Western powers strike Libya; Arab League has doubts

Comments (49)

Peace Prize Winner Obama sends cruise missiles into Libya: “War is Peace” was Big Brother’s slogan in Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four. And the goal is to do what? Change the government — the traditional purpose of WAR.

The excuse “to protect civilians” is a novel one. I’ll give the imperial powers credit for that. My guess is civilians will get killed and a civil war prolonged.

But why are Europe and the US so anxious to overturn Gadhafi after more than 40 years? And were they behind the rebellion to begin with? That was the case in Afghanistan in 1978, when Carter armed and financed the rebellion that led to Russian intervention and a million deaths.

I notice that when Israeli aircraft and missiles are used against civilians in Lebanon or Gaza, I don’t see the West threatening anything at all — no embargo, nothing to prevent Israel from flying and bombing, and surely no attack on tanks or armored vehicles used to kill civilians. How many? More than 20,000 civilians in many such attacks going back to 1978.

The definition of a bully is “one who uses strength or power to intimidate or harm others.” Looks like the West, Gadhafi, and Israel have a lot in common.

Mar 19, 2011 12:54am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Greenspan2 wrote:

As in every other tragedy and including this one, those who have had their homes and families destroyed do not care about geopolitical opinions.

Mar 20, 2011 1:24am EDT  --  Report as abuse
McBob08 wrote:

Anonymous, what on earth are you talking about? This is a secular rebellion against a secular government! Not everything in the Middle East is about religion, you fearmonger. What they cheered is irrelevant; the article didn’t say, so why are you assuming that it was “Allah Akbar” (No different than a Christian saying “Thank God!”, for your information)?

I’m sick of these Muslim-Haters commenting on news articles, spreading their irrational paranoia to others like the disease it is. Bush isn’t president anymore. The politics of fear are over! Get over it; al Qaida has *NOTHING* to do with the popular rebellion in Libya, so just drop it, hatemonger!

As for whether a war is good or bad, the issue is that this was already a war well before the West got involved. It was just a monstrously unfair war, with the side of the despot being armed with sophisticate weapons of war that the rebelling patriots just couldn’t stand against. The point of establishing the no-fly zone is so that the people of Libya can fight this issue out for themselves, without one side simply wiping out the other summarily. The forces of Gadhafi were already destroying the homes of innocent civilians, and the Western Coalition is only attacking military targets, exclusively.

War is a horrible thing when it happens, but it is part of human nature, and at times when a people are dealing with a fascist despot that will not let go of power through peaceful/diplomatic means, then war is what is left. I hate war more than most people, but people have to think; if England came up with a powerful weapon that was wiping out hundreds of American Rebel Troops during the US War of Independence and they could do nothing to stand against it, wouldn’t you have wanted Spain or some other big global power at the time to step in and stop that mega-weapon from being used, so that the war didn’t turn into a genocide?

Mar 20, 2011 3:20am EDT  --  Report as abuse
pfbulmer wrote:

It is very important that people question the UN for lists of casualties, these are a lot of missiles and bombs to be sending in a peace mission.

It is difficult to see how there has not been a massive increase in the death of Libyan people since the UN pushed the button on this .

Very few of these defences could have been used against the people of Benghazi.

This is all about protecting the invading forces, these are additional deaths and people will be asking why ?

The comments by Obama saying that the world can not stand by while gadaffi says he will kill his people without mercy’ presumably he means the armed rebels in Benghazi is pure rhetoric both from Obama and Gadaffi who both have exceeeding over sized vocals and must be the first time an invasion has been launch for what some one might do or say to an armed rebel resurrection .

Mar 20, 2011 3:37am EDT  --  Report as abuse
DDavid wrote:

Help came 4 days too late. Often the West means well to avoid civilian casualties. But this time, earlier action could have saved more lives. The rebels held just about every city except Tripoli & Sirta. Then within 4 days with tanks, aircraft, and rockets Gaddafi was able to retake every city except Benghazi & Tobruk, all that time, 4 days worth 100’s of civilians from men, women, babies & young boys lost their lives. Sometimes I wonder how the world has to wait first for a few thousand to die before they have grounds to act. It’s really ironic when just about any average educated layman can foresee that lack of leadership often hinders more than it helps.

