No, what I, West Point Military College, CIA analysts, and the rebels themselves are saying is that Israel are supporting (*) Gaddafi while the US, UK, etc are supporting Al Quada.

(*) Or at least giving your troops enough targets to let them feel there's some level of danger !
You can't have a no fly zone unless there's an enemy !

So, it's actually you who are supporting muslim jihadists in a coup in Libya.

And your news media couldn't be more firmly on the jihadists side, And it's great to see that Al Quada can call on the US airforce and navy whenever they need them.

So, under your own rules I think that your now classified as a rogue state.

I couldn't make this stuff up !:clapclap:

I think you're exaggerating. Not all the rebels fighting Gaddafi's forces are Al Quada but it wouldn't surprise me if some were, Al Quada and their sympathizers are in almost every country and political movement in the Middle East. Besides, NATO knows how to deal with Al Quada insurgents, I don't think they'll be playing a major role in rebuilding the gov't when Gaddafi's forces are defeated.

As for the media, they are spineless lackeys to political correctness and leftist bias. They wouldn't be caught dead reporting that certain freedom fighters rebelling against Gaddafi's army may have ties to Al Quada, it would ruin a great story.

On the other hand, if Israel feels that all of these uprisings and coups in the Middle East are going to produce secular governments that operate under Sharia law, I don't blame them for wanting to protect their own interests, not that I believe Israel has the kind of influence over Muslim nations that you're claiming.
Don't underestimate the strength of America's alliance with Israel, I feel comfortable saying that in meetings even your irrefutable sources don't know about, the US and Israel are working on avoiding a conflict of interest.

Here's some more information regarding Israel's deal with Lybia.

The one thing that is surprising, even to me, is that the thoughtful U.S. Ambassador to the Security Council has requested that the mercenaries intervening in Libya be exempt from prosecution under international law.

Whilst the US is quick to exempt itself for any war crimes it may commit it hasn't given the same freedom to other troops who are actually fighting for them. So while the UK, France etc troops can be charged with war crimes, the US has ensured that the mercinaries your fighting are exempt from any such charges.

A chocolate fish is on offer for the best explination !

Attending the fateful Feb. 18 meeting were Netanyahu, Barak, Lieberman. They heard assessments from IDF intelligence chief Gen. Aviv Kochavi and Chairman of the Division of North Africa in the Foreign Ministry, Shalom Cohen, that if Ghaddafi falls, a radical Islamic regime would follow him. Based on this unlikely assessment, the Prime Minister decided, supposedly on behalf of the Israeli people, to bail out Libya’s leader with a well trained and equipped army of African guns for hire. He contacted Gen. Ziv who arranged a meeting with Ghaddafi military representatives in the Chadian capital N’djamena. Joining them were two reps from the Israeli government, former Israeli Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami, and Gen. Yossi Kuperwasser. There, a deal between Israel and Libya was cut.

Global CST would supply tens of thousands of mercenaries for 5 billion American bucks. After they slaughtered the last of the rebels, Israel would be granted rights to explore and export Libyan oil hushhushedly and Gen. Ziv would be permitted to operate his army from Libyan soil to spread its unique talents at saving dictators throughout Africa.

However, Ziv is not merely a maverick general: http://nuestrosricos.blogspot. ... a-death-do-we-impart.html
General Ziv is on the payroll of Counterterrorism International and is member of the Task Force on Future Terrorism (FOTFF), created in June 2005 by the Office of Homeland Security of Israel? No, of the USA.FOTFF operates under the orders of then-Secretary Michael Chertoff and Lee Hamilton.

http://www.thefireinsider.com/

I'm not going to say that the reasons for US/UN involvment are different on the surface than what they truly are, but I must say, that in order to save lives it would be best that we either intervene entirely, or completely stay out. This way there would less human loss.

Quote from DeKo :

People are being shot in Yemen, Ivory Coast and Bahrain (by Saudi troops, incidentally) while taking part in perfectly reasonable protests. You're kidding yourself on if you think that this is not to do with oil.

Anyway, it's all about volume of murder, is it? Where is the limit before you start bombing? 10, 20, 100?

In no way am I saying that they should be going to war with any of the countries I've mentioned, I just don't think we should be interfering at all.

Once you want to watch women, Men, Children, All being bombed for no apparent reason, You can figure out a different solution or go be a doctor, Sure, It might be about oil, But sharing makes the world better Give a little bit and all that jazz, And sure, There might be small scale terror in different regions, But the US can't be spread so thin and be the miracle country everyone wants it to be, What is the crime if people in Saudi Arabia pay 1c or something like that and they let the gas run over, Pour over everywhere on the ground (This is coming from two of my close friends from that region) That's living in excess, We however, Having been fighting 1 (2?) war(s) for a damn long ass time and we just lead another one on, We just passed it to nato.

