The conflict in Libya- your views?

[Tokis-Phoenix]

How do you feel about the conflict in Libya?

Personally i do not think we should be getting involved with Libya at all and i certainly don't believe the government/UN is over there for any moral cause. I believe we are destroying a functional country (no matter how bad a dictator is, some government is better than no government at all- Somalia case & point). I am highly against the arming of the "rebels". This will only up the violence & civilian casualties- we're no even arming a face, a political leader or army, just a mob of bitter scabbling rebels.
I believe that if Libya ever rises from the ashes after all this (though due to our meddling this could just be the start of a decades long downwards spiral) far worse people will replace Gaddafi (afterall some of the leading rebel groups are extremist Muslim political parties who Gaddafi previously kept under control, and i doubt we will get a more liberated Libya from such people). Perhaps we the West will try and install some sort of puppet government...
But what i really want to know, is what is our financial incentive for being in Libya, because whatever power politicions have promised theirselves i think this is where the real reason for our involvement in this whole mess lies.

 

[Hezam]

How do you feel about the conflict in Libya?
Personally i do not think we should be getting involved with Libya at all and i certainly don't believe the government/UN is over there for any moral cause. I believe we are destroying a functional country (no matter how bad a dictator is, some government is better than no government at all- Somalia case & point). I am highly against the arming of the "rebels". This will only up the violence & civilian casualties- we're no even arming a face, a political leader or army, just a mob of bitter scabbling rebels.
I believe that if Libya ever rises from the ashes after all this (though due to our meddling this could just be the start of a decades long downwards spiral) far worse people will replace Gaddafi (afterall some of the leading rebel groups are extremist Muslim political parties who Gaddafi previously kept under control, and i doubt we will get a more liberated Libya from such people). Perhaps we the West will try and install some sort of puppet government...
But what i really want to know, is what is our financial incentive for being in Libya, because whatever power politicions have promised theirselves i think this is where the real reason for our involvement in this whole mess lies.

Yeah,when we protest against dictators you consider us "rebels" and "extremist Muslim" ....mobs and maybe AlQaeda members...crazies...etc etc.

Don't you think that your words make us mad and become more extremists ?

Just because we are Arab and Muslims ?

What a shame!

 

[RolandtheHeadless]

I don't know what to make of the conflict in Libya, but experience suggests that my own country shouldn't be meddling there. The rebels (which isn't necessarily a negative term, Hezam) don't seem to be organized or well-led.

Someone should have vaporized Ghadaffi years ago; too bad Reagan didn't do the job right. My sympathies are with the rebels, but it doesn't seem they have much chance to win, absent our sending in our own troops to help them. Let's get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, before we start any new projects.

 

[Haruspex]

We don't know who will replace Gaddafi if anyone. So long as the dictator is deposed and any extremists are left weak, things have been handled correctly. Changes, unaided, have a lower rate of occurrence, especially in regimes who have perfected oppression of one sort or another. It's always this wishy-washy, middle of the road non-interventionism that consistently ****s things up.

While the world (the planet, that is) is not becoming any smaller, boundaries become less significant, logistical, economic, geographical, ideological and cultural boundaries. The west professes to be a herald of all sorts of liberal and humanist ideologies and yet it appears that realpolitik and electorate-appeasement seem to best define it.

I hate even the thought of the Soviet Union, having been fortunate enough to have experienced its last days and aftermath, but hell, at least the Soviet Union could tell who its ideological allies were and would proceed vehemently to anal fist their opponents through various methods of anal fisting, political and military alike.

You'll often hear how violence does not solve problems. Bullshit! If you kill your enemies you will run out of them. If you kill the enemies of your friends they are considerably more likely to remain your friends. The west always wanted political stability in a bunch of states without much regard to what will happen in the future. Sadly for the west political stability could use a bit of sanity within society, something states like Libya lack. Oppressive ideologies, oppressive religions and an amalgam of the two mixed with barbarism and ignorance. Yeah, this is totally going to sort itself out without intervention.

God! Our people! Look at the average western person. We've become so middle of the road that we have lost our character. It's always 'XY dictatorship's citizens are armed with sticks and small rocks. The state goons are armed with rebel-seeking thermonuclear dıldos and two thousand fighter jets, bombers, helicopters and flying saucers.' And to that the average westerner would say 'I am overcome by sadness and terror whenever the thought of these poor souls being obliterated crosses my mind, but violence is not the answer!' Well, how will sticks fare against high-tech dıldos of mass destruction if I may ask? Not too well, I suspect.

