Gadhafi Dead?

Al Jazeera is reporting that Gadhafi has been killed. The early reports are that he was fatally wounded during a capture attempt. AJ has a pretty solid record on these calls, so I expect this to be confirmed.

I still think going into Libya was a mistake. But I’m not going to mourn this bastard’s passing. I’m sure there’s a bench somewhere warm were he can sit next to Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.

Comments are closed.

  1. AlexInCT

    This guy is worse than a cockroach. I would not be surprised he pops up elsewhere sooner than later. If they did kill him however in a fire fight, he died by the sword he so liked to wield, and that is some small measure of justice. Now watch Lybia go the way of Egypt.

    Thumb up 0

  2. richtaylor365

    I still think going into Libya was a mistake.

    At least it was an inexpensive mistake (wrt American lives lost), compared to some of our other “mistakes”. I m thankful for that.

    Oh, and it also provides yet one more chevron on the “terror warrior” arm of Obama.

    Thumb up 0

  3. AlexInCT

    Oh, and it also provides yet one more chevron on the “terror warrior” arm of Obama.

    I thought that the only people we could refer to as terrorists where those evil right thinking domestic ones? Or am I confusing the let dropping the terminology “War on Terror” with this? Maybe it should be referred to as a “kinetic engagement” badge so it is all clean & nice?

    Thumb up 0

  4. AlexInCT

    I hear Obama and his Nobel Peace Prize where on a podium with the TOTUS’ replacement – TOTUS was stolen just the other day along with a whole lot of other paraphernalia – trying to claim credit for this killing. Maybe they should give him another Nobel Peace Prize? He saved the Euros from losing the Lybian oil to China, after all. NICE!

    Thumb up 2

  5. Section8

    I don’t know, how about some investigations of why he was clearly captured alive, and shot afterward, or some comments about how creepy they are for dancing in the streets, much less driving him around on the hood of the car. I thought you and CM would be right on this. I guess since the words USA weren’t uttered it’s a non issue right fuckos ?

    Thumb up 1

  6. Kimpost

    ?

    I obviously think that he should have been taken alive. But I’m more understanding towards the dancing here. This marked the end of the conflict after all. And their dictator for 40+ years was now gone.

    And if you go back, you’ll see that I didn’t really mind the US dancing. It was understandable. Even if it still was a bit creepy in my mind. Mind you, I’m from another culture. A similar culture, but not exactly the same.

    Thumb up 0

  7. Manwhore

    No, I fear it may be the start of something far worse. What we have to fear now is a tribal civil war, an Islamic theocracy, or total anarchy. I hope I’m wrong about all of those but dissent among the ranks of the rebel fighters was dubious at best before they stopped having a common enemy.

    Hopefully they will nationalize the oil wealth and create some system of election. However, after 40 years of total dictatorship, the people of Libya might shed more blood before they see it. The jobs still aren’t there, and if they can’t get the youth working I wonder how long before they pick up the AKs.

    Thumb up 3

  8. CM

    Romney’s rhetoric is more informed than Michele Bachmann’s, less nutty than Ron Paul’s, and less self-admiring than Newt Gingrich’s, but his line on Obama’s record on national security and foreign policy is a sham. Obama is responsible for an aggressive assault on Al Qaeda, including the killing of bin Laden, in Pakistan, and of Anwar al-Awlaki, in Yemen. Beginning with his 2009 speech in Cairo, the President has walked a deliberate, effective path on the question of Arab uprisings, encouraging forces of liberation in the region without ignoring the complexities of each country or threatening Iraq-style interventions. He has drawn down forces in Iraq and Afghanistan; awakened to the miserable realities of Pakistan and Iran; and, most recently, played a crucial role, without loss of American lives, in the overthrow of the world’s longest-reigning dictator. If a Republican had been responsible for the foreign-policy markers of the past three years, the Party would be commissioning statues. In Tripoli, Benghazi, and Surt, last week, Obama won words of praise; on Republican debate platforms, there was only mindless posturing. In an election year, the world is too little with us.

    http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2011/10/31/111031taco_talk_remnick

    Thumb up 0

  9. Manwhore

    Oh, and Kimpost, no real disrespect, but Swedes are some of the biggest wall sitter cultures I’ve ever met. I don’t know if it was jontanloggana or what, but I was hard pressed to meet a Swede who didn’t hold up the walls of a pub with a beer. I highly doubt I would see any Swede dancing over any event..Not even the ousting of the royal family.

    Stabil som fan! :-)

    Thumb up 0

  10. Kimpost

    You’re (probably) right. Wall sitters, that’s us.

