RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender

Page: << < prev 4 5 6 [7] 8 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/18/2011 3:45:33 PM

domiguy

Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline

wilbur, I see you up there.

Has Holder resigned or been forced out yet?

(in reply to domiguy)

Profile

Post #: 121

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/18/2011 4:47:46 PM

Politesub53

Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

The rebels in Baghdad were from Iran, the rebels in Tripoli were from Tripoli.

Utter nonsense and we both know it. Many of the bombing attacks in Bagdhad were carried out by Sunni miltias who dont see eye to eye with the Shias in Iraq or Iran.

(in reply to Sanity)

Profile

Post #: 122

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/18/2011 6:13:30 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

Libya declares cease-fire after UN vote

31 days in to the crisis.

Too bad they couldnt have moved a wee bit faster

In 1988, while St. Wrinklemeat was president of the US, and arming Iraqis in the Iran-Iraq war (and subsequently the Iranians in an arms for hostage deal) Kurds were gassed, while wrinklemeat invaded grenada, and blew an arm off Khaddafi.

Subsequently, in 2003, there was an invasion of Iraq (it wasn't over WMD, it wasn'over oil, it wasn't over ...... until it was over the horrendous crimes of the regime, and proclaimed (you fuckin rinos and nutsuckers better start begging moderators to delete your old posts) over this gassing.

Do the math. Took 15 years, that is nutsuckers and neocons.

31 days....How do you feel about asking Springsteen to change the song from 42 times, to 15 years, or 31 days?

Which one seems more nutsucker to you?

liberally biased, in your lingua franca?

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 3/18/2011 6:42:26 PM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to Sanity)

Profile

Post #: 123

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/19/2011 12:35:47 AM

hlen5

Posts: 5890
Joined: 3/2/2008
Status: offline

I'm hearing this on the BBC right now, Qadhaffi is violating the cease-fire.

_____________________________

My fave Thread: http://www.collarchat.com/m_2626198/mpage_1/tm.htm

One time "Phallus Expert Extraordinaire"

(in reply to mnottertail)

Profile

Post #: 124

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/19/2011 4:13:14 AM

Politesub53

Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5

I'm hearing this on the BBC right now, Qadhaffi is violating the cease-fire.

Breaking news in the UK is he has violated the ceasefire and his forces are entering Benghazi. A Libyan jet has also been shot down over the city.

The problem will be once his forces are amongst civilians its impossible to get them out with air power alone.

(in reply to hlen5)

Profile

Post #: 125

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/19/2011 4:50:04 AM

StrangerThan

Posts: 1515
Joined: 4/25/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Here is the part that kills me.

The Democrats came out against Bush for his handling of Iraq. Hell, over half the country believed it was a mistake for us being there.

Now, certain republicans and independents are screaming that Obama didnt act fast enough. Another case of damned if you do, damned if you dont.

If Obama had rushed in, they would have pointed out that he acted no different than Bush... another Bush 2 claim.

But, he didnt rush in like Bush, so now he is ineffective.

Honestly, is there no pleasing anyone, even independents?

You can't compare the two. They're not even apples and oranges. It's more like oranges and boston cream pie. The perception Obama left behind him in this crisis was one that is particularly weak and ineffective. The man barely had an opinion on the subject until he was sure he could get everyone to go along with it and that neither China nor Russia would piss all over the party.

For me, Bush's legacy is more of lying and abusing power to cover up mistakes and reasons for going to war. I'm one of those people who, if you can make a case and tell me we're going, then fine, let's go. If your case is built on shoddy work, where decisions and information is based upon "make it happen" rather than tell the truth, then you and I got a problem, a real one. The bulk of people bitching about Bush ignore the fact that Saddam was responsible for killing more of his own people than we would in another 10 years in country. They whine and talk about innocent people dying when they were dying every fucking day of the year, and dying in horrendous ways. I never had a problem with invading Iraq. I had a problem in the fact that he lied about the shit up front and kept lying, kept pressuring everyone around him to maintain the facade his administration put up. It's just one of those things with me. Lie and I got no reason to trust you on anything else. End of story.

I've seen this collaboration of fearful, timid, and weak response from the Obama administration described as clever, even as masterful. You gotta be four feet up the man's ass to think there was anything masterful about it. Just about every responsible, freedom loving government or people in the world would like to see the fruitcake gone. The reason he isn't gone is because Bush, yes, Bush, with his invasion of Iraq, scared the shit out of gadfly. Kinda funny in a way, that he all of a sudden doesn't want nukes, wants to pay compensation to families of Lockerbie, and accepts responsibility.