It comes naturally to me, when I think about the matter, that when called upon to do so, I would endeavour to help my ideological counterparts in another country or comrades, if you will. Regrettably, however, this seems not to apply to the current west. I think that the preferable approach is somewhat like this: kill the dictators, kill the extremists. If this leaves 5 people in the end, so be it. The dead were free to pick their ideologies and they knew what they were up against. They were also out of luck.

I always thought that an ideology was something like 'This is what we're building. If you'd like to join us, you're welcome. If not and you become a hindrance, we will attempt to get rid of you.' In the west, however, it is something among the lines of 'Umm, well.... err, you see, hmmm, to be honest... maybe, uuu, perhaps... you know, potentially, well...'

But enough of my rant, I submit myself to being flamed now.

 

[RolandtheHeadless]

My, you sound a bit bloodthirsty today. And you seem to want to kill extremists, while promoting extremism in doing so.

People are on the fence not necessarily because they're wishy-washy, but because the world isn't black and white. There are a lot of shades of gray when it comes to our meddling in the ME.

The Libyan rebels pose a dilemma because their cause is just; they want their human rights. But whose responsibility is it to help them? Why not Arab states? The UN would be unable to do more, without China and Russia vetoing such action.

I definitely don't want to see US troops going into Libya to help the rebels. Every time we do something like that, the people all end up hating us. We sent troops to overthrow a dictator (Saddam Hussein) in 2003, and Iraq is still a weight around our neck.

 

[Hezam]

"All" Arab governments must be removed.

Anyway,there is something more important to discuss witch is 'Extremism' and the Wester & Islamic relationship...it's the real issue.

i want you (not your governments) to discuss our relationship honestly...we can make a better world for us away from companies and mercenaries.

i Would love to start another thread about the western-eastern relationship or western-eastern future discussion.

 

[RolandtheHeadless]

Sounds like an interesting thread topic, Hezam. Why don't you start one?

 

[Hezam]

The Libyan rebels pose a dilemma because their cause is just; they want their human rights. But whose responsibility is it to help them? Why not Arab states? The UN would be unable to do more, without China and Russia vetoing such action.

It's supposed to be Arab nations but as you might know,the Arab governments are just puppets of the west,Thanks to Tokis-Phoenix.
They cant make any movement.

I definitely don't want to see US troops going into Libya to help the rebels. Every time we do something like that, the people all end up hating us. We sent troops to overthrow a dictator (Saddam Hussein) in 2003, and Iraq is still a weight around our neck.

Yeah,the US government won't help people who needs help,only if they have interests there.
for your info,Saddam was better than these puppets,although he was a puppet and the west used him to protect the oil in Iraq,Saudi Arabia,and the other oil countries from Iran.

in 2003 no one asked the US for help,they lied and attacked iraq,they made alot of genocides that i have never seen like them before.
Dude! do you really think that Bush came to help ! WTH!

Now the Libyans asked for help,and still they UN & USA are lazy (if you read news).

Why don't you especially the American people do something ?
Protest against Iraq war,Force the US army to pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan,Force your government to stop supporting Israel,Do something! you have freedom that we dont have !

If you did,you will see our answer and we (people) will create a new page of relationship that is based on respect and friendship (Not interests)....
You will say "Hezam,this is not possible to achieve",,,I will tell you that we (Arab) were talking about revolution for 50 years ago and Now we made it and we are still fighting for out goal.

Why don't you try us ?
By the way, Best thing you can do now is to close Fox news channel,They fool you and lie to you.

"extremists,extremists,extremists,Terrorism,Islamism,...etc etc" !!

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

Yeah,when we protest against dictators you consider us "rebels" and "extremist Muslim" ....mobs and maybe AlQaeda members...crazies...etc etc.
Don't you think that your words make us mad and become more extremists ?
Just because we are Arab and Muslims ?
What a shame!

You are completely twisting my words out of context. Firstly;

a. I said some of the leading rebel groups are extremist muslims, not all. And this is the case.
b. Rebels doesn't equate terrorists.

The problem is the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) which is a powerful radical faction waging Jihad in Libya against Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi's regime. While there are plenty of more sincere people rebelling against Gaddafi for a more fair Libya, the LIFG wants a more conservative/sharia Islamic Libya.
In Gaddafi's weakness, groups like these have started major power struggles. Gaddafi kept the LIFG under control while he was in power, but LIFG is now trying to lead the people to topple him.

If the LIFG come to power you will not get a more liberal, freer or fairer Libya.

It's supposed to be Arab nations but as you might know,the Arab governments are just puppets of the west,Thanks to Tokis-Phoenix.!!

I don't get what you're trying to imply here, please elaborate >_> .