    If the government (or anyone for that matter) won’t listen to us, we’ll go home quietly while making fists in our pockets, and while thinking about appropriate swearwords. If things get really bad we might even write to the letter pages of our local news paper.

    If it’s an employer we have a beef with, we of course still go to work the next day, but we might refuse to wash our coffee cup the next couple of days – hah! If it’s the government, we still pay our taxes. On time, but we might leave it to the last minute – just to show the bastards.

    :)

    Thumb up 0

  11. Manwhore

    CM,

    Sweden, being impartial to conflict has become a nest of Islamics that are, at best, trying to get American passports…At worst using Sweden’s social system to game the system. Something like, 1 million Iraqis, Iranians, Ottoman Turks all call Sweden home. Syrians, etc. the same. Swedes say it takes 3 generations to erase the previous culture, and many times it’s true. However, Sweden cannot erase all of the culture they take on.

    Sweden embarked on the “Million Man” project. A project to build ghettos for cultures they knew were going to sweep floors for them later. They now are reaping those rewards in droves, as those cultures have been unsuccessfully integrated into Swedish society. Unfortunately their best immigrants are discarded in favor of these others that ask little more than a passport wipe to enter the USA. Knowing that Sweden is a culture that works only for most Swedes, these people have a total disregard for that nation’s laws and culture.

    They view their stay there as temporary, and refuse to integrate at all. Swedes continually knuckle under to the onslaught under the premise that “you don’t want to piss them off” but they are perpetually pissed off.

    I don’t have the nuance of Kimpost, but after living there for a couple of years I got my own perspective of the events on the ground.

    Granted, I lived in Stockholm, and saw some pretty raw shit (I was there when Anna Lihnd was killed in a mall) but that was what I saw. Who knows? After a decade things might have changed, but I doubt it.

    Thumb up 0

  12. West Virginia Rebel

    I think this is part of the whole problem that Europe in general seems to have with immigrants-they’re still expected to clean up after the former Colonial powers. Assimilation and integration really aren’t part of the mindset on either side, it seems.

    As for Gaddafi, it looks like one of his own guards got him.

    Thumb up 0

  13. Kimpost

    I agree on that we do have immigration problems. But I don’t agree with your perception of its magnitude. Our societal problems aren’t worse than those of Finland’s or Denmark’s, in spite of them having all but closed borders.

    Sweden, being impartial to conflict has become a nest of Islamics that are, at best, trying to get American passports…[…]

    How would that work?

    […] At worst using Sweden’s social system to game the system.

    Our biggest failure wrt to immigration is and has been the red tape surrounding the process. It can take years for us to process an asylum seeker, during which time the immigrants have not been allowed to work. We need to speed up the process, and we need to allow them to work during the process. We have gotten considerably better in both areas, but things are still too slow.

    The “game the system” mantra is repeated a lot. Not only here, but everywhere.It’s generally unsubstantiated, and more of a disgruntled feeling, than something backed up with facts. It’s a them or us mentality. I generally feel that it’s quite unlikely for people to pull up their roots to go to a cold Scandinavian country with hopes of gaming a system. No, I think they leave because they are forced to, and with hopes of building a better future for themselves and their children. They want to work. Living on welfare sucks, even in Sweden.

    Sweden embarked on the “Million Man” project. A project to build ghettos for cultures they knew were going to sweep floors for them later.

    That wasn’t the purpose of the million programme. The purpose was to build new modern homes for a growing Swedish (native) population during the 60’s and the 70’s. Those areas have now become the choice of many immigrants, while swedes have moved on to houses and apartments in other, more expensive, areas.

    They view their stay there as temporary, and refuse to integrate at all.

    The integration has mostly failed because of political failures. If we don’t even allow them to work for years, then what kind of message are we sending them? If we allow their schools and neighbourhoods to fall apart, then what chances are we giving them – or us?

    I don’t have the nuance of Kimpost, but after living there for a couple of years I got my own perspective of the events on the ground.

    I appreciate your perspective. It’s cool to see a (almost) fellow swede around here. Stabilt som fan! :)

    Granted, I lived in Stockholm, and saw some pretty raw shit (I was there when Anna Lihnd was killed in a mall) but that was what I saw. Who knows? After a decade things might have changed, but I doubt it.

    Things are changing, but slowly. And in some ways I’m not even sure if we are moving in the right direction…

    Thumb up 0

  14. Poosh

    I consider myself pretty blood thirsty. I hate Gadhafi for Lockerbie and his support of the IRA, and thus death is what he deserved.