I'm not trying to act like I'm the shit when it comes to conversations about jets, Flying and wars and stuff, But I'd rather take more dead knowing I did something than if I did absolutely nothing and let the whole damn place get nuked like Korea almost went into (Yeah, We went there, Too.)

US does need to stop shelling out help and only care about themselves, Be neutral and shit, Isn't that what most country's do? I never see Russia do anything against stuff like that.


-Sidethought = Why does everyone blame US? Isn't there other PERFECTLY capable military's spread out around the globe that can take care of murder and death.. military rape.. abuse of power.. All that stuff?

People need to get off their high horse

Quote from TehPaws3D :

US does need to stop shelling out help and only care about themselves, Be neutral and shit, Isn't that what most country's do? I never see Russia do anything against stuff like that.


-Sidethought = Why does everyone blame US? Isn't there other PERFECTLY capable military's spread out around the globe that can take care of murder and death.. military rape.. abuse of power.. All that stuff?

People need to get off their high horse

Thank you

Wouldn't it be a great idea if people actually ignored all of this " We need to kill people so they agree with us ! " and " The only thing that matters is money and how I get lot's of it involves me trampling peasants underfoot because their not me " macho crap and actually focused on all working together to make it a planet worth living on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v ... re=player_embedded#at=154

Prepare for flaming for expressing left wing views .......:bananadea

Isn't it wonderful to hear that the US command have heard 'flickers' of intelligence that there may be muslim jihadist elements among the 'rebels'.
Perhaps they could simply try reading their own reports, or does the word oxymoronic really apply to US military intellegence.

Another point they seem to have 'overlooked to mention' is the fact that Khalifa Hifter who was appointed the 'rebels' top military commander seems to have had an interesting previous 20 years working for the CIA.

"Hifter’s name has not appeared in the bulk of the corporate-controlled US media. The New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, the Los Angeles Times have all been curiously silent, despite having more journalists in the war zone than McClatchy. The US television networks have likewise kept quiet on the identity of the Libyan rebel commander, with the exception of a brief interview with Hifter on ABC News March 27, which made no reference to his previous long-term residence within five miles of CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. There is no credible explanation for this silence from the standpoint of journalism. There is no security reason to keep the name of the Libyan commander secret—it was publicly announced by the Transitional National Council in Benghazi, and Hifter is certainly well known to Gaddafi, who employed him as a commander of Libyan-backed forces in the civil wars in Chad in the 1980s.
The obvious conclusion is that the American media is keeping silent in order to deprive the American people of information that would help clarify the nature of the US military intervention in Libya—and trigger opposition to it. The selection of a longtime CIA collaborator as commander of the rebels makes nonsense of the official claim that the United States is intervening militarily in Libya to protect civilian lives, rather than taking sides in a civil war in order to gain control of Libya’s oil assets and strengthen the position of American imperialism in the region."

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27796.htm

For anyone who's confused about this sudden urge for the US, UK, and France to start arming Muslim Jihadists, then this may explain it. As the article states, theres now clear evidence that Pres Barry agreed to go along with a CIA planned reigime change in Libya weeks ago.

Nothing new there then, except for the pathetic western media who only appear capable of reporting what their told to say. :laola:

" Yet one thing is clear, thanks to Mazzetti and Schmitt. "Several weeks ago, President Obama signed a secret finding authorizing the CIA to provide arms and other support to Libyan rebels." It is said that the arms have not yet been sent; but the timing is interesting. The order was signed just about the moment that President Obama was lauding the triumph of non-violence in Egypt. The Times reporters wisely let the serial flat reiterations of "no comment" from leading officials speak for themselves. [
The upshot is this. An event that we Americans were led to believe was an autonomous rising on the model of Egypt turns out to have been deeply compromised from the start, and compromised by American meddling. And the president himself, far from having been balked in mid-decision because he is a man of skeptical and hesitant mind, took a long time to decide because he was face to face with a moment John Kennedy had reached at the brink of the Bay of Pigs invasion, whose 50th anniversary the U.S. will mark on April 17. After three days of ill-fated support for the anti-Castro rebels, President Kennedy drew back from that invasion. Eventually, he made a public apology to the country.
All the external parties are in Libya for different reasons. Things could not have gotten this far without the CIA. But the president was also heeding pressure from Nicolas Sarkozy and David Cameron; and what those European leaders wanted was an assured supply of oil for Europe. Italy, meanwhile, is fearful of an influx of refugees. All these things President Obama knew, and he was careful to mention none, when he spoke to the nation on Monday. He opened and closed with a salute to American troops. He uttered -- in a truculent manner that was new to him -- a stream of wishful words about American support for freedom everywhere."