Mar 20, 2011 6:43am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Retiree wrote:

Seems to me that most are forgetting that France fired the first shot against the forces of Gaddafi, not the USA. It was also President Reagan that ordered the bombing Libya many years ago. People, put things in prospective. (and forgive any misspellings)

Mar 20, 2011 9:23am EDT  --  Report as abuse
ladygoodman wrote:

The Arab League and the U.N. didn’t authorize anyone to take Gaddafi out with a pair of tweezers, and they had to have known and discussed the fact that there would be civilian casualties. Establishing a no-fly requires taking out Gaddafi’s military ability to shoot down the West’s planes. Gaddafi is the one sending mercenaries into hospitals to slaughter wounded rebels and terrorize the staff. The militaries of the West aren’t taking pot-shots a civilian targets. This is what they specifically asked for. The only reason they can be complaining – without any reports of civilian casualties – is to CYA with those who oppose Western military intervention regardless. And since when does China give a whit about civilian lives with the exception of those who keep their economy moving and work to keep the communists in power? Even Gaddafi hasn’t forced women who don’t have a state-issued license to become pregnant into abortions and hysterectomies. Ask a native resident of Tibet or a migrant city worker how much China cares. Ask the Buddhist nun who was “reeducated” by repeatedly being electrically shocked in her genital area how much China cares. Ask the families of those executed prisoners whose organs are dug out with spoons to support China’s transplant industry how much China cares.

Mar 20, 2011 11:14am EDT  --  Report as abuse
charlie651 wrote:

It seems mighty strange that the “Allied” forces were able to act so quickly on this one. The quick action indicates preplanning that has been going on for weeks. Was there a warning shot “fired over the head” of Qaddafi so that he could fully realize the ramifications of not halting his attacks on the “rebel” protestors? Why the action against Libya and not also Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain; where government action against protestors is just as violent as it is in Libya? Whose idea was it to bomb rather than enforce a no fly zone? What is going on behind the scenes that we know nothing about? What is the ultimate goal of the air strikes against Libya? Has anyone one in the Allied forces thought about what would happen if China (who is condemning this action) should decide to come to the aid of Qaddafi and the Libyan government? Maybe its time to soothe the consciences of the Allied forces by mentioning the threat Qaddafi poses to the security of the world because of his stock piling of WMD’s (ever heard that before). I don’t condone the wanton killing of innocent people by Qaddafi or the collateral damage (killing innocent civilians) by the Allied forces. I am just beginning to wonder exactly what is going on in the Middle East and who is using the protests as a means to accomplish an agenda. If the agenda is to stop the killing of protestors protesting dictators and their corrupt reigns, then why not make it a clean sweep of it everywhere throughout the entire world? What is the major difference between Qaddafi and all the other dictators throughout the world that requires such immediate action now? Now is the time questions have to be asked because if ground troops ever enter Libya it will be too late to ask questions.

Mar 20, 2011 11:35am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Eric93 wrote:

Why do we need to get involved in someone else’s civil war? And waste our taxpayer money. As usual, we will go in and end up killing more civilians in the process of ’saving them’ (as in Iraq and Afghanistan) than Gaddafi would have killed. Gaddafi is doing what any government in power does when it is threatened by insurrection – it fights back. Everyone seems to have forgotten what happened in our own civil war – namely that ‘honest Abe’ sent out the troops and we had over a half a million dead. And what about even more recent events like Kent State, Ruby Ridge, Waco? And I seem to recall the governor of Texas talking about ’secession’ a little while back – and curiously he is silent about that idea now….. Hmmmm…. maybe he got the word from the ‘Big Boys’…. As FredericW pointed out in a posting, back in 1978 we armed a bunch of mujaheddin to fight a proxy war against the Russians in Afghanistan and once they finished with that bunch of infidels they turn on us ‘infidels’. I guess our ‘Big Boys’ didn’t learn much from that….

Mar 20, 2011 12:17pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

I guess all those overtures and apologies to the Muslim countries didn’t pan out. Who’s a sucker?

Mar 20, 2011 12:50pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
neahkahnie wrote:

Let’s see. The Arab League wants to get rid of Quaddaffi. They support of no-fly-zone. Yet they criticize Libyan civilian deaths as reported by the Libyan Government (which they, the Arab League, hates).
They don’t want civilian deaths but their respective governments kill lots of civilians while they the civilians, protest the dictatorships of the Arab League governments. Makes sense to me.

Mar 20, 2011 12:59pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
CCHUCK wrote:

..and in what war did civians never get killed or injured? Gaddafi is lying about the civilian casulties. The Arab League thinks Gadaffi’s word is enough?
Have we been suckered into another war or what?