    But seeing the actual report of his death, knowing everything he’s done, I still find myself feeling sorry for him and kinda upset about his swift execution, the way he died. I don’t know what’s wrong with me!

    If these rebels proceed to become tyrants themselves, and we learn this was tribal and had nothing to do with the principles of injustice, but rather a tribe angry that someone else was being tyrannical when they believe THEY should be the ones being tyrannical, then I guess it’s all a big clusterfuck really.

    It also highlights the uselessness of the UN and NATO. We could barely carry out this operation that should have taken little time at all. We ran out of ordinance and had to be rearmed with US (showing again how useless the EU part of Nato is). We let Iran and Syria have at it without any likewise repercussions.

    Thumb up 0

  15. Poosh

    omgz that is about the dumbest thing I’ve read all day. Bin Laden’s death was delayed by Obama not helped. If any politician is to be praised it’s Hilary Clinton. The Drone Warfare was already being built up and accelerated during the last year of the previous administration. This type of warfare cannot simply be “switched on” it evolves and reflexively interacts with the environment in question. It’s so fucking stupid to suggest Obama was instrumental in this other than to give it the “ok”. Whoever the president was, the SAME thing would have happened, just as Bin Laden would have been killed (indeed the origins of the hunt for Bin Laden, predictably, took place during the last administration). I can’t believe people spout this crap in the article you posted. The only way the increased drone attacks could NOT have happened would be if a President actually said “we’re not doing this because it’s a step to far and violating a sovereign nation”. Which is a rational position to take, even if you think it’s a bad choice in the end. McCain I assume would have taken this position.

    Thumb up 1

  16. richtaylor365

    I don’t know what’s wrong with me!

    I think your unease is misplaced. While I don’t feel sorry for this guy one bit (the irony of “live by the sword,die by the sword” should not be overlooked) I do understand the squeamishness in the manner in which he met his demise. AJ has a video of the execution, once the crowd started up with their Allahu Akbar, I knew he was a dead man. This may sound odd, me usually coming off as a law and order advocate, but I understand the necessity (in this instance) of instant justice and am glad it went down this way, as opposed to some gruesome beheading or a prolonged torture scenario. It would have been nice to see Iraqi’s do this to Saddam before we went in. When a maniacal murderous dictator, with the blood of thousands of his own citizens on his hands, gets his from those same people that he has brutalized, too bad for him.

    then I guess it’s all a big clusterfuck really.

    That is really out of our hands. Alliances are never static, considering in the past we have backed the Russians, the Shah, the Contras, and Saddam, all working with the information we had then and taking a calculated risk that that action at that time was in our best interests, it is always a gamble.

    And regarding this military operation, I think it is a vindication of NATO, not a condemnation. We can argue about whether it was a mistake to interfere in the first place, but you can’t argue with success, and given the fact that no loss of life (on our part) occurred and that Libya (for now) has one less dictator to worry about, for today I’m happy. Sure, things can go south in a hurry and Sharia compliant fanatics could take over, The Muslim Brotherhood is making great strides in Egypt, maybe Libya is next.

    Thumb up 0

  17. Poosh

    I think it’s just an emotional reaction, empathy, taking hold. Maybe part of me is suggesting that a lot of the “rebels” would and may act no different to him, if given the chance, thus i’m subconsciously feeling some sort of injustice. Who knows eh :s

    My problem has been, even though Iraq has been an incredible success, with Iraq being forgotten it’s now slowly (or even with speed) becoming a proxy of Iran. Islam already tainted the constitution and now things are even worse. It could have been the other way so easily. If that can happen to a country that we – in theory – were meant to oversee, I feel little confidence for other countries.

    I think you can argue with the success of Libya in terms of NATO’s effectiveness. Putting aside the time frame, it showed just how ineffective NATO was. Our pilots, and the French, fantastic as they are, were dropping bombs we couldn’t afford.. and running out of them and having to acquire them elsewhere. Behind the victory is a very uncomfortable feeling that we simply could not repeat this – and Libya is by all accounts a weak, useless enemy for us. It leaves an uneasy feeling. We were always reliant on American power but it’s now even more clear I think. It just feels like a hollow victory. But another way of looking at is, is that both US and UK assets are tied up in Afghanistan, so, from that perspective, this is quite good.

    I guess it’s now just a “fingers crossed” sort of thing, for the “arab spring”

    Thumb up 0

  18. AlexInCT

    My problem has been, even though Iraq has been an incredible success, with Iraq being forgotten it’s now slowly (or even with speed) becoming a proxy of Iran. Islam already tainted the constitution and now things are even worse. It could have been the other way so easily. If that can happen to a country that we – in theory – were meant to oversee, I feel little confidence for other countries.