Bush and Obama occupy opposing ends of the spectrum when it comes to such things. Bush was more of a fuck-it, let's just do it. Obama is turning out to be, well, if everyone agrees and no one is going to be mad at me, and everyone will pat me on the back, then yeah, I'll have a clear opinion and maybe even will do something.

All of it boils down to the fact that there's a bunch of ill-trained, poorly equipped people wanting to be free from gaddy's insanity, and we've spent a month sitting on our haunches waiting to make sure no one would be mad at us before we got tough. Of course, now we're just fucking bad assed and telling him what's going to happen. Only, he's bombing the shit out of people again because he heard that all the tough talk isn't going to happen until they have another committee meeting to decide exactly what they're going to do now that they've decided to do something.

Gaddy isn't stupid. When the resolution passed, he was all for cease-fire. And he will be again, once the committee gets it's collective ass in gear and mobilizes. Then where we gonna be? Sitting with weapons at the ready and nothing to do. In the meantime, he's going to retake as much territory as possible and punish as many people as possible.

Masterful my ass.

< Message edited by StrangerThan -- 3/19/2011 4:53:47 AM >

_____________________________

--'Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform' - Mark Twain

(in reply to tazzygirl)

Profile

Post #: 126

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/19/2011 5:14:05 AM

tweakabelle

Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline

quote:

StrangerThan
I've seen this collaboration of fearful, timid, and weak response from the Obama administration described as clever, even as masterful. You gotta be four feet up the man's ass to think there was anything masterful about it.

Or ......you could do a simple exercise like a cost-benefit analysis. These have been found to be helpful in making the comparisons and assessments that inform good policy. Far more helpful and reliable than macho chest-beating bluster and folksy cliches that Hollywood abandoned long before John Wayne went to the great corral in the sky.

FYI I offered a rough cost-benefit analysis in post #102. I'm looking forward to seeing yours. They don't get you free drinks at the VFW but they might help save thousands of lives, trillions of $ and help avoid massive blunders like Iraq.

Is it about image or outcomes? Macho posturing is recommended if the goal is to impress adolescents and empty heads. Thinking people are persuaded and guided by incisive analysis of results and outcomes. Go figure.

< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 3/19/2011 5:26:07 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to StrangerThan)

Profile

Post #: 127

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/19/2011 5:30:12 AM

Sanity

Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

Isnt it great to have two threads on the same subject? Thanks Marini, what would we do without you!

Drudge is reporting that it was a head fake all along, that Ghadaffi lied about the cease fire in order to buy the maximum amount of time to do his killing

quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5

I'm hearing this on the BBC right now, Qadhaffi is violating the cease-fire.

_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to hlen5)

Profile

Post #: 128

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/19/2011 5:53:23 AM

stellauk

Posts: 1360
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

The bulk of people bitching about Bush ignore the fact that Saddam was responsible for killing more of his own people than we would in another 10 years in country.

This is an assumption not a fact. In Iraq there's different factions along religious and ethnic lines, there's Sunnis and Shiites, and Kurds, many of whom want a separate Kurdish state. Most of the people that Saddam Hussein killed were Kurds, or religious fundamentalists. It's not quite as simple as 'killing his own people'.

Not quite the same situation as Gaddafi and what is happening in Libya.

Gadaffi can twist it round any way he wants but neither Arab, or Islam, or socialism for that matter is a justifiable excuse for disregarding democracy. (and yes, I am writing this as a socialist).

I support the UN resolution and also Cameron's decision to deploy British military force. Use of military force should never be a decision that is taken lightly, as it almost invariably involves consequences. Those consequences invariably involve the loss of human lives.

That in itself goes beyond political and financial considerations. Freedom and democracy costs and those costs, whether they be financial or in terms of human lives, need to be justified.

_____________________________

Usually when you have all the answers for something nobody is interested in listening.

(in reply to StrangerThan)

Profile

Post #: 129

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/19/2011 6:16:51 AM

StrangerThan

Posts: 1515
Joined: 4/25/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: stellauk

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

The bulk of people bitching about Bush ignore the fact that Saddam was responsible for killing more of his own people than we would in another 10 years in country.

This is an assumption not a fact. In Iraq there's different factions along religious and ethnic lines, there's Sunnis and Shiites, and Kurds, many of whom want a separate Kurdish state. Most of the people that Saddam Hussein killed were Kurds, or religious fundamentalists. It's not quite as simple as 'killing his own people'.

Saddam launched two invasions, one of Iran wherein Iraqi casualties are estimated between a quarter and a half million. Another 25-35,000 Iraqis died during the Gulf War as a result of his invasion of Kuwait. During the Iran-Iraq war, Saddam had 8,000 Kurds abducted. Most were slaughtered. Another 182,000 died as a result of chemical weapons he used against them.

