Another country up for sale

[routan]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14610722

1640:
Foreign countries which backed Libya's revolt will be rewarded with contracts in the country's post-war reconstruction, rebel chief Mustafa Abdel Jalil is quoted as saying by the AFP news agency.

A bunch of thugs armed by the weapons of France, Italy and Britain, has now "liberated" and "freed" Libya, and are paving the way to a "democratic" government.

Who chose the NTC as representatives of Libya? I dont remember any elections. But all the Libyan assets "frozen" are going to be handed to them? So they can give it back to France, UK and other NATO countries because they backed the "revolt"?

 

[RbSX]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14610722

A bunch of thugs armed by the weapons of France, Italy and Britain, has now "liberated" and "freed" Libya, and are paving the way to a "democratic" government.

Who chose the NTC as representatives of Libya? I dont remember any elections. But all the Libyan assets "frozen" are going to be handed to them? So they can give it back to France, UK and other NATO countries because they backed the "revolt"?

Pretty sure that the USA is involved in here somewhere, that being said, I don't imagine any of you idiots would actually accept any responsibility.....

 

[BeauJangles]

Why is freed in quotes? There's no doubt that they've liberated their country from a ruthless dictator. The question now is whether they'll replace him with a democracy or another ruthless dictatorship.

 

[busydude]

Who chose the NTC as representatives of Libya?

IIRC.. Egypt was the first to recognize that.

 

[Craig234]

It makes all of the sense in the world for the CIA to be playing a big role in pushing who rules Libya, and that the money goes into the 'right' friendly hands.

But what's actually happening is a mystery about that at this time. We just don't know who's doing what as far as I know.

Hopefully good journalists like Jeremy Scahill will find some info. Unfortunately, 5% of the American people seem like they'd bother to read it.

 

[MotF Bane]

You like dictators, routan?

 

[Jaskalas]

You like dictators, routan?

That's hardly the argument, and you should know that.

To try and see it from their perspective, think of it as Libya now being made impure. They fear it'll now be a 'dirty' country sold out to the west.

 

[routan]

IIRC.. Egypt was the first to recognize that.

So what? No one from Libya CHOSE NTC. Just because some other shit country recognizes it doesnt mean it is the representative of the Libyan people.

 

[routan]

Why is freed in quotes? There's no doubt that they've liberated their country from a ruthless dictator. The question now is whether they'll replace him with a democracy or another ruthless dictatorship.

A ruthless dictator is far better than ruthless thugs out to fill their pockets by selling "reconstruction contracts" to those that supported them. They havent "freed" Libya. They have simply assumed power as hired guns of NATO

Its not any improvement.

 

[werepossum]

There will always be a certain number of Muslims willing to bask under a Muslim dictator's foot in squalor rather than have any infidels in their country, or Heaven forbid make any money off their country. We call these people morons, and they appear in every religion and country. Except maybe Switzerland.

I suspect though that a lot more Muslims want this purity for other Muslims than want it for themselves.

EDIT: As for who chose these people, they chose themselves. Being willing to stand up to one's dictator has a lot of risk and sacrifice, but also some potential rewards.

 

[cubby1223]

A ruthless dictator is far better than ruthless thugs out to fill their pockets by selling "reconstruction contracts" to those that supported them. They havent "freed" Libya. They have simply assumed power as hired guns of NATO

Its not any improvement.

Meh.

When you come up with a better solution that will actually *accomplish* the work that needs to be done, then we'll talk. Until then...

 

[routan]

There will always be a certain number of Muslims willing to bask under a Muslim dictator's foot in squalor rather than have any infidels in their country, or Heaven forbid make any money off their country. We call these people morons, and they appear in every religion and country. Except maybe Switzerland.

I suspect though that a lot more Muslims want this purity for other Muslims than want it for themselves.

EDIT: As for who chose these people, they chose themselves. Being willing to stand up to one's dictator has a lot of risk and sacrifice, but also some potential rewards.

Of course central to the above argument is that the "infidels" making money off of the Muslim country are benevelont and charitable
Thats how it rolls, isnt it possum? NATO is supplying arms and bombing the shit out of Libya because they "care" ^_^

 

[routan]

Meh.