    My fear was always that since we where not allowed to do what was done in Germany and Japan to get the people in line, too much of the old guard and problems would remain lingering around to fuck things up. Blame this on sanitized warfare and the organized campaign to undermine everything in Iraq by the left, whom hoped feverishly it would turn into another Vietnam for them to revel and rejoice about.

    Thumb up 2

  19. Poosh

    I think that’s a very accurate summary of what happened. If you want to consider just how destructive Islam can be, consider Pakistan which is with great speed descending into tyranny/Sharia. The speed of which this happens, despite many democratic apparatus in place, shows how incredible the effect of Islam is, and reveals they very obvious political core of that religion. It is hard to talk to someone about ‘freedom’ and ‘peace’ when those words translate in their minds as “Islam” and not remotely what we take those words to be.

    Thumb up 2

  20. Manwhore

    I think that’s why you see so many dictatorships in Muslim countries. I think that the laws of Islam are fairly absolute and don’t chime with secular or “western” (for lack of a better term) governance.

    As for your ambivalent feelings about Ghadafi’s death, I can really sympathize. I understand the desire for vigilante justice, and for much the same reasons that you think the UN and NATO are rendered toothless. Had he been captured and imprisoned, the call might have been made by his buddies to send him to Hague where he would be in the lap of luxury, presumably for the rest of his life.

    Had he been tried in Libya, I’m sure the result would have been summary execution in public, like Saddam. Watching him beaten and shot by a blood thirsty crowd was pretty brutal, but I try and sympathize with the desire of the people for revenge on tyranny.

    I say to myself “look, I’m not Libyan any more than I was French during their revolution. The people of Libya made their decisions.” At least, some of them did.

    Thumb up 0

  21. Manwhore

    That wasn’t the purpose of the million programme. The purpose was to build new modern homes for a growing Swedish (native) population during the 60′s and the 70′s.

    That’s not my understanding of it, but I won’t argue with a person about their homeland. I was just a visitor at the time (albeit a good chunk of time). No matter the intent, many of these ghettos on the furthest reaches of the tunnelbanna in Stockholm are home to a disparity of immigrants.

    I generally feel that it’s quite unlikely for people to pull up their roots to go to a cold Scandinavian country with hopes of gaming a system.

    Why not? For a spell I had contemplated staying in Sweden for the purposes of enriching my understanding of Industrial design. I had a job with one of the Bonnier family, but to obtain residency outside of sambo seemed a little difficult.

    My girlfriend at the time, her parents suggested that I should just go to Turkey and throw away my passport: then go to the Swedish consulate as a Turkish citizen W.O.P. for the fastest way to gain entry.

    Many immigrants I met there were simply wards of the state or would attend school for free so they could stay.

    The integration has mostly failed because of political failures. If we don’t even allow them to work for years, then what kind of message are we sending them? If we allow their schools and neighbourhoods to fall apart, then what chances are we giving them – or us?

    I don’t disagree entirely, but changing your school menus to halal sends them the wrong message of entitlement. I do agree that Muslims have been pretty compliant about trading off (the Mosque on sodermalm is silent–good for them), but I was there for some pretty heavy dust ups. I hope that it’s better now.

    Things are changing, but slowly. And in some ways I’m not even sure if we are moving in the right direction…

    Given the climate, history, and education style, I don’t know if an American style democracy would work there. The context I used would be that no Swede would allow another to freeze to death in Pitio because the power bill was late.

    The social structure, to me, was largely created out of the backlash to the potato famine, and the laws about alcohol were created to save swedes from taking a week’s pay in vodka. I know I’m not delivering the entire picture, but the point is that to survive there is more of a community effort. Due mostly to the rugged conditions a Swede lives in.

    Thumb up 0

  22. Section8

    But I’m more understanding towards the dancing here. This marked the end of the conflict after all. And their dictator for 40+ years was now gone.

    Yeah? How long did you think this clown should have been taken out?. I bet you were a big supporter when Reagan bombed his ass right? I doubt it. As far as your lack of understanding on our excitement with OBL getting taken out, maybe it’s just your ignorance of how the American people were affected by 9/11, or just lack of sympathy from our “friends” across the pond.

    If Bush were in office, you and CM would be going on non stop about how the old dictator met his end, and why were we there in the first place, and this will make the world more unstable. It’s all politics, and not the “Oh I care so much for the poor people.”, so let’s cut the crap.

    And if you go back, you’ll see that I didn’t really mind the US dancing. It was understandable. Even if it still was a bit creepy in my mind. Mind you, I’m from another culture. A similar culture, but not exactly the same.

