quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer Yeah you go ahead and continue to support the bombing of other nations and call it Democracy. You are forgetting that the true Democracy must come from within. Look at the Egypt FFS, they survived and we didn’t need to bomb them either and Mubarak was just as evil as Ghadafi. Not sure why you are getting so angry here with me and the name callings Malek, I’m all for freedom and Democracy in the region but I Just don’t really buy the whole Western intervention in Libya.

Mubarak wasn't slaughtering the people who were protesting, and didn't vow to show any dissenters "no mercy." It's a completely different situation in Libya.

Calling it a "Western intervention" is also purposefully misleading.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by OrangestO This isn't about physics, this is about waves.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer Yeah you go ahead and continue to support the bombing of other nations and call it Democracy. You are forgetting that the true Democracy must come from within. Look at the Egypt FFS, they survived and we didn’t need to bomb them either and Mubarak was just as evil as Ghadafi. Not sure why you are getting so angry here with me and the name callings Malek, I’m all for freedom and Democracy in the region but I Just don’t really buy the whole Western intervention in Libya.

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about and are only invoking blind ideals that support your argument without any regard as to their logical efficacy.







Simply put, you are a fucking delusional idiot.

___________________

Now with extra singles!
my old stuff, not quite up to snuff - but I still dig it - UPDATED 9/23/2012

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018 Mubarak wasn't slaughtering the people who were protesting, and didn't vow to show any dissenters "no mercy." It's a completely different situation in Libya. Calling it a "Western intervention" is also purposefully misleading.

Exactly. The military in Egypt was for the most past letting things unfold so it was the people vs the political government - the military did not side with the government by opening fire on protesters and vowing to kill anyone that stands in their way.

Mubarak was bad, but he stepped down when it came to it and didn't incite a bloodbath against his own people.

In Libya, Ghadaffi IS the military government, so unless an internal military coup happens, it's ghadaffi's military vs the people.

Yes, we'd all love to throw flowers on these people and have them magically stand down, and granted Iraq had nothing to do with spreading democracy, but someone had/has to stop Ghadaffi using his considerable military force against unarmed (or at least badly armed people) just because the don't want him in power anymore.

If you can't see that, then yes, you're a twat.

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018 Mubarak wasn't slaughtering the people who were protesting, and didn't vow to show any dissenters "no mercy." It's a completely different situation in Libya.

He wasn’t? Sure maybe he didn’t kill hundreds during the protests but what about the last 30 years that he was in power? All of those kings/dictators in that region are maniacs and undemocratic and there is no argue with it, what I'm trying to bring into the discussion is the fact that the UN/NATO only seems to go after certain bad leaders and not all of them.
Every situation is different that is true and you can’t go bomb them so why Libya? I know most of you hate to hear the comparison of Iraq and Libya but both situations do have things in common.
For instance why that is the West was cheering and wanting to do so much business with this dictator not too long ago and now he is the most evil man and he must go? As if he wasn’t killing and torturing his own people 2 years go? There are many questions about this intervention that barely any of the leaders can answer them. The main one being what is next? What is the role of NATO/UN after Gadhafi is gone? How do we know that these Rebels will not turn their backs on us like the Mujahidin’s did in Afghanistan in the early 90’s? Why is it so wrong to question the intervention in Libya? I truly wish that this situation as simple as we like it to be but I think there is a lot more to this than it meets the eyes.

quote:

Calling it a "Western intervention" is also purposefully misleading.

What would you call it then?

___________________
Mystic Mind - DJ Mixes
http://soundcloud.com/mystic-mind

Facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/DJMysticMind

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer Yeah you go ahead and continue to support the bombing of other nations and call it Democracy. You are forgetting that the true Democracy must come from within. Look at the Egypt FFS, they survived and we didn’t need to bomb them either and Mubarak was just as evil as Ghadafi. Not sure why you are getting so angry here with me and the name callings Malek, I’m all for freedom and Democracy in the region but I Just don’t really buy the whole Western intervention in Libya.