Mar 20, 2011 1:07pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Whatsgoingon wrote:

A few hundred mils will be billed to the taxpayers, a few more reconstruction projects will be awarded to the Chinese, a new joke from the Arab league who flipped words in just a few days, a new endless war zone pouring more pirates to the open sea, more teachers are needed to be laid off to support defense spending, a new group of people will find democracy means taking to the streets…What has changed? LOL people should count on UFOs to save the world, right?

Mar 20, 2011 1:17pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
txgadfly wrote:

Another triumph of American interventionism. And more enemies for the American people. And more big debts. How about putting mandatory limits on the number of troops and para-militaries that the USA can have? And the number of warplanes.

If they do not have the resources to invade other countries, they are much less likely to do so over the objections of the people. When was the last time we had a trustworthy Federal Government? They habitually misuse power. And habitually misjudge situations.

Mar 20, 2011 1:22pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SportsCar39 wrote:

Please everyone comment, Dose anyone see the problem here, Gaddafi is complaining that the West, Europeans & Arab League is killing civilians and at the same time he is sending tanks & snipers into Misrata to kill civilians. Don’t give me the bullshit that its Al Qaeda that Gaddafi is killing, It’s poor civilians that just want freedom from Gaddafi’s 40 years of hell!

Mar 20, 2011 1:47pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Hannah2 wrote:

“Mullen said he had seen no reports of civilian casualties from the Western strikes.” Is this man insane or just stupid or just a big liar? Maybe he just thinks we’re stupid…and in a lot of cases, he is correct. The people of the UK, France, and the US are among the most stupid when it comes to believing their governments. Or is it just that we don’t care that foreign civilians…men, women and children…are being killed by our forces. Guess it’s only a bad thing if other people kill civilians. We’ve been doing it for many years every day in Iraq and Afghanistan. Does anyone care about that? Is the US and allies being charged with crimes against humanity? Not yet. Of course there were civilian casualties. These idiots pulling triggers miles away and expecting to get result without civilian casualties are insane. They can’t even tell which are Ghaddafi’s men and who are the “rebels” whoever they are and not that we care. This is a tragedy.

Mar 20, 2011 1:49pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ChangeWhat wrote:

The west has NO BUSINESS in Libya, they should have stayed out of it and let the Arab Nations intervene on their own for a change to protect their muslim brothers. The Arab League wants to back operations but they couldn’t foresee civilian casualties? Are they really that stupid?
So WHY did the west step in and why is Europe so excited about attacking Libya? One word….one guess….come on…….you know the answer….think think think…..mmhhmmmmmmm……OIL!!! Libya has the ONLY pipeline connecting directly to Italy, which then is dispersed to the southern parts of Europe. When was the last time the French strikes first in any war? EXACTLY!
“More Hate Will Be Aimed At The West Throughout The Entire Region And World.”

Mar 20, 2011 1:50pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
leggett wrote:

The U.S. has become nothing more than a schoolyard bully, all for oil. These criminals must be brought to justice. Thomas Jefferson would be rolling in his grave if he could see whats become of his once great nation.

Mar 20, 2011 1:54pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SportsCar39 wrote:

All these people complaining that the West & Europe has no business in Libya, They are listrening to Gaddafi. Hey people, if you were living a 40 year nightmare where the only hope is that when the end comes, it will be fast (Death). Won’t you hope there was someone out there that cared about you and wanted to save your life!

Mar 20, 2011 2:00pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Whatsgoingon wrote:

Big boys are growing up. They are learning their lessons, some quicker, some slower. Once they get to the age of dating they’ll behave differently.
The world is ruled by Darwinism. “Good boys” will demonstrate the ability of surviving through multiple recreation cycles. On the UN table some boys are shouting, some are watching, and some are sleeping. It’ll be interesting to see who takes home the prettiest girl. Judging from my high school years the favor never goes to the loudest. We will all have to wait and see.

Mar 20, 2011 2:07pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SportsCar39 wrote:

ChangeWhat your words would CHANGE fast if you were in Misrata with a Tank mussel pointed at your Head. You would beg for help from the outside world.

Mar 20, 2011 2:12pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
leggett wrote:

The world needs to arm itself, conventional or otherwise. If not, it’s clear that the U.S. who cant even provide it’s people with a simple health plan, will destroy all in it’s path to provide cheap fuel to keep it’s bloated voters rolling around in gas guzzlers. Mao Tze Tung said that power comes from the barrel of a gun. Iran, Indonesia, Russia, China, Nth Korea, India, Pakistan, Brazil, Venezuela, take note, we’re experiencing corruption at it’s highest level. Arm yourselves before it’s too late!