    Right, one that isn’t so creepy. Again, thanks for the nicely stated insult. I got it, so again, you and CM should cut the crap and quit with the let’s be friends while I fuck you in the ass posts.

    Thumb up 1

  23. Kimpost

    As far as your lack of understanding on our excitement with OBL getting taken out, maybe it’s just your ignorance of how the American people were affected by 9/11, or just lack of sympathy from our “friends” across the pond.

    All Americans weren’t super thrilled about the OBL-killing celebrations either. I even know conservatives who weren’t.

    If Bush were in office, you and CM would be going on non stop about how the old dictator met his end, and why were we there in the first place, and this will make the world more unstable. It’s all politics, and not the “Oh I care so much for the poor people.”, so let’s cut the crap.

    I was for stopping the pending slaughter at Benghazi, but I was sceptical to the regime change. In spite of Obama and NATO going for the regime change.

    Right, one that isn’t so creepy. Again, thanks for the nicely stated insult. I got it, so again, you and CM should cut the crap and quit with the let’s be friends while I fuck you in the ass posts.

    It wasn’t an ass-fuck. Or if it was, it was a gentle one, with wine before, lube during and cuddling afterwards. Anyway, not loving it but understanding it and not making a big deal out of it. I’d just call that nuance.

    Thumb up 0

  24. CM

    Wow, Section 8, you really don’t give a shit about being accurate about any of this do you. You hate us so apparently anything goes.

    Thumb up 0

  25. Section8

    Wow, Section 8, you really don’t give a shit about being accurate about any of this do you.

    It’s accurate.

    You hate us so apparently anything goes.

    Yes I do, and I won’t play the wordy bullshit games. I’ll just be straight up and honest. You can chalk it up the the diplomatically superior European civilization and their years of shit talking. You thought neocons made the world hate us? Well, European shit talking has made me hate you. Fair enough? Where is your fucking outrage over the whole Libyan thing? Even with the “responsibility to protect” bullshit NATO went way overboard of the no fly zone. I figured you’d be outraged being a man of the law and all you bullshitter.

    Thumb up 0

  26. CM

    I won’t play the wordy bullshit games

    As opposed to your brainless binary and blatant misrepresentation?

    Well, European shit talking has made me hate you. Fair enough?

    I really don’t care what you think. You’ve posted more than enough to demonstrate to me that your opinion isn’t worth anything.

    Where is your fucking outrage over the whole Libyan thing? Even with the “responsibility to protect” bullshit NATO went way overboard of the no fly zone. I figured you’d be outraged being a man of the law and all you bullshitter.

    Much like Kimpost I have mixed feelings about it all. Above all though, this wasn’t a unilateral decision made against a country which posed no immediate violent threat to people. The resolution authorised member states to “take all necessary measures” to protect civilians under attack from the Qaddafi’s government. The action was requested from within the country and even if it overstep it was really only against the wishes of Qaddifi.

    As Stewert Patrick, said: “There is bound to be selectivity and inconsistency in the application of the responsibility to protect norm given the complexity of national interests at stake in […] the calculations of other major powers involved in these situations.”

    Unlike the pro-Iraq war people, I’m not going to criticise those who opposed the Libya intervention and call them Qaddafi supporters.

    However, the fact that you think the “responsibility to protect” doctrine is bullshit means that we’re not going to get far in any discussion on this.

    Thumb up 0

  27. Section8

    As opposed to your brainless binary and blatant misrepresentation?

    Misrepresentation of what? I posted the link earlier, people can judge for themselves. Saying things like “I understand” (the insincere I’m your friend part) followed by “but it’s creepy” (the insult), but our cultures are different so there you have it. (the belittling as superiority is obviously implied) isn’t a misrepresentation of anything. It’s how you have presented yourself. Spin it all you want. Here’s a thought. Why post anything at all that day? Why not just shut the fuck up and be happy for Americans? Well, that would be what friends would do, but you couldn’t help yourself without throwing in a little jab.

    I really don’t care what you think. You’ve posted more than enough to demonstrate to me that your opinion isn’t worth anything.

    Likewise, but I don’t feel it’s my duty to run my mouth off on a New Zealand blog.

    Much like Kimpost I have mixed feelings about it all. Above all though, this wasn’t a unilateral decision made against a country which posed no immediate violent threat to people.

    Saddam wasn’t killing anyone? Really? Come on. It just didn’t get enough TV time. Just ask Eason Jordan. As far as the unilateral decision, it came after 12 years of Saddam playing games. which just like this mission we’re footing most of the damn bill. Mind you I don’t think we should have went into Iraq, I’m was more about getting out of the UN, as I don’t believe the UN should be dictating what wars we get in or not get into, or should be a back door that’s available for any of our Presidents such as Bush I and Obama to use to get us into conflict, but that’s another story.

