Originally posted by generalissimoThat's got to be the most ignorant thing I've ever heard. Except for Whodey's posts, of course.
Could it be that the savagery of the operation would reveal something about the political maturity of the Libyan rebels? Could it be that these frenzied mobs will prove to be incapable of conforming to international standards of civilized behavior?
Perhaps we should indeed ponder these questions before fully embracing the revolution, if things get o ...[text shortened]... ldn't rule out invasion and the subsequent establishment of a proper government in Libya, IMHO.
Originally posted by generalissimoThat's soooo 2003. Besides we're broke. Anything more costly than a drone fired hellfire is right out.
Could it be that the savagery of the operation would reveal something about the political maturity of the Libyan rebels? Could it be that these frenzied mobs will prove to be incapable of conforming to international standards of civilized behavior?
Perhaps we should indeed ponder these questions before fully embracing the revolution, if things get o ...[text shortened]... ldn't rule out invasion and the subsequent establishment of a proper government in Libya, IMHO.
2 edits
Originally posted by SleepyguySo what is the going rate for a despot these days? Is it a million dollars, a billion dollars, or as Dick Cheney would say, "Who cares about debt, any price will do"
That's soooo 2003. Besides we're broke. Anything more costly than a drone fired hellfire is right out.
1 edit
Originally posted by rwingettI don't see why it is that we should for some reason hold the Libyan rebels to be unaccountable for extrajudicial killings, I've said before and I'll say it again that they should have captured and tried Gaddafi in a court of law.
That's got to be the most ignorant thing I've ever heard. Except for Whodey's posts, of course.
That you and some other sympathetic observers have the rebels down as infallible saints is what is truly puzzling.
Originally posted by generalissimoOne could be very far from regarding the rebels as "infallible saints", yet still think them preferable to what came before.
I don't see why it is that we should for some reason hold the Libyan rebels to be unaccountable for extrajudicial killings, I've said before and I'll say it again that they should have captured and tried Gaddafi in a court of law.
That you and some other sympathetic observers have the rebels down as infallible saints is what is truly puzzling.
Originally posted by TeinosukeIn no way was I implying that the Gadhafi regime was preferable to the current state of affairs, my point was merely that there is a possibility that the rebels will not turn out to be the cuddly democracy advocates and guardians of freedom No1 and rwingett think they are.
One could be very far from regarding the rebels as "infallible saints", yet still think them preferable to what came before.
The cold-blooded extra-judicial killing of Gadhafi is, in my opinion, lamentable, and a poor reflection of the new government's stance on proper procedures and the rule of law.
Originally posted by generalissimoI agree. This is a bad sign. Obama should not so readily take credit for this. In ding so he infers a huge financial committment to rebuild this African country. Who wants that?
In no way was I implying that the Gadhafi regime was preferable to the current state of affairs, my point was merely that there is a possibility that the rebels will not turn out to be the cuddly democracy advocates and guardians of freedom No1 and rwingett think they are.
The cold-blooded extra-judicial killing of Gadhafi is, in my opinion, lamenta ...[text shortened]... and a poor reflection of the new government's stance on proper procedures and the rule of law.
Originally posted by generalissimoIt would of course have been better if he had stood trial. But no1's opinion of the rebels as expressed over the course of the long Libya thread was not, as I recall, uncritical.
In no way was I implying that the Gadhafi regime was preferable to the current state of affairs, my point was merely that there is a possibility that the rebels will not turn out to be the cuddly democracy advocates and guardians of freedom No1 and rwingett think they are.
The cold-blooded extra-judicial killing of Gadhafi is, in my opinion, lamenta ...[text shortened]... and a poor reflection of the new government's stance on proper procedures and the rule of law.
It seems fairly clear that the rebels are a mixture of democrats and theocrats, along with various other stripes of opinion. We'll see what happens in the long term. But I'm not going to mourn Gaddafi's passing.
Originally posted by KunsooSo losing loved ones means it's okay to murder someone who has been captured and is weaponless? It must be nice to be able to justify any action.
It looked pretty chaotic. But I'm not certain I would judge them as "animals." Some of these people have probably lost loved ones under his brutality. Were the Italians who strung up Mussolini also animals?
http://www.custermen.com/ItalyWW2/ILDUCE/Mussolini.htm
But it also looked like some of them (in Libya) were trying to prevent further harm to him and they did head to a hospital.
Originally posted by dryhumpJust like the American bombs rained down on Baghdad and killed innocent civilians in the name of oil. Wow the similarities are so alike but this time it was the French that wanted the oil more.
So losing loved ones means it's okay to murder someone who has been captured and is weaponless? It must be nice to be able to justify any action.
Originally posted by boarmanJust for clarity's sake, I didn't support the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Just like the American bombs rained down on Baghdad and killed innocent civilians in the name of oil. Wow the similarities are so alike but this time it was the French that wanted the oil more.