Mar 20, 2011 2:21pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ayesee wrote:

Interesting how the apparent right wingers here choose to talk as if the offensive against the murderering dictator Gaddafi is entirely the U.S.ofA.’s doing. It has been made clear, and even this article further
illustrates, that the USA is not the leader in the effort and certainly is not alone, or even the major player in a multinational effort. There are at least 6 other nations involved in the effort, but evidently some commenters choose to ignore that fact.

The Arab organization first endorsed an effort to help the people of Libya who want their freedom from the tyrant of 41 years, now they change their mind. That is, if you believe what is said in Gaddafi’s own news media it appears that they changed their mind. Who in their right mind would believe anything that Gaddafi says, unless it is something about torturing, suppessing and killing people in his country? On the above video the lst comment of the reporter is that Gaddafi said he is going to arm 1 million citizens to fight. Right. How ignorant or gullible does one have to be to believe that?

Mar 20, 2011 2:21pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SportsCar39 wrote:

Doen’t anyone want to know why Gaddafi is not letting reporters into the Hospitals in order to see the civilian casuaties. For all we know the Dead are African troops that the Rebels killed. Gaddafi says that he is fighting Al Qaeda with the U.S. When was the last time that you knew that Al Qaeda stood for Freedom.

Mar 20, 2011 2:22pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
burkes wrote:

What an idiot….>>>Arab League chief Amr Moussa>>> a typical arab double-cross, trying to turn muslims against the West. EXCUSE ME! They aren’t civilians if they are attacking and killing innocent civilians, they are Gaddorf’s terrorist! What is the sense of enforcing a ‘no fly’ zone; only to watch Gaddorf’s tanks kill the freedom fighters? Why don’t YOU stay out of the war with Libya and read the Koran? And leave the military victory to the military.

Mar 20, 2011 2:29pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Whatsgoingon wrote:

If the dictatorship has been going for 40 years why no action had been taken earlier? Who armed his forces with planes and tanks? If the west have questions about the billions US dollars he hid outside of his country, why did they allow it to happen in the first place?
No reason is needed to explain fights between boys, and don’t waste energy to find out why, as the “reasons” will all end up excuses. Once they get families to feed and kids to raise, things will become better. For the ones that don’t have these, while, their fight genes will disappear from this planet. God bless.

Mar 20, 2011 2:32pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
leggett wrote:

Ayesee: I know of nobody that Gadaffi has murdered in his 41 years of power, it seems to me that he is simply trying to restore order after a C.I.A. backed coup tried to usurp him. Yes, I’m gullible enough to believe that this is another C.I.A. plot to gain control of whats left of the world oil reserves, and whats more, everybody knows it, except you!

Mar 20, 2011 2:41pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ChangeWhat wrote:

Sportscar39 don’t forget to vote for your failing president in 2012. If you want to enter a “discussion” then enter one, but don’t bring your idiotic comments my way and please write words with meaning not hypothetical conspiracy theory situations like your African soldiers in the hospital and such. If you don’t see the ever amounting issues that the politicians are creating by their actions, and if you don’t realize the problems Americans have then please disconnect your internet, turn off your televisions or switch to a non biased news station.

Every cruise missile we fired at Libya you and I paid for remember that, and remember it gets tacked back onto our deficit for not your kids to pay or their kids but your great great great grand kids.

Enough is Enough! I used to be proud to call myself an American now I am ashamed too.

Mar 20, 2011 2:59pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
GreyWolfSC wrote:

It’s amazing the amount of people that never considered the pro-Gadaffi state media might be _lying_. Considering the ridiculous drivel that generally comes out of the man’s mouth, I have a hard time understanding why some would choose a single thing to believe as true.

Mar 20, 2011 4:18pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
neahkahnie wrote:

If the Arab League doesn’t like what they asked us to do, let them use all the exotic hardware we have sold them and do it themselves. Of course, none of these states kill their own innocent civilians for protesting their authoritarian governments like Saudi Arabia, Bahrein, Syria, Yemen, Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria. In short, let them get off of their rear ends and do it themselves.

Mar 20, 2011 4:31pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Ghulab wrote:

Apparently the Arab leaders never really believed that the call for no fly zone will pass through UNSC (trusting their comrades in Russia and china will veto the move). Now that they see it not just passed but getting well executed on the skies of Libya, they are worried that many of them could be next, so they decide to change their position overnight.