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

I don't know what to make of the conflict in Libya, but experience suggests that my own country shouldn't be meddling there. The rebels (which isn't necessarily a negative term, Hezam) don't seem to be organized or well-led.

I agree, we are merely causing full-scale civil war here.

Someone should have vaporized Ghadaffi years ago; too bad Reagan didn't do the job right. My sympathies are with the rebels, but it doesn't seem they have much chance to win, absent our sending in our own troops to help them. Let's get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, before we start any new projects.

And replaced with who? We're not even the best thing since sliced bread. When it comes to Arabian Dictators, you could argue that none of them are ideal. But IMO like Saddam, Ghaddafi is the lesser of two evils. A functional government is better than no functioning government at all, and in the big picture of things when it comes to the alternatives don't think Ghaddafi is that bad anyway.

People can argue all they like how bad Ghaddafi is, but IMO when there is no better replacement available there is no point in felling him. Ultimately i think this is an Arabian issue and should be dealt by Arabians only. We have no place to meddle in these affairs.

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

We don't know who will replace Gaddafi if anyone. So long as the dictator is deposed and any extremists are left weak, things have been handled correctly.

The thing is though this won't be the case. Gaddafi kept the extremist parties like the LIFG under some control, but in his weakness they are now struggling for power. They will use the people to gain power, and i believe that if Libya's government is ever restored we will not be looking at a freer, fairer & more liberal Libya.

You'll often hear how violence does not solve problems. Bullshit! If you kill your enemies you will run out of them. If you kill the enemies of your friends they are considerably more likely to remain your friends.

If there were only a perscribed number of bad people in the world and all you had to do was topple them and the world would be a better place, then this would be true. But there is an unlimited amount of corruptable & corrupted people in the world. Afterall, while we are all inherently good we are also all inherently bad. You view is extremely black & white.

kill the dictators, kill the extremists. If this leaves 5 people in the end, so be it. The dead were free to pick their ideologies and they knew what they were up against. They were also out of luck.

Ok so lets say you had your way. You now have 50 Somalia's and trillions of pounds/dollars worth of debt. After toppling x-leader you now have a responsibility to his people to sort things out for them. But who will replace x-leader? A puppet government which you have put into place? Doesn't work. In the ensuring civil war struggles hope that someone better comes out on top of the heap of bodies? Not exactly a plan.

Its all fair & well saying "so & so is a really bad person and should be toppled!!!", but if you have no better alternative or even a proper plan then you will do more harm than good.

Even in a bad government, a bad government is better than no functioning government at all. Case & point: Somalia.

If anything we are only increasing the bloodshed in Libya, and which for supposed reasons of aiding the riddance of Gaddafi because he killed his own people, will make us worse than him.

"Ex-Gaddafi aide Moussa Koussa warns against civil war";

Ex-Gaddafi aide Moussa Koussa warns against civil war

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

The Libyan rebels pose a dilemma because their cause is just; they want their human rights. But whose responsibility is it to help them? Why not Arab states? The UN would be unable to do more, without China and Russia vetoing such action.

Either way, i certainly don't think we will help them by arming the rebels. There are a lot of people in Libya who are against Gaddafi because they want a freer, fairer Libya etc, but there are also those who are against him because he is not sharia enough and they want a more conservative Islamic Libya. I suspect the good people of Libya will be used and end up unwittingly bringing a far worser regime into power (if government order is ever restored at all).

Every time we do something like that, the people all end up hating us. We sent troops to overthrow a dictator (Saddam Hussein) in 2003, and Iraq is still a weight around our neck.

Well no wonder why. You only have to look at Iraq now to see why the people want the old Iraq back.
And in Afghanistan, the people suffer more from extremist Muslim groups than they ever did. Disorder has flourished in the war in the power vaccuums that arose and now over 80% of the worlds Heroin now comes from Afghanistan, which is fueling the very people the Americans want to rid from the country. But the situation is very complex. Toppling the old governments in both countries has done more harm than good to both people's. And there is no end in sight- the negative repurcussions of our actions are spiralling into the future and the clock can never be turned back.

The biggest challenges in both countries is not fighting terrorists or even building their economies back, but restoring governmental order, which is nigh on impossible. The people won't respect or follow a puppet government, but on the other hand democracy simply doesn't work (and will never work) in such Islamic countries. By giving people the ability the vote we have actually made them even more vulnerable, as they are now being terrorised into voting for/supporting extreme Islamic groups. The American's can't protect the peoples and so the peoples will just do whatever they need to do to survive in the here & now.