    Unlike the pro-Iraq war people, I’m not going to criticise those who opposed the Libya intervention and call them Qaddafi supporters.

    No, the people who got criticized as Saddam supporters were the ones who wanted to go a step further and call it a racist war, a war for oil, call Americans cowboys and redneck idiots, basically were rooting for the other side, and any school bombing by a bunch of assholes killing their own was somehow our fault, any action on the side of the US was seen as mindless slaughter. That’s the fucking difference. It’s certainly OK though if you don’t get it.I understand. It takes a little more complex thought to see the difference and I’m aware our cultures are different.

    However, the fact that you think the “responsibility to protect” doctrine is bullshit means that we’re not going to get far in any discussion on this.

    I do believe it’s bullshit, if New Zealand wants to pay for these new protection wars instead of us having to, I’m all for it.

    Thumb up 2

  28. CM

    I’m more than happy to let people judge, fucko. If you still want to insist I meant something different, even after I confirm I didn’t, that’s your issue. Knock youself out. If people can’t judge it properly, that’s not my problem. I’m not going to keep repeating myself in order for you to keep calling me a liar about what I know I meant.

    Why post anything at all that day?

    Which day? May 2, when he was killed, or May 6, when I wrote that?

    Why not just shut the fuck up and be happy for Americans?

    Way to demonstrate, yet again, that you’ve no interest in being honest. It was an American I was responding to on the issue (and I essentially just agreed with him). He bought it up. That’s just PART of the context. But fuck context right? It’s binary misrepresentation or nothing.

    http://right-thinking.com/forum/moorewatch/bin-laden-murdered/page-2/

    Thumb up 0

  29. balthazar

    You mad bro?

    Why because he called you out on yer condescending bullshit?

    Here’s an idea, don’t be such a condescending ass and he won’t have a reason to.

    Thumb up 2

  30. CM

    No I’m not mad. It’s of very little importance. He didn’t “call me out” because there was nothing to be “called out” on. He’s running an argument based on making shit up. See above. Not that it will make a blind bit of difference to either of you. You’ve got your little meme and you’ll stick to it, no matter what.

    Condescension is a show of disdain and superiority in which the condescending person patronizes, or considers him/herself superior and “descends” to the level of, the disdained person.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condescension

    I’ve given you the link – where exactly was I condescending?
    Although if you’re not going to assess this honestly, don’t even bother because I’ll just “call you out”.

    Thumb up 0

  31. Section8

    He’s running an argument based on making shit up.

    Not true, and I agree, please do see link above. Someone else in that thread even took notice and pointed out that the there were celebrations in the past in other wars, which your parrot kimpost said it’s not the same while pointing out war isn’t a sport (thanks for the lecture, but no fucking shit), but this was different and the celebrations are creepy, but understandable (CYA part of the comment). Well again no fucking shit this is different, but in this case it’s obvious it wasn’t a conventional war, so there was no surrender of a country we could celebrate. Of course since your countries have gone through your own 9/11, you’d know how to handle it. Oh wait.

    But back to the thread and this garbage

    The resolution authorised member states to “take all necessary measures” to protect civilians under attack from the Qaddafi’s government. The action was requested from within the country and even if it overstep it was really only against the wishes of Qaddifi.

    As Stewert Patrick, said: “There is bound to be selectivity and inconsistency in the application of the responsibility to protect norm given the complexity of national interests at stake in […] the calculations of other major powers involved in these situations.”

    So bombing the guy while he’s fleeing is a necessary measure? And the kicker is well there was a mandate, but it’s complex, and there might be some national interests at stake that would dictate will and won’t be done. Are you fucking kidding me? This pick and choose shit based on a country’s (mainly US) personal interest is the very thing you guys used to bitch about. YOU ARE TRULY HILARIOUS.

    Thumb up 1

  32. AlexInCT

    So bombing the guy while he’s fleeing is a necessary measure?

    Actually killing him so the European could keep the oil – something they all accused Bush of doing in Iraq, and your average moonbat still tells you was the reason for the Iraq war, even today, when it is obvious that Iraqi oil goes to Europe and China predominantly, with other asian countries getting the rest – had ALWAYS been the end goal.

    Watch them stage a faux trial about old Muamar being shot illegally (damn the video!), blame the rebels fighting him for the killing, and declare their hands totally clean. Nobel peace prizes for all, along with the oil they now get to keep, at least for now, and we will not hear another peep, either from these crooks or our domestic gang of assholes, until they can blame a republican for this stuff again. I hope the boys from the Muslim Brotherhood stick it to them hard. They deserve it.

