Pretty awful. People can be animals.http://weaselzippers.us/2011/10/20/video-gaddafis-final-moments-captured-alive-by-rebel-forces/
There is the face of the new Libya - a bunch of religious nuts screaming Allah Akbar as they kill Gaddafi [without trial]. Also note that they tied up a Black man on the back of a truck which you can see at the end of the video...Its already well known that the "rebels" dislike Black people and in every city they have liberated, blacks are arrested and often beat and killed.
Without outside intervention the Rebels would have been pounded into sand, they were at most 2 days from being stomped out before we intervened dont forget [thats how shitty their "uprising" was going]. So its not lame. NATO [ie- the US/UK/France] won the war for them so they owe those countries massive favors. Nothing comes free in this world and dont be a fool and think "we" helped Libya just out of sheer kindness...
Without outside intervention the Rebels would have been pounded into sand, they were at most 2 days from being stomped out before we intervened dont forget [thats how shitty their "uprising" was going]. So its not lame. NATO [ie- the US/UK/France] won the war for them so they owe those countries massive favors. Nothing comes free in this world and dont be a fool and think "we" helped Libya just out of sheer kindness...
Remember all the bitching about going into Libya with NATO and "leading from behind"?
Doubt we'll hear from them.
Add this one to the Reasons to vote for Obama thread.
Even if we didn't personally get him the strategy for our involvement was sucessful so far.
0 soldiers killed!
The NATO Mission _always_ meant the end of Gadhafi, always. As soon as the cruise missiles hit I knew it was over for him.Because violating the US constitution is a reason to be re-elected? Going against the initial reason we went in (to limit Gadhafi from wiping out cities) was turned into "hey, we think he's over there, so let's bomb it" - we should not be mucking with other countries. Peace keeping and protection is one thing. Getting further into the business of taking down gov'ts is not. And violating the constitution is worse. But Obama and Pelosi showed they have no intention of respecting the constitution, so it's all good, right?
The NATO Mission _always_ meant the end of Gadhafi, always. As soon as the cruise missiles hit I knew it was over for him.
Right, but that was always going to happen. It's like playing just the tip. In practice it doesn't work. Nobody really thought the no fly zone was going to be anything other than a proxy air force for the rebels. In fact, that's all it ever could have been.The US mission was to enforce a no fly zone. We did more than that (bombing) and then stayed without approval from congress, violating the constitution.
Right, but that was always going to happen. It's like playing just the tip. In practice it doesn't work. Nobody really thought the no fly zone was going to be anything other than a proxy air force for the rebels. In fact, that's all it ever could have been.
Without outside intervention the Rebels would have been pounded into sand, they were at most 2 days from being stomped out before we intervened dont forget [thats how shitty their "uprising" was going]. So its not lame. NATO [ie- the US/UK/France] won the war for them so they owe those countries massive favors. Nothing comes free in this world and dont be a fool and think "we" helped Libya just out of sheer kindness...
If the tables were turned you would have this view. Yep. I am sure of this.
Wait, that would mean that a Republican would have to have won a war or got anything done militarily.
I have no sympathy for tyrants of the people. The prick had it coming since the bombing (that killed our GIs) in the 80s, too bad the Republican back then screwed up and failed to get the bad guy.
Empty barrels make the most noise sums up Conservatism well nowadays, quite fitting that your leaders are a bunch of draft dodging crybaby angry/dry/drunk cowards in real life who endlessly talk tough. What a bunch of losers. 2012 is going to be a laugh riot!
You right wingers are being played like a bunch of bored housewives on a soap opera tabloid trip, politics style. Reality does not give a shit about the fantasy world a bunch of arrogant conmen spin on the radio dear. Wake up.
So then you feel the American people were misled and those responsible should be held accountable in a court of law? Lets have some consistency people, we can't go on holding administrations to different standards based on such arbitrary things like ideologies.
Right, but that was always going to happen. It's like playing just the tip. In practice it doesn't work. Nobody really thought the no fly zone was going to be anything other than a proxy air force for the rebels. In fact, that's all it ever could have been.
Agreed. My point here is that the constitution was violated, and there needs to be some action to deal with that.
I think we could very well have been a no-fly zone enforcement mission. So see a AA site, bomb it. You see a plane taking off with armaments, take it out. Ignore all else. Did I think we were going to eventually be involved in taking him out? Yes. I honestly expected soldiers deployed.
Possibly. I say that because we all knew, as I've said, that this was a proxy airforce used to overthrow Gadhafi. So we really cannot pretend it was anything else and incredulously feign shock that that's what it became.So then you feel the American people were misled and those responsible should be held accountable in a court of law? Lets have some consistency people, we can't go on holding administrations to different standards based on such arbitrary things like ideologies.
But the professed purpose was to prevent Gadhafi from running amok and going on a killing spree. Without any air power (which he quickly lost) he just used armor and other ground units, so locking down the air alone would have been pointless, which is why the mission was to protect civilians. But since it never drew a line in the sand it seemed what would happen--and it did--that the rebels would continue to push forward and then when Gadhafi's forced poked their heads out they'd get hit.I think we could very well have been a no-fly zone enforcement mission. So see a AA site, bomb it. You see a plane taking off with armaments, take it out. Ignore all else.
See my sig. The law means nothing to the federal government. Was it a constitutional violation, quite possibly, but the only people who seem to care don't have the power to do anything about it.Agreed. My point here is that the constitution was violated, and there needs to be some action to deal with that.
http://weaselzippers.us/2011/10/20/video-gaddafis-final-moments-captured-alive-by-rebel-forces/
There is the face of the new Libya - a bunch of religious nuts screaming Allah Akbar as they kill Gaddafi [without trial]. Also note that they tied up a Black man on the back of a truck which you can see at the end of the video...Its already well known that the "rebels" dislike Black people and in every city they have liberated, blacks are arrested and often beat and killed.
Possibly. I say that because we all knew, as I've said, that this was a proxy airforce used to overthrow Gadhafi. So we really cannot pretend it was anything else and incredulously feign shock that that's what it became.But the professed purpose was to prevent Gadhafi from running amok and going on a killing spree. Without any air power (which he quickly lost) he just used armor and other ground units, so locking down the air alone would have been pointless, which is why the mission was to protect civilians. But since it never drew a line in the sand it seemed what would happen--and it did--that the rebels would continue to push forward and then when Gadhafi's forced poked their heads out they'd get hit.
Because violating the US constitution is a reason to be re-elected? Going against the initial reason we went in (to limit Gadhafi from wiping out cities) was turned into "hey, we think he's over there, so let's bomb it" - we should not be mucking with other countries. Peace keeping and protection is one thing. Getting further into the business of taking down gov'ts is not. And violating the constitution is worse. But Obama and Pelosi showed they have no intention of respecting the constitution, so it's all good, right?
Remember we invoked the War Powers Act, agree or disagree.
Also we went in under NATO with whom we have a treaty. U.N. authorized NATO intervention so it was legal.
The war powers act gave him 60 days.
Edit: http://professors.nesl.edu/2011/06/libya-and-war-powers-act.html
Don't forget the 2nd part of my response. We are part of the UN and NATO and the actions was approved so it didn't require the President to go back to Congress.
In hindsight maybe he should have but he didn't have to.
Given we were engaging, he needed to get approval. The fact it was part of NATO doesn't preclude that. The war powers act still applies.
To rid the world of Osama bin Laden, Anwar al-​Awlaki and Moammar Qaddafi within six months: if Obama were a Republican, hed be on Mount Rushmore by now
The most articulate response yet was by conservative columnist Andrew Sullivan