hopper on 21/10/2011 at 09:36
Never mind the fact that Libya, with its population of 6 million people largely concentrated along the coast, is a much easier target. And in Syria, Western interference would almost certainly lead to a new Israel-Lebanon (or Israel-Hezbollah) war, and toppling the regime in Syria might well bring Hezbollah to power, with Iranian backing. In short, the situation in each country is unique.
And that hogwash about going to war over a common currency project is just mind-bogglingly stupid.
CCCToad on 21/10/2011 at 12:48
The thing is, we don't really know the reason nor are we likely to. There's a shit-ton of stories floating around (many credible, many not) that involved the guy pissing off Western economic interests. Which of these are bullshit and which were contributing factors is something that the rest of us lack the information to sort out.
What is bizarre about this whole situation is why we backed Al-Queda's people this time. Its a significant break from the US's habit of supporting corrupt dictators over ideological extremists in the Middle East.
Queue on 21/10/2011 at 13:30
Quote Posted by Azaran
So no, I didn't just pull this theory out of my ass.
Quote Posted by dethtoll
Maybe not, but you don't know where it's been either.
It's been in Forever420's ass.
... but then again, what hasn't.
Martin Karne on 22/10/2011 at 00:28
They got him while running away, so much for his vaunted bravery, fucking pussycat.