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27804.htm


“As Commander-in-Chief, I have no greater responsibility than keeping this country safe,” the president declared, adopting his predecessor's favorite title for himself. “I’ve made it clear that I will never hesitate to use our military swiftly, decisively, and unilaterally when necessary to defend our people, our homeland, our allies and our core interests.”

Put another way, President Obama says he will only start a war – without consulting Congress, much less the public – when it is absolutely necessary for defending the “homeland” or for, you know, whatever he deems an “interest.”

But if the threat of a massacre is what spurs President Obama to action, what are we to make of his reaction to Israel’s massacre of more than 1,400 Palestinians during Operation Cast Lead in Gaza, or what Amnesty International calls “22 days of death and destruction," giving Israel an additional $30 billion in American weapons is a rather curious response, no?

And what about the hundreds of civilians killed by drone attacks in Pakistan since Obama took office – as many as 1,850 according to the New America Foundation? In early March, the very administration cloaking its new war in moralizing rhetoric carried out a massacre of 40 Pakistani civilians – a massacre the president who authorized the attack couldn't even be bothered to comment on.

Right now, the Obama administration is actively supporting brutal regimes in Yemen, Iraq and Bahrain – to name a few – where protest movements are being violently suppressed on the American taxpayers' dime. And the Obama administration is selling $60 billion in weapons to the Saudis, who not only oppress their own dissidents but recently occupied neighboring Bahrain and violently cracked down on peaceful protesters there with the U.S.'s stamp of approval.

So if one thing's clear, it's that the U.S. government is fine with tyranny – when it's “pro-American” (business). Fancy rhetoric aside, there is no “freedom agenda.”

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27805.htm

wow, that was two pages of i couldn't give a flying fcuk. and there was me thinking this thread was about a new expansion pack for Arma II. i wonder if they discuss LFS in Libyan forums.

Quote from TehPaws3D :

Once you want to watch women, Men, Children, All being bombed for no apparent reason, You can figure out a different solution or go be a doctor, Sure, It might be about oil, But sharing makes the world better Give a little bit and all that jazz, And sure, There might be small scale terror in different regions, But the US can't be spread so thin and be the miracle country everyone wants it to be, What is the crime if people in Saudi Arabia pay 1c or something like that and they let the gas run over, Pour over everywhere on the ground (This is coming from two of my close friends from that region) That's living in excess, We however, Having been fighting 1 (2?) war(s) for a damn long ass time and we just lead another one on, We just passed it to nato.

I'm not trying to act like I'm the shit when it comes to conversations about jets, Flying and wars and stuff, But I'd rather take more dead knowing I did something than if I did absolutely nothing and let the whole damn place get nuked like Korea almost went into (Yeah, We went there, Too.)

US does need to stop shelling out help and only care about themselves, Be neutral and shit, Isn't that what most country's do? I never see Russia do anything against stuff like that.


-Sidethought = Why does everyone blame US? Isn't there other PERFECTLY capable military's spread out around the globe that can take care of murder and death.. military rape.. abuse of power.. All that stuff?

People need to get off their high horse

I'm certain that literally nobody wants that.

Um, it's all about humanitarum aid, or is it about supporting murders who do what the establishment want ?

The six-month visa was issued following a request by Foreign Secretary William Hague from the Home Office and authorizes the “alleged war criminal” and former Muammar Gaddafi intelligence chief to freely travel to and from Britain, The Sun reported.

The disclosure came amid angry reactions to a decision by the government to allow Kusa leave Britain for Qatar, which critics said turned Britain into a “transit lounge for alleged war criminals”.

“Many people will be very anxious that Britain is being used as a transit lounge for alleged war criminals,” said Tory MP Robert Halfon.

Kusa is said to have been deeply involved in supplying arms to the IRA, the bombing of Pan American flight over the Scottish city of Lockerbie in 1988 and the murder of British WPC Yvonne Fletcher.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/174767.html

“No political settlement in which the dictator remains in place will work. The West and its partners must be ready to maintain political, economic and military pressure until he is gone,” states the New York Times in its April 15 lead editorial.

Do not be fooled by the anti-dictatorial motivation of the New York Times. When the CIA and British intelligence overthrew Iran’s democratically elected government of Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh and replaced it with the dictatorship of the Shah, the New York Times editorialized: “Underdeveloped countries with rich resources now have an object lesson in the heavy cost to be paid by one of their number which goes berserk with fanatical nationalism.”

