I pray he rest in peace, but like everything else I pray for, it likely won't happen.
It's a shame the NTC Militia couldn't restrain themselves and keep him alive. He had a lot to answer for beyond the oppression and murder of his own people.
The murder of PC Yvonne Fletcher, his financial and material support for the IRA, and of course his role in the Lockerbie bombing still carry many questions which will probably never be answered now.
^Agreed. There was nothing gained by summarily executing him like that. At least Saddam got a trial.
As much as I hate politics and do my best to avoid following any kind of news related to it, I have to say that I find the entire "intervention" and the rest of Libya-related fighting disgusting. Today I saw an interesting picture that I think deserves sharing:
http://a6.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/309717_264737916896408_100000806064332_725995_1807) 315931_n.jpg
Here's a couple of comments made by the poster of this image:
I believe this is Libya's capital. Hillary Clinton the secetary of state laughs and jokes about killing another countries leader. John Mccain says we have freed them. All they show is the bad things (or lies) about Gaddafi, how about the fact housing was a human right, electricity was free and you got 50,000 grand once you were married.
Compare and Contrast....In America if you miss a few house payments the bank puts you and the street, miss a couple light bills they turn of the heat off, and you have to pay to get married.
Take them for what you will.
I have a Libyan in my Turkish classes and he was quite upset over the death of Qaddafi; he's concerned over the future of the country, the previous Libyan government had paid for his education here. I have mixed emotions over the issue; partly I think because the world doesn't easily fit into the nice "good guys" and "bad guys paradigm" we would like it to also because call me a cynic but I'm not convinced about the real motivations behind the war. Why is it we have interveened in Iraq and Libya both who have oil... But not regimes in North Korea, Zimbabwe, Sudan, Myanmar and Uzbekistan all of whom have far more brutall, repressive and murderous regime's than Sadam, Qaddafi or even the Taliban.
Qaddafi did brutally repress anyone who stood up against him, countless thousands went missing, he funded international terrorism and he would of brutally suppressed those who had protested against him. In the end did he reap what he sewed with his people?
The flip side of that of course is the point Igyman just made, there were good things his leadership had done, housing, and all that jazz. Although the economy was in a real state; though it remains to be seen how much of a help the war has been? Will Libya just trade one dictator for another? Who will fill the power vacuum that has been left?
I've tried to stay away from this, but I can't... Lets face it, my problem with this is how things went down. We went from a psychotic nutjob to... Well we just don't know. At least with Qaddafi we knew what to expect. How do we know that the guy who takes over won't be just as brutal or worse.
And as to the whole Oil thing: If that were our true motivation, we'd be going after Venezuela. They're closer, and happen to be where we get the majority of our oil in the US. And honestly we aren't going to be getting oil out of Libya any time soon. Heck we don't even know that the new regime(when it comes about) will deal with us.
I've tried to stay away from this, but I can't... Lets face it, my problem with this is how things went down. We went from a psychotic nutjob to... Well we just don't know. At least with Qaddafi we knew what to expect. How do we know that the guy who takes over won't be just as brutal or worse. You talking about with Qaddafi or Saddam?
I find it funny people will defend going after Saddam while spending a trillion US tax payers dollars and 4,478 US military lifes, but gripe about going after Qaddafi that cost less than a billion US Dollars and ZERO American Military lifes.
For some reason going after Libya make more sense to me than going after Iraq, but that just has something to do with Pan Am Flight 103.
I've tried to stay away from this, but I can't... Lets face it, my problem with this is how things went down. We went from a psychotic nutjob to... Well we just don't know. At least with Qaddafi we knew what to expect. How do we know that the guy who takes over won't be just as brutal or worse.
The biggest problem is now tribes have toppled Gaddafi they don't have anything to unify them anymore - and they'll all want something out of it. Hopefully they can all get it without more bloodshed, but I doubt that very much.
And as to the whole Oil thing: If that were our true motivation, we'd be going after Venezuela. They're closer, and happen to be where we get the majority of our oil in the US. And honestly we aren't going to be getting oil out of Libya any time soon. Heck we don't even know that the new regime(when it comes about) will deal with us.
Fuel prices here rose as a result of the supply being cut off, seeing as Libya has been a big supplier to Europe for decades - if it was truly about Oil, Gaddafi would likely still be alive and kicking as he at least guaranteed us a supply - which is something the NTC isn't able to do presently.
Is there someone who honestly believes the people who started this were there to "liberate" Libya and bring them democracy?
I know It's easier for you to live in that pink cloud of yours but... really?
Next up in Libya: SHARIA LAW.
:carms: In 3... 2...
If that is the people of Libya choice, then so be it.
Don't want other countries telling us what to do, so I don't expect to tell them what to do.
And as to the whole Oil thing: If that were our true motivation, we'd be going after Venezuela. They're closer, and happen to be where we get the majority of our oil in the US.
or Canada :xp:
don't hate me, I'm from Michigan.. I'm an honorary Canuck
And as to the whole Oil thing: If that were our true motivation, we'd be going after Venezuela.
No offence, but the majority of the conflict with the exception of Predator drones has been performed by EU block countries... Also given that I'm British and I said "our", whose government did you think I was talking about?
I don't think anyone can really compare the "good" sides/things of a dictator or any other non-democratic system to the "bad" sides of it. What are infrastructure or paid marriages against not being allowed to tell your opinion and in case being punished for doing so? Sorry if this sounds offensive but I can't understand the people glorifying "leaders" like Gaddafi for the few "good" things they've done.
So that's my two (European) cents :)
I don't think anyone can really compare the "good" sides/things of a dictator or any other non-democratic system to the "bad" sides of it. What are infrastructure or paid marriages against not being allowed to tell your opinion and in case being punished for doing so? Sorry if this sounds offensive but I can't understand the people glorifying "leaders" like Gaddafi for the few "good" things they've done.
I'm not glorifying Gaddafi, but he did do some good; my question also remains why have we not done anything about the worst regime's on the planet who are killing and oppressing their people's far more?
Here you show your cultural bias (which we all have), yes being able to give your opinion is a very important thing in western cultures, however you seemed to of missed say igyman's point. Nor do I actually see what's so great about "democracy" - if you consider in Morocco the more power the King has given to the elected government, the more the fundamentalist Islam brigade have gained power which has actually reduced freedom's for the people (examples, Christian orphanage runners be thrown out the country, the kids now on the street, Shia Iraninan Clerics being thrown out and many of Morocco's indigenous homosexuals being imprisoned) even though they can now vote and choose their government.
My Libyan friend thinks Qaddafi was needed to hold everyone inline; and that now without Libya will fall apart into different warring tribes and many more people will die.
Now if you had to choose between "freedon of opinion" in a lawless state where you could be shot by anyone, or live in a state run by a dictator with running water and some semblance of rule of law which would you choose?
Hmm.... you're right in all points. Nothing more to say from me.