I personally find it amazing that even after Iraq & Afghanistan, so many people are still supportive of our government starting wars in Islamic countries (which is just what we're doing now in Libya).

 

[Nuala]

Yeah,when we protest against dictators you consider us "rebels" and "extremist Muslim" ....mobs and maybe AlQaeda members...crazies...etc etc.
Don't you think that your words make us mad and become more extremists ?
Just because we are Arab and Muslims ?
What a shame!

You want us to pull out of countries such as Iraq & Afghanistan, both which had oppressive regimes that killed those that went against them. Saddam himself had no problem killing hundreds of thousands of Sunni Muslims and Kurdish people. You also want us to no longer support Israel, and also invade Libya beyond what we have already done. Why should we? Because you're telling us to?

Oh, look here! You're crying about words used to describe people going against the ruling body or the norm. A rebellion is a very apt name. Why are you nitpicking such trivial matters? You've also said that our words turn Muslims into extremists. No, you know what does that? Ignorance and blind loyalty to people who care as little about you as anybody else in the world. I'm sick and tired of all this nonsense, Hezam. it is you who should be ashamed.

 

[Hezam]

You are completely twisting my words out of context. Firstly;

a. I said some of the leading rebel groups are extremist muslims, not all. And this is the case.
b. Rebels doesn't equate terrorists.

The problem is the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) which is a powerful radical faction waging Jihad in Libya against Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi's regime. While there are plenty of more sincere people rebelling against Gaddafi for a more fair Libya, the LIFG wants a more conservative/sharia Islamic Libya.
In Gaddafi's weakness, groups like these have started major power struggles. Gaddafi kept the LIFG under control while he was in power, but LIFG is now trying to lead the people to topple him.

If the LIFG come to power you will not get a more liberal, freer or fairer Libya.

Jihad means resistance,Answer me please :
Don't muslims have the right to resist dictators ? whatever we call it resistance or protest or jihad it's all same,Sounds like you fear this word Jihad.
Am i extremist because i protest against criminals and corrupted system ?
Jihad is an Arabic term of resistance.I think i said that several times ago.
We have the right to live as we like ! Who gives me or you to decide the way i/you should live ?
Answer please.

I don't get what you're trying to imply here, please elaborate >_> .

You posted this :

Perhaps we the West will try and install some sort of puppet government...

i think you meant the systems such Mubarak and Bin Ali (Egypt & Tunis dictators).

 

[Hezam]

but on the other hand democracy simply doesn't work (and will never work) in such Islamic countries.

Who said that ??? Who ?
Have you seen real democratic system in any Arabic country ? If not then Why ?

 

[Nuala]

I love how all these conversations go! I really do. Hezam, you don't so much as discuss as you do rant. :/

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

Jihad means resistance,Answer me please :
Don't muslims have the right to resist dictators ? whatever we call it resistance or protest or jihad it's all same,Sounds like you fear this word Jihad.
Am i extremist because i protest against criminals and corrupted system ?
Jihad is an Arabic term of resistance.I think i said that several times ago.
We have the right to live as we like ! Who gives me or you to decide the way i/you should live ?

Jihad doesn't simply mean "resistance", Jihad is an Islamic term that means waging holy war against unbelievers. Loads of web definitions here: Google .

By declaring Jihad against Gaddafi the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) are claiming that Gaddadi is not sharia enough for them. Their cause is not to fight for a fairer, freer & more liberal Libya, but to fight for a more conservative Islamic state. Is this what you want?

You posted this :
i think you meant the systems such Mubarak and Bin Ali (Egypt & Tunis dictators).

No i didn't and you are again twisting my words out of context. If you want to have a serious debate with me and not just try to vent your fustrations regardless of how much/little place they have in this thread, then i suggest you change your tune. Do you even understand my viewpoint on the matter? Your posts would make a lot more sense to me if you didn't.

Who said that ??? Who ?
Have you seen real democratic system in any Arabic country ? If not then Why ?

Long story short democracy will never work in countries like Afghanistan & Iraq due to the nature of politics & religion in such countries.

For the record: I am not anti-islamic so can you please stop all your Islamic ranting at me. I don't know who aggrevated you but i haven't been following your other thread recently (in fact i've barely been on the internet at all for the last 3 weeks), but i'm not your target.
I believe that most Muslims are just like most Christians, in the sense that most Christians are not bible-bashing conservatives but are instead pretty liberal and just like to get on with life, most Muslims are also fairly liberal and also just want to get on with life. But there are some Muslims who like some Christians, are highly conservative in their values and go about trying to run entire countries based on conservative religious law & dogma. Some terrorists are Muslim, but not all Muslims are terrorists. So i am neither pro nor anti-Islamic. Too many people are Muslims to generalise such a large religious following. So will you please stop with the whole "Y'all calling us terrorists blah blah!!!" etc tune because no a single person in this thread has said such a thing. I'm just getting the feeling here too that you're not really here on this thread to openly discuss points but rather just rant at whoever you can quote.