Kurds were not the only group targeted. Shites were too. There are a reported 250 mass grave sites in Iraq. More than a million people are estimated to have died under Saddam's rule as a result of wars, genocide, and executions. Those are not assumed facts.

The only reason to defend this piece of shit is because one hates Bush.

_____________________________

--'Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform' - Mark Twain

(in reply to stellauk)

Profile

Post #: 130

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/19/2011 6:30:43 AM

StrangerThan

Posts: 1515
Joined: 4/25/2008
Status: offline

A cost-benefit analysis... so trot your accountant ass over to North Africa and sit with your numbers

In terms of cost-benefit, the benefits usually outweigh the costs when one has a nation and a people as friends rather than carrying years old hatred over past actions. You can figure in terms of current dollars what something might cost. Looking over the next few decades is a different story.

Even so, as I have said before, rushing to provide assistance or a no-fly zone isn't the issue. The issue is the stance taken. I can understand being hamstrung by distance, cost, and political pressures. France and the UK took a leadership role in this mess. The US didn't. Our contribution was saying that gaddy should step down. Not a week ago, I read a statement by some white house official that Obama's reticence on the subject pointed to his not allowing himself to be side-tracked on creating jobs.

I thought it bullshit when I read it. Even if it wasn't bullshit, I'm not sure I want a president who can focus only on one thing at a time. Either way, if anything is crystal clear in what's transpired in the past month is the spotlight shining on his inability to act in crisis mode - something that the Gulf Oil spill also brought out. It's also clear that we had back-room negotiations going on during the rebellion. My problem with Obama is the man seems to be terrified of having an opinion until he vets it with everyone else and makes sure no one is going to piss on his parade before he has it.

That's not masterful or clever. Honestly, it's weak.

_____________________________

--'Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform' - Mark Twain

(in reply to tweakabelle)

Profile

Post #: 131

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/19/2011 6:45:07 AM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

Well, let's have our friends in Iraq trot over there and do the duty, as they are part of that Arab League, and since we brought them freedom and peace and stability, they can pay it forward.

Did you ever stop to think that since we are on the ropes, our treasure depleted due to an unwarrented, unrequested, unwinnable invasion in muslim countries, that this might be another way to sink another well into us, at the expense of his people but the glory of allah?

Hows about we plan a war, and its ideological and political purpose instead of jumping in there with both feet killing everyfuckinbody, and then some 9 or 10 years later, saying; OK, what is the point here? How do we win this? What does this do to us? Why are we here?

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to StrangerThan)

Profile

Post #: 132

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/19/2011 7:30:27 AM

stellauk

Posts: 1360
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

The only reason to defend this piece of shit is because one hates Bush.

I wasn't defending Saddam, and being a Brit you know deep down I got far better things to do with my life than to hate a politician.

But you know, it's really strange when these Bush supporters get all upset and angry over people like Saddam Hussein and Colonel Gaddaffi and Iraq and Libya and all that yet are not quite as outspoken when it comes to other evil dictators say in Uganda, or Bahrain (which is also at this moment in time using military force against its protestors and has even managed to gather supporting Saudi and UAE troops).

I mean at the end of the day, you either stand for freedom and democracy or you don't.

Or is it conditional on how one perceives Bush? Interesting...

_____________________________

Usually when you have all the answers for something nobody is interested in listening.

(in reply to StrangerThan)

Profile

Post #: 133

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/20/2011 9:54:13 AM

Edwynn

Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline

"That's not masterful or clever. Honestly, it's weak."

The point being made most vociferously here is that right or wrong is a secondary or tertiary issue. Whip them guns out and start shooting. OK, maybe not right away, but at least make the strong statement that you are gonna whip them guns out and start shooting. And to consider the thoughts or issues of countries located much closer to the event than yours is considered as being weak minded. Got it. Blaming the current administration for unavoidably having to carry the albatross of the previous administration's foreign policy non-policy-but-f*ck-you-and-yer-momma aggression is also a fun game in this thread.

The gullible and weak-minded are so focused on "public statements," to such extent as to loudly and repeatedly bray their ignorance of the reality that back channel operations always have and always will be how things get done. OTOH, one can be a master of "strong statement" such as Reagan, and while saying all the right things to make these twits happy be shipping guns to our worst enemy of the time and importing cocaine into the country and raising the debt to new heights, and to this day still gets away with it in terms of PR, because of these twits being sufficiently satisfied with the "public statements" overlying deeds entirely contrary to such hugely popular blathering.

No, Obama is not "masterful" at all in pandering to dimwits.

Bless the man.