Mar 20, 2011 4:43pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Whatsgoingon wrote:

LOL – what the definition of “come home clean” – living on SS? War’s part of the growing exercises for some healthy boys. Unfortunately, that’s also the end for some others.
There had been many government changes. How many of them got done in 3 years? (sorry I screwed up my history classes and is now paying a price:)

Mar 20, 2011 5:19pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

@ayesee: I’ve followed this thread and I don’t see where the right-wingers are claiming this offensive is entirely the USA’s doing. Did I overlook something? I see a lot of posters really critical of us being involved in Libya at all. We don’t get our oil from them and Qaddafi hasn’t threatened our security for years. This is tribal warfare and our country has decided to back the tribe that has been on the outside looking it.

Mar 20, 2011 5:23pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

@ayesee: I’ve followed this thread and I don’t see where the right-wingers are claiming this offensive is entirely the USA’s doing. Did I overlook something? I see a lot of posters really critical of us being involved in Libya at all. We don’t get our oil from them and Qaddafi hasn’t threatened our security for years. This is tribal warfare and our country has decided to back the tribe that has been on the outside looking it.

Mar 20, 2011 5:23pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

Time for the ultimate question: What if Col. Gaddafi is just a figurehead as he sometimes claims to be and somebody else — one or more of his sons — is actually in charge?
And if it is so, what does that say about intelligen­ce services that continue to think the colonel is actually calling the shots?
Sure, it sounds ridiculous­. But stranger things have happened.
Meanwhile, why is it that when oil and huge oil reserves are involved, America and its Nato allies, like Canada, are quick to intervene militarily – claiming to protect civilians.
However, if no oil is involved, the West is silent, as in the case of the Hama massacre in February 1982, when the Syrian army bombarded the town of Hama in order to quell a revolt by the Muslim Brotherhoo­­d. An estimated 17,000 to 40,000 people were killed, including about 1,000 soldiers, according to Wikipedia . The attack has been described as possibly being “the single deadliest act by any Arab government against its own people in the modern Middle East – but nobody in America or Nato complained­­: there is no oil in Syria.
The automatic question that must be asked is whether Iran is next.
The West openly supported Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war that lasted nearly eight years, from September of 1980 until August of 1988, causing more than one and a half million war and war-relate­­d casualties­­.
Rudy Haugeneder
Victoria, BC, Canada

Mar 20, 2011 5:47pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
sowhat wrote:

The US and Europe have maintained a consistant Middle Eastern policy for years-

1. Defend Israel and
2. Keep stable governments in the oil producing countries

I suspect it doesn’t matter if the governments are democratic or dictatorships as long as the OIL STILL FLOWS UNINTERRUPTED! The corporate oligopoly controlled by the wealthiest 1/10% of Americans have enforced this policy for 35 years. If Gaddafi can’t keep a stable government he will be replaced. The Middle East policy has never been about democracy…..only about keeping the oil flowing.

Mar 20, 2011 5:49pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
pfbulmer wrote:

the level of force being used is not consistant with UN mission to prevent deaths and save lives but is more consistant with regime change the wish to change the demographics of the country .

The main aim of saving Benghazhi from the progovernment troops has largely been achieved.

The two sides need to be encouraged to talk and negotiate, gadaffi is a substantial leader of his country and has three tribes on his side .

The UN mission is not there to take sides but to encourage dialogue between the east and the west and to save lives

This is something that the US , the UK and the UN has miserably failed to do.

They should not let this chance go by and encourage the two side to negotiate even if they know it is ploy for more time.

They must take that risk and with their fire power they can afford to take that risk ! they must give gadaffi the benefit of the doubt if they are to keep the moral high ground but give him time limits .

Mar 20, 2011 5:53pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Shastokovic wrote:

All of this nonsense about greed. The former colonial powers are grasping at their last chance to seize and control the finite oil reserves in North Africa. Nothing will ever get settled. Just drop the bomb on them.