I buy into it but the motives are probably more about oil than anything else. Helping the rebels of Libya win their political rights is really just the icing on top. But you have to consider that the rebels asked for Western military intervention themselves. What do you think would have happened if Qaddafi retook Benghazi? Clearly, the Libyan government would have purged the rebels on a level rivaling that of Saddam Hussein's suppression of Iraq's Shiite rebellions.

As for Egypt; that can hardly be compared to Libya. Mubarak did not send the army to violently crush his opponents. There was no need for Western intervention.

quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Stalin I buy into it but the motives are probably more about oil than anything else. Helping the rebels of Libya win their political rights is really just the icing on top. But you have to consider that the rebels asked for Western military intervention themselves. What do you think would have happened if Qaddafi retook Benghazi? Clearly, the Libyan government would have purged the rebels on a level rivaling that of Saddam Hussein's suppression of Iraq's Shiite rebellions. As for Egypt; that can hardly be compared to Libya. Mubarak did not send the army to violently crush his opponents. There was no need for Western intervention.

Mubarak sent fighter jet planes to bombard cities? Tanks to squash protesters? Come back to earth man.

Yes Mubarak is filthy disgrace of a dictator, but the way Kadaffi handled the protests pushed the west (and arab countries) to intervene.

P.S. Saddam threw chemical bombs on kurds killing tens of thousands.

Al Assad, father, bombarded Hamaa, killing 20 to 40,000 civilians (no one know the real number)

___________________
[/IMG]http://i54.tinypic.com/ngycqo.png[/IMG]

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer He wasn’t? Sure maybe he didn’t kill hundreds during the protests but what about the last 30 years that he was in power? All of those kings/dictators in that region are maniacs and undemocratic and there is no argue with it, what I'm trying to bring into the discussion is the fact that the UN/NATO only seems to go after certain bad leaders and not all of them. Every situation is different that is true and you can’t go bomb them so why Libya? I know most of you hate to hear the comparison of Iraq and Libya but both situations do have things in common. For instance why that is the West was cheering and wanting to do so much business with this dictator not too long ago and now he is the most evil man and he must go? As if he wasn’t killing and torturing his own people 2 years go? There are many questions about this intervention that barely any of the leaders can answer them. The main one being what is next? What is the role of NATO/UN after Gadhafi is gone? How do we know that these Rebels will not turn their backs on us like the Mujahidin’s did in Afghanistan in the early 90’s? Why is it so wrong to question the intervention in Libya? I truly wish that this situation as simple as we like it to be but I think there is a lot more to this than it meets the eyes.

You're muddying the discussions here. Bush made a plan to invade iraq for oil, and the "evidence" was constructed with the help of the British to do so. After the evidence was proved BS, they then said well at least we got rid of a tyrant etc.

Obama did not invent a popular uprising in Libya, by the Libyan people, against it's dictatorship leader.

Yes, there is a double standard about which countries are "assisted"(otherwise we would have invaded Zimbabwe years ago) but don't try to confuse the issue here.

Libya is a completely different situation to iraq or Afghanistan, and unlike in those two situations, the right thing has happened as the only thing that was standing between Ghadaffi and the mass genocide of his people, is the allied airforce, and they literally got there with only minutes to spare.

And no offense but you don't know shit about the region. I've been all over Egypt and know people living in Libya. Mubarak was a bastard, was not even in the same league as Saddam or Ghadaffi in terms of crimes against humanity.

fuck if george bush was smart he would have invaded canada for oil. We are their number 1 exporter!





talk about an idiot


http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/...ent/import.html

quote:

Originally posted by malek Mubarak sent fighter jet planes to bombard cities? Tanks to squash protesters? Come back to earth man. Yes Mubarak is filthy disgrace of a dictator, but the way Kadaffi handled the protests pushed the west (and arab countries) to intervene. P.S. Saddam threw chemical bombs on kurds killing tens of thousands. Al Assad, father, bombarded Hamaa, killing 20 to 40,000 civilians (no one know the real number)

Reread what I wrote. I never said Mubarak sent fighter jets bomb cities or tanks to squash protesters.

Wow world leaders meeting each other, who would have thought that was even possible!