    Thumb up 0

  33. Kimpost

    Sextion8, you’re being an idiot. This is what happened in the thread you’re posting from.

    1. loserlame, once a member here (as well as on old Moorewatch) before he got himself banned, started a thread on Osama being killed. He made three posts about nothing really, and then some more also about nothing, as he so often did.

    2. On page 2 of the thread an old Moorewatch member called crichton (a conservative who wasn’t particularly fond of me or CM) posted that HE felt uneasy about the celebrations. Here’s what he said.

    Personally I won’t miss bin laden, but my first thought after hearing the news was of middle eastern adults giving candy to children as they celebrated the destruction of the twin towers. And then I heard that Americans were taking to the streets in a victory lap after Obama’s mortal announcement. I guess we’re not all that different…

    So you see that the discussion was initiated by someone else. CM and I only responded several days after the killing, and when we did we were quite nuanced. These are my words:

    Celebrating the end of a conflict is not exactly the same as celebrating the killing of an individual. I must confess that I didn’t love the chantings either. Celebrations like that tend to make me feel un-easy. Seems like crichton felt the same way.

    War is not sports. It’s evil. Necessary evil sometimes, but generally not reason for celebration, unless it ends. Now, having said that, I understand the differences in culture, and I also recognise the symbolic value of getting Bin Laden. Which is why I find it understandable. And which also is why it wasn’t a big deal to me.

    Sure there are plenty of “no shit” passages in it. But so what? The point is that it’s nuanced. If you don’t think it is, then please tell me how I should have worded myself? I suspect that nothing short of “the celebrations are awesome”, would have been fine with you. Tssss…. Americans…. ;)

    Thumb up 0

  34. Manwhore

    I used to get mad about stuff like this and then I realized…We’re just better than you knuckle dragging Euros. :)

    We can’t change fast enough and you can’t ever change.

    Thumb up 0

  35. Section8

    Sure there are plenty of “no shit” passages in it. But so what? The point is that it’s nuanced. If you don’t think it is, then please tell me how I should have worded myself?

    I’ve already stated this multiple times, the use of the word “creepy” (which you reiterated again in this thread) is clearly a negative statement. Do you want to explain how it’s a positive? And then to say you understand because it’s our culture is belittling, whether you want to be subtle about it or not. Spin it how you want, but that’s how it is, and I know I’m not the only one who sees it that way.

    I suspect that nothing short of “the celebrations are awesome”, would have been fine with you. Tssss…. Americans…. ;)

    How binary of you.

    At this point I’m just enjoying you two putzes trying to spin your way out of the blatant hypocrisy over your rather muted reaction to the whole Libyan event.

    Thumb up 0

  36. Kimpost

    That was, IMO, a separate issue.

    But no, I don’t think that Iraq = Libya, and I don’t think it’s hypocrisy to hold such a view.

    Thumb up 0

  37. Section8

    See Kimpost, some like balthazar can see the obvious.

    Anyhow,

    And if you go back, you’ll see that I didn’t really mind the US dancing. It was understandable. Even if it still was a bit creepy in my mind. Mind you, I’m from another culture. A similar culture, but not exactly the same.

    This was your post in THIS thread where you chose to reiterate in your words. Since you and CM simply parrot each other anyhow, whatever one says it’s pretty safe to assume the same is going to come from the other. So again, spin it all you want dipshit.

    My original comment way back in this thread was

    I don’t know, how about some investigations of why he was clearly captured alive, and shot afterward, or some comments about how creepy they are for dancing in the streets, much less driving him around on the hood of the car. I thought you and CM would be right on this. I guess since the words USA weren’t uttered it’s a non issue right fuckos ?

    One of you did use the word creepy in the prior thread, and I included the name of the person who wrote it for that reason. I also clearly explained my issues with it, which I’m sure everyone else here but you two have already figured out (ages ago). So while you guys spin yourselves silly on the comments back then, I’m still waiting for a honest response on the current situation. I would expect more than CM’s well, the UN said some of it was ok so it’s all good. Never mind any national interests involved, that’s okie dokie now, and who gives a shit about consistency, because that was never the issue in the first place. It’s about politics plain and simple. So again let’s cut the crap.

    Thumb up 1

  38. CM

    No point discussing it with you dude. You don’t even seem to understand what I post. When it’s explained, you turn into a massive dick. I’ll let you know when I have a binary opinion. Something a little more your level.