Mar 20, 2011 6:12pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SportsCar39 wrote:

ChangeWhat, You don’t know what it feels like to be under the finger of Sadam Hussein or Gaddafi, wondering when it will be your turn to die for their amuusement. Don’t you think I woudn’t like to see the Arab League send troop in to Libya in order to end Gaddafis 41 year rule. No person should rule a county for 41 years, they will only get power dunk. Killing anyone who wants to end his rule, (Gaddafi, Dear Leader)

The United States made it clear that they were not going to take the lead in this intervention. We made it clear that the Arab League had to be on board before they would consider stopping Gaddafis from murdering his own people just because they dear to ask for freedom. France was the first to shoot in the air war. Even if the Arab League has changed their mines. (Amr Moussa looking for votes in his run for leader of Egypt) Obama has made it clear that the United States will not send Ground Troops in to Libya, It may take that to stop the killings of inocent civilians. I’m sure if it comes to troops that it going to be the Arab League that is going to provide the soldiers. The U.S. currently don’t have any plains flying over Libya, It is being handled by other members of the U.N. Also, the reason why Russia and China are speaking up against the action is because they want it to be known that killing your own civilians is OK!

Mar 20, 2011 6:31pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
EveDeVubbet wrote:

Over 8000 Libyan people who only wanted freedom and a better life
lie dead now…and how many more wounded…because of Gaddafi’s

The Arab League should have acted 3 weeks earlier. They would have
saved many people and their now quavering stance is highly questionable.

Mar 20, 2011 7:18pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
satori23 wrote:

Have you seen Gaddafi’s son Saif al-Islam showing horns whilst stating that he has proof that Libya funded French presidential elections?

Mar 20, 2011 8:06pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Janeallen wrote:

DIdn’t these guys learn anything from the demonstrations against civilian casualties in Pakistan, Afghanistan,
or from that incident when they bombed the Chinese Embassy in the Balkans by mistake!

Treat these civilians like your own family before you push the button to release bombs– the head of the military MUST tell the troops!

Otherwise, another diplomatic and political disaster is in store for us.

Mar 20, 2011 8:09pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
mastermind888 wrote:

Amazing how the west can jump up against Libya and not against Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, the war against libya is not for democracy it is for straight up to put a puppet regime in power and sell the west oil at discount prices as Saudi Arabia and Bahrain do.Why no military intervention in the Ivory Coast when worse is happening there,because there is nothing worth fighting for(oil).Im reality human lives mean nothing if they are not sitting on large important resources and you the media should have pickup and reported on the trend but instead you ignore

Mar 20, 2011 8:33pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
JoeAtLowell wrote:

“What is happening in Libya differs from the aim of imposing a no-fly zone, and what we want is the protection of civilians and not the bombardment of more civilians,” What the western force is doing is do what we really want to do, and not even trying hard to pretend that we are doing something else. Shame on us!

Mar 20, 2011 8:45pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
actnow wrote:

Stand back and watch how quickly this will turn against us. Have we learned nothing? This is another disaster in the making.

Mar 20, 2011 9:39pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
FlourGirl wrote:

This is a war that is none of my business, and my son should not bomb anyone in Africa or the Middle East. If someone needs to “get them Libyans in line” let it not be my son. Let it be someone from Brazil, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Indonesia….Ridiculous? Yep.

Mar 20, 2011 9:43pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
barberrr wrote:

How does that Bible verse go, “You have sown the wind, you shall reap the whirlwind.”

Gaddafi, Qadaffi, Kaddafi –whatever– is one mad dog. Don’t think he isn’t making a short list of his adversaries during this little tempest. And Italy is right across the pond from his front porch. Remember this little UN intervnetion into a sovereign state’s internal affairs once the Lockerbies start raining down all over Europe when this unstable tin horn despot sends out his agents in a final act of desperation.

Mar 20, 2011 10:28pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
rmarr79 wrote:

I have to agree with fredricwilliams. Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize is the biggest farce, second only to Henry Kissinger receiving it. Apparently they give the award out in hopes that you will feel obligated to live up to it, as opposed to actually deserving it based on your actions. Sad. Obama bought the Afghan and Iraq wars when he failed to end them. Now he owns a third war. That’s change you can believe in, folks!

Mar 21, 2011 2:19am EDT  --  Report as abuse
rmarr79 wrote:

McBob08, I suggest you look up the definition of “fascist”. How is Gaddafi a fascist? Conservatives always throw that word out there when referring to a dictator, almost always in an inappropriate way.

The word fascist is not a synonym for dictator, and the irony is that one could make a much better argument for calling the Western coalition “fascist” than one could for calling Gaddafi a fascist.

Gaddafi is nothing more than a brutal dictator that will stop at nothing to stay in power. His ambitions have nothing to do with corporate control.

Mar 21, 2011 10:56am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.