 

[RolandtheHeadless]

To paraphrase Barry Goldwater, extremism in support of liberty is not a vice.

I see no reason to believe that Arabs (or Muslims generally) could not live under a democracy. But note that some Arabs who have posted here prefer a caliphate.

I think all you guys are probably misinterpreting each other's words. Easy to do in written communications, where the tone doesn't always come across. Hezam gets a bit extra indulgence, in my mind, because he's not a native English speaker.

Hezam, you've read too much in my words. I opposed the Iraq invasion from the start. And I'm convinced the Bush people lied to us Americans in order to get political support for his actions.

Please note that a majority of Americans DID vote to do something: we elected Obama, who had opposed the Iraq invasion, and who promised to get our troops out of there as soon as possible. Two years later, we still have troops in Iraq, and appear to be making no progress on whatever we're aiming to do in Afghanistan. The fact that I have no idea what we're aiming to do there is part of my problem.

We supposedly went to Afghanistan ten years ago in order to wipe out al Qaida. That was a legitimate act of a nation that had been attacked, and found three thousand of its people killed, on 9/11.

But we bungled the mission when we allowed bin Ladin and his friends to escape from Tora Bora into Pakistan in 2003. After that, we had no legitimate business in Afghanistan. If we weren't willing to go into Pakistan after bin Laden, we should have withdrawn from the whole region.

 

[Pachipro]

Perhaps we the West will try and install some sort of puppet government...

Yeah,when we protest against dictators you consider us "rebels" and "exJihad means resistance,Answer me please :
Don't muslims have the right to resist dictators ? whatever we call it resistance or protest or jihad it's all same,Sounds like you fear this word Jihad.
Am i extremist because i protest against criminals and corrupted system ?
Jihad is an Arabic term of resistance.I think i said that several times ago.
We have the right to live as we like ! Who gives me or you to decide the way i/you should live ?
Answer please.

"All" Arab governments must be removed.

And they will through the use of the "rebels" and the Muslim Brotherhood. As many don't know, the Muslim Brotherhood was created and funded by the CIA and MI6.This was all planned out years ago and is finally being implemented in order to bring about a one world government. The next country to go into turmoil and "rebel" against their government will be Yeman. Oil will go to $200+/barrel and the final chess piece to fall in the Middle East will be Saudi Arabia.

Check out these links to see what I am talking about:
http://euro-med.dk/?p=22135

http://www.thenewamerican.com/world...ed-chaos-behind-the-scenes-in-the-middle-east

This is all a grand scheme that is coming to it's final conclusions. Many will still refuse to believe it, but it is happening as much as one prefers to keep their heads in the sand.

Hezam, you have every right to rebel against corrupt dictators, but first you must understand who controls your present government and why they were "put" there in the first place. Then you have to understand who controls the "rebels" and why and who is funding them, and finally you have to understand who will control your "new" government and why. Read the links for an interesting education. It is only when you learn who is behind this and why can changes be made. Be careful what you ask for Hezam, without knowing the truth behind it because you may just get your wish, but it will not be what you hoped for.

If anyone truly believes that the sudden revolutions in the Middle East were spontaneous and are for "freedom" and "democracy" they are sadly mistaken and misled as the goals go far beyond that.

All you have to do is do a little searching with the right key words, sift through the bullcrap and propaganda and you will find the truth behind these so called "revolutions". I wish you luck in the coming year as it will be a rough one. Nothing happens in this world today spontaneously or by accident. It is all planned by the global elite. Understand that and then maybe, maybe, things can be changed for the good.

I always wonder at the newspaper stories claiming that "democracy" and "freedom" is taking their first steps in the Middle East when we here in the USofA have been losing ours steadily on a daily basis for the past ten years. Today, if one attends an anti-war rally, they are photographed cataloged, and branded as a potential "terrorist" by the FBI and anyone, anywhere can be stopped and searched for any reason whatsoever.

 

[Rube]

But what i really want to know, is what is our financial incentive for being in Libya

I see it more of the world calling America's bluff on it's commitment to democracy and human rights honestly.

Don't you think that your words make us mad and become more extremists ?

Words? No, but cartoons..........

Of course you have a point but so does every black person in America have a point when they talk about the way media reports black crime. Good luck trying to get media to change.