    Thumb up 0

  39. Section8

    No point discussing it with you dude.

    Translation: I can’t defend my view on the actions in Libya where NATO way over stepped its mandate, let alone the necessity of the mandate to begin with. I can’t do so without looking like a complete hypocrite trying to explain away the lack of any actions in countries like Syria. I can’t explain away any of that, I can’t explain away national interest rather than the moral interest which I’ve taken great effort to demonstrate how moral and for the law I am, so I’ll just say you wouldn’t understand. Good deal, that’s what I would expect from you.

    Thumb up 2

  40. Kimpost

    How is it hypocrisy to recognize things for what they are? The Libya intervention, which I was initially for, was only possible because of several circumstances. The major ones being that no security council members felt a need for pulling the veto card. And it also worked well logistically. There might have been 10 or even 100 more worthy causes in the world than the pending slaughter at Benghazi, but few of them were possible politically or logistically. This includes Syria. That’s just the nature of Real Politics. Do I like it? No, but when circumstances happen to allow intervention, I might actually be for it, sometimes. I’m not a pacifist.

    And about Libya. I’ve already stated that I was not a fan of that it turned into regime change. But, and this is important to me. Libya was, as far as I can see, at least internationally lawful. Iraq never was. And Iraq also was ten billion times “worse” in scale. They are not equatable. Not morally, not politically, not at all. I’m not surprised to find myself being less “upset” over Libya, than over Iraq.

    Thumb up 0

  41. Section8

    How is it hypocrisy to recognize things for what they are? The Libya intervention, which I was initiallyfor, was only possible because of several circumstances. The major ones being that no security council members felt a need for pulling the veto card. And it also worked well logistically.

    Ok, so initially is fine, so we are in agreement that the powers in NATO overstepped their bounds, changed the rules, and should be charged with war crimes for their illegal actions then right? I mean I understand you weren’t for going beyond the initial mandate, but your response for going beyond it seems to be more of the yeah it’s wrong, but shit happens type of variety. I would think those who believe in the rule of law (by the UN) would be more outraged.

    As far as circumstances, therein lies the problem. Are those circumstances due to moral footing behind the rule of law, or for convenience and national interests? I mean the big cock blocker in the whole Iraq thing was France, but I’m sure there was no national interest there. If the national interest worked in their favor and they said have at it rather than running all over the world saying no don’t do it, would Iraq have been ok then? How about national interests in going into other countries that have also kicked the crap out of their civilians lately? Syria for example, there wasn’t even a response of shame on you for quite a while, much less the let’s go in there and get ‘em cowboy attitude that the left suddenly found so endearing.

    There might have been 10 or even 100 more worthy causes in the world than the pending slaughter at Benghazi, but few of them were possible politically or logistically.

    Again, you say politically, so we’ll at least we’ll be honest and say the UN’s “morals” rest on politics rather than a set of standards of right and wrong. I at least appreciating you owning up to that and that’s not sarcasm.

    This includes Syria. That’s just the nature of Real Politics. Do I like it? No, but when circumstances happen to allow intervention, I mightactually be for it, sometimes. I’m not a pacifist.

    Right, so basically the law of the UN is what is politically convenient, which I agree with.

    And about Libya. I’ve already stated that I was not a fan of that it turned into regime change. But, and this is important to me. Libya was, as far as I can see, at least internationally lawful.

    Well now that we’ve seen the “law” is based on politics and not right and wrong, it’s not much to rest one’s hat on is it? I’m kind of confused at the superiority of the UN law.

    Iraq never was. And Iraq also was ten billion times “worse” in scale. They are not equatable. Not morally, not politically, not at all. I’m not surprised to find myself being less “upset” over Libya, than over Iraq.

    Worse in scale in the fact that there was also a big propaganda campaign going on at the time by the left, but not much of one here such as…

    We don’t even know if this will make Libya a safer place or a haven ground for terrorists.
    Didn’t see much complaints of any erroneous NATO bombings.
    Didn’t see much outrage over reports of brutality by the rebels (including targeting blacks), or the treatment of Gadaffi

    It’s all about how things are sold Kimpost, and that’s all it is. If it were about morals, the outrage would be the same.

    Thumb up 2

  42. CM

    It doesn’t matter what I post, you’ll turn it into something else. Like you keep doing. Why would I possibly expect you to do anything different? You’ve proven your inability to have an adult discussion.
    I already put forward my views on Syria v Libya months ago. I’ve spent ages here and previously at MW banging on about the problems I have with the UN. I’m not repeating them just so you can misrepresent it all. That would be a very definition of a waste of time.

    Thumb up 0