Thread: A U.N. evolution...A U.S. devolution?

I guess this means Gaddafi and Barry are no longer like peas and carrots.
Gaddafi: Obama Is of Muslim Descent, He Is a Friend | The Gateway Pundit

A shame too, since most of Barry's buds are big labor thugs, Reverend Wright types and people like George Soros. As undesireable as Gaddafi is, I'd say he was one of Barry's more respectable political allies.

Originally Posted by DCasper

"The current military actions have started to prevent Kadhafi from committing genocide."

"Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group."

The Libyan government putting down an insurrection is definitely not genocide. The civilians and protestors we are protecting are AK47 carrying insurrectionists. Calling them protestors and innocent civilians is the same as calling the Iranians who stormed our embassy in 1979 with AK47's "college students" (which by the way is what they were called). These same misnamed college sutdents were the same people who held the embassy workers and our Marines hostage for 444 days. When did they find time to be college students?

Those that are comparing this to Iraq are using a very poor comparison. These same commenters seem to be calling the civil war an act of genocide by the Libyan government. If anyone wants to talk about genocide they might consider the mass killing of Kurds by Saddam's forces. This was an act intended to kill members of a specific "ethnic group" which actually is genocide.

I do not understand postings that condemn our country regarding Iraq and then cheer for stepping in to stop the misnamed genocide in Libya. I understand postings are intended to blow off steam and provide opinions, but this is definitely not a case of genocide. The Libyan government is killing insurrectionists who can stop be insurrectionists as a matter of choice. Being a member of a targeted religious, ethnic, religious or national group can not be so easily changed by such a simple matter of choice. I might have accepted calling them "Freedom Fighters" but this is not how they are portrayed by the media or our government. I would have even supported assisting Freedom Fighters, but calling them protestors and innocent civilians is simply not factual.

I remember having my hand kissed by civilians when we liberated Iraq. I also remember many of these same people becoming insurgants who attacked us and planted IED's. We are not welcome in Arabic or Persian Muslim countries and we will once again regret this action sometime in the future. I am not saying this to make a racial or religious slur...I am basing it on personal experience and history.

Historical Questions:

Does anyone recall the first war the United States became involved in that was not on our own continent?

How many times in our history have we used our armed forces to attack what is now known as Libya?

I agree with you, Dave, about the Libyan conflict being considered genocide; however, I'm actually OK with what may be a misrepresentation for this reason: IF such an insurrection were to ever occur in the U.S., I would want the rest of the world to view the deaths of those who may very well be fighting for freedom as victims of genocide rather than the U.S. government portray them as say, "terrorists".

In Egypt, the current U.S. government scolded the regime for cutting off free and open communication for the Egyptian people. It makes me feel better knowing that I live in a country that would allow free and open communication for its citizenry IF again, at some point the same level of unrest would ever occur here. It couldn't just be talk, could it?

Finally, what does the U.S. government or those that profit from it stand to gain in Libya? I'd say a great deal. I'd say the Military Industrial Complex, the Masters of War, are popping Balthazar sized bottles of the finest bubbly in celebration of a potentially protracted war that will further secure a demand for the supply of their weapons.

Chris L

If Hillary and Obama are all for our involvement, I have to wonder who is really behind the insurrection(s). WMD's of a different kind.

What strikes me as rather curious is that we're supporting these rebels and we don't seem to know much about them. How do we know we're not supporting a group (or groups) that, at the end of the day, will be just as oppressive, corrupt, etc, as the regime currently in power?

Originally Posted by LAsoxfan

What strikes me as rather curious is that we're supporting these rebels and we don't seem to know much about them. How do we know we're not supporting a group (or groups) that, at the end of the day, will be just as oppressive, corrupt, etc, as the regime currently in power?

You don't. That's the thing with revolutions. Their purpose is to get rid of the old guard. They are trying to oust a murderous dictator. So presumably that means they think that oppression is not the way to go. I have a bit more faith in rvolutions that were started by the oppressed, rather than by foreigners for other purposes (like in Iraq and Iran a couple decades ago) because in this case, the rebels represent a good majority of the people.

In the end, there is no way to know. Noone could have predicted that the US revolution would turn out. The French supported it strongly, just to spite the English. And during the French revolution, the person who came out on top (Robbespierre) turned into a murderous loon which had to be disposed of before the society could stabilize again. Revolutions are chaotic and predicting the outcome is very difficult. The only consolation you have is that the current dictator is so bad that whatever ends up replacing him is likely to be better.