When you come up with a better solution that will actually *accomplish* the work that needs to be done, then we'll talk. Until then...

What "work" needs to be done exactly? A solution for what exactly? I dont remember this being any problem last year. Heck, I remember Blair hugging Gaddafi not too long ago.

 

[cubby1223]

What makes Libya the "Muslim country"?

I do not refer to the U.S. as "the Christian country".

Maybe that *is* how you view the world, and if you are content living that way, fine, but don't expect other people to care about your views.

 

[Thump553]

Turkey has publically stated they gave the rebels $300 million (so far). Given Quadaffi's antagonistic relations with essentially every other Arab leader, I bet a bunch of money has come in from the Saudis, etc.

You stand by your friends and allies-is that so shocking?

 

[Kadarin]

Pretty LOL as usual there Routan. I guess it's a shame the Muslim world was far too weak, ineffective, and impotent to do the job on its own, huh? That's ok though, just keep whining about it.

 

[epidemis]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14610722

A bunch of thugs armed by the weapons of France, Italy and Britain, has now "liberated" and "freed" Libya, and are paving the way to a "democratic" government.

Who chose the NTC as representatives of Libya? I dont remember any elections. But all the Libyan assets "frozen" are going to be handed to them? So they can give it back to France, UK and other NATO countries because they backed the "revolt"?

Why you call them thugs when you are really ignorant of the situation?

 

[routan]

What makes Libya the "Muslim country"?

I do not refer to the U.S. as "the Christian country".

Maybe that *is* how you view the world, and if you are content living that way, fine, but don't expect other people to care about your views.

I didnt. It was an assertion by the possum person.

 

[BeauJangles]

A ruthless dictator is far better than ruthless thugs out to fill their pockets by selling "reconstruction contracts" to those that supported them. They havent "freed" Libya. They have simply assumed power as hired guns of NATO

Its not any improvement.

You've constructed a dialog and narrative that has little factual basis beyond the point that NATO was clearly interested in toppling Gaddafi's regime. Those so-called thugs have gone to great lengths to prevent reprisals against Gaddafi loyalists and have fought a fairly clean campaign against Gaddafi's military. There aren't many reports of looting, rape, or pillaging from the rebel side.

 

[Craig234]

Pretty LOL as usual there Routan. I guess it's a shame the Muslim world was far too weak, ineffective, and impotent to do the job on its own, huh? That's ok though, just keep whining about it.

That was a rude, pointless, nasty post promoting militarism.

 

[routan]

Pretty LOL as usual there Routan. I guess it's a shame the Muslim world was far too weak, ineffective, and impotent to do the job on its own, huh? That's ok though, just keep whining about it.

LOL at you. Intervention in other countries is a game played well by the non-Muslim world. Muslim world usually is on all fours for the highest bidder.

What the fuck does the Muslim world's ineffectiveness have to do with the arming of thugs who are in turn selling the country?

Talk bullshit and present as fact. Thats what you are good for.

 

[GaryJohnson]

A ruthless dictator is far better than ruthless thugs out to fill their pockets by selling "reconstruction contracts" to those that supported them.

How is one worse than the other? Don't both have the potential to be equally exploitive of their people?

 

[routan]

Why you call them thugs when you are really ignorant of the situation?

Why dont you enlighten me oh smart one.

 

[epidemis]

Why dont you enlighten me oh smart one.

I'm not the one claiming anything, asshat.

 

[routan]

You've constructed a dialog and narrative that has little factual basis beyond the point that NATO was clearly interested in toppling Gaddafi's regime. Those so-called thugs have gone to great lengths to prevent reprisals against Gaddafi loyalists and have fought a fairly clean campaign against Gaddafi's military. There aren't many reports of looting, rape, or pillaging from the rebel side.

If your "reports" are so accruate, would you mind informing us all how many civilians have died in the NATO bombing?

A large component of the so-called rebels were part of the Gaddafi regime. If people like you proclaim that the Gaddafi regime was responsible for looting, rape and pillage, I am quite skeptical that members of his former regime were not involved then, and not involved now.