< Message edited by Edwynn -- 3/20/2011 10:22:11 AM >

(in reply to stellauk)

Profile

Post #: 134

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/20/2011 11:57:19 AM

Sanity

Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

More from Drudge:

NYT: Obama follows the women to war...

Obama Doctrine?

Bush Doctrine?

Palin Doctrine?

_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to Sanity)

Profile

Post #: 135

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/20/2011 12:56:43 PM

Edwynn

Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline

Dredging up the Drudge yet again.

OK, I'll shut up then.

Inability to think for one's own self is so foreign to my own being that it's hard for me to comprehend and especially hard to observe as manifested by those congenitally lacking such ability.

Sorry to be blunt, but you have nothing to contribute, the clue here being that high volume shrillness does not constitute "contribution."

(in reply to Sanity)

Profile

Post #: 136

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/20/2011 1:11:58 PM

slvemike4u

Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline

You expected something else from him?If nothing else the link to the "Palin Doctrine"(the tittle in and of itself is hilarious)is entertaining as all get out....the short bio of the author giving a clue to the impartiality brought to the subject.Some hack who heads the "JewsforPalin" committee or some such nonsense.Typical posting from the sane one.

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4

(in reply to Edwynn)

Profile

Post #: 137

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/20/2011 1:16:12 PM

DarkSteven

Posts: 28072
Joined: 5/2/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

The problem will be once his forces are amongst civilians its impossible to get them out with air power alone.

That's not an option. The stated aim is to enforce a no-fly zone, not to put troops on the ground. We're not providing direct support to the rebels as much as ensuring that Khadafy doesn't simply wipe them out.

If it comes down to troop fighting, Khadafy is cooked. The tanks and planes give him his only strength.

_____________________________

"You women....

The small-breasted ones want larger breasts. The large-breasted ones want smaller ones. The straight-haired ones curl their hair, and the curly-haired ones straighten theirs...

Quit fretting. We men love you."

(in reply to Politesub53)

Profile

Post #: 138

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/20/2011 1:35:55 PM

ThatDamnedPanda

Posts: 6060
Joined: 1/26/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan
Bush and Obama occupy opposing ends of the spectrum when it comes to such things. Bush was more of a fuck-it, let's just do it. Obama is turning out to be, well, if everyone agrees and no one is going to be mad at me, and everyone will pat me on the back, then yeah, I'll have a clear opinion and maybe even will do something.

All of it boils down to the fact that there's a bunch of ill-trained, poorly equipped people wanting to be free from gaddy's insanity, and we've spent a month sitting on our haunches waiting to make sure no one would be mad at us before we got tough. Of course, now we're just fucking bad assed and telling him what's going to happen. Only, he's bombing the shit out of people again because he heard that all the tough talk isn't going to happen until they have another committee meeting to decide exactly what they're going to do now that they've decided to do something.

Gaddy isn't stupid. When the resolution passed, he was all for cease-fire. And he will be again, once the committee gets it's collective ass in gear and mobilizes. Then where we gonna be? Sitting with weapons at the ready and nothing to do. In the meantime, he's going to retake as much territory as possible and punish as many people as possible.

Masterful my ass.

I'm typically not someone who's going to rush to defend Obama, because for the most part I see him pretty much the same way you do. But in this case, I think you have to cut him some slack. We're backed into a very tight corner in terms of viable options in the MidEast right now. From the standpoint of regional politics, the last thing in the world that we can afford to do is look to the people of the Middle East as though we're leading yet another gung-ho invasion of an oil-producing Arab country. As far as our longterm interests in the region are concerned, we would have been far better off not taking any direct military action at all. Unfortunately, that has proven not to be possible, but I can't blame Obama for waiting until the last possible moment to make the decision.

_____________________________

Panda, panda, burning bright
In the forest of the night
What immortal hand or eye
Made you all black and white and roly-poly like that?

(in reply to StrangerThan)

Profile

Post #: 139

RE: Gadhafi tells rebels to surrender - 3/20/2011 2:09:55 PM

Politesub53

Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

The problem will be once his forces are amongst civilians its impossible to get them out with air power alone.

That's not an option. The stated aim is to enforce a no-fly zone, not to put troops on the ground. We're not providing direct support to the rebels as much as ensuring that Khadafy doesn't simply wipe them out.

If it comes down to troop fighting, Khadafy is cooked. The tanks and planes give him his only strength.

The stated aim, as per the UN resolution, is to protect civilians " By any means necessary without using ground troops" This includes air attacks on Qaddafis armour, as demonstrated by the French yesterday.

Thats why I said once his troops are among the civilian populating it is impossible to get them out with air power alone.

(in reply to DarkSteven)

Profile

Post #: 140