Mossadegh had earned the label of “fanatic” because he had dared nationalize the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (aka British Petroleum) and use the profits of Iran’s oil to bring the country out of immense poverty.

All the targets of imperialist invasion and “regime change” strategies are fully demonized prior to aggression. From Iran in 1953, Guatemala in 1954, the Congo in 1961, Grenada in 1983, Panama in 1989, Yugoslavia in 1999, Afghanistan in 2001 to Iraq in 2003, the process of selective demonization of leaders is a precursor to aggression. The motives of the invaders are pure and noble. The bombs they drop are smart. They only kill bad people who are the enemies of freedom.

At these moments, the money-gouging corrupt politicians of both sides of the aisle in Washington, D.C.—from Tea Party Republicans to most Democratic Party politicians—mainly put aside all differences to join the chorus of the holy condemning the targeted demon as the troops are assembled, the war planes take to the skies and the cruise missiles crash into their targets. They are patriotic to the Empire and realize that their privileged and pampered employment as the “people’s representatives” can be quickly ended if they resolutely defy the war makers and their mass media propaganda machine. They, too, can be demonized if they step too far out of line.

The people of the United States do not want this war. They want the war in Afghanistan and Iraq—two other wars for Empire—ended now. They can see through the lies of the government that says the country is so broke that tens of thousands of teachers, nurses and other public sector workers must be fired. Yet the same government, pursuing a global imperialist foreign policy that benefits the biggest banks and oil corporations, has limitless funds to invade and occupy the lands of other working people.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27913.htm

The two most destructive forces of human nature—greed and envy—drive the financiers, the bankers, the corporate mandarins and the leaders of our two major political parties, all of whom profit from this system. They place themselves at the center of creation. They disdain or ignore the cries of those below them. They take from us our rights, our dignity and thwart our capacity for resistance. They seek to make us prisoners in our own land. They view human beings and the natural world as mere commodities to exploit until exhaustion or collapse. Human suffering, wars, climate change, poverty, it is all the price of business. Nothing is sacred. The Lord of Profit is the Lord of Death.

The pharisees of high finance who can see us this morning from their cubicles and corner officers mock virtue. Life for them is solely about self-gain. The suffering of the poor is not their concern. The 6 million families thrown out of their homes are not their concern. The tens of millions of pensioners whose retirement savings were wiped out because of the fraud and dishonesty of Wall Street are not their concern. The failure to halt carbon emissions is not their concern. Justice is not their concern. Truth is not their concern. A hungry child is not their concern.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27919.htm

Isn't it remarkable that the only political leader involved in the madness in the Middle East and North Africa, who makes any sense and who actually seems to know what he is talking about - and who isn't lying all the time - is Gadaffi!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v ... re=player_embedded#at=324

Of course, this opinion may require 15 min of your life, flame away those who have no ability to think for this long.........

You've got it all figured out.

http://english.pravda.ru/opini ... 3-message_from_qaddafi-0/

and if one's not too lazy to just watch tv and eat everything they give you, you can easily find libyan forums (i found like americans were looking for jobs in libya), statistics about libya, even US reports and informations about libya...and you can find out, that libya has average salary over $80000, they have free state health care in combination with private, they have free education from elementary to university and country is even paying for studying abroad, they have mobile schools for bedouins living in deserts and almost everyone who works instantly gets a place to live and most probably also a car.

+this video http://rt.com/usa/news/democracy-promotion-usa-regime/
and it's certain libyans have absolutely no reason to want american democracy

When the Rebels are ripping people to pieces after them saying "My heart is with Gadaffi" and then eating it from the charred corpse I think we can safely say they are as bad as each other.

Gaddafi is a saint.
In 1984. Gaddafi started plotting terrorist acts inside the United States. One of the leading groups receiving Gaddafi's money was the Nation of Islam. Al-Rakr, a Libyan-financed gang in Chicago, declared in 1984 that it was preparing for a "race war" to "settle scores with whites". Members of the gang were arrested in 1986 for preparations to bomb government buildings and bring down American planes. In 1986 Libyan state television announced that Libya was training suicide squads to attack American and European interests.

Gaddafi has said that "execution is the fate of anyone who forms a political party"

Libyans are free.

The regime often executed dissidents publicly and the executions are rebroadcast on state television channels.
Libya under Gaddafi was the most censored country in the Middle East and North Africa, according to the Freedom of the Press Index.

Things were just peachy in Libya, don't let anyone tell you otherwise or you will be executed.

Quote from dadge :

wow, that was two pages of i couldn't give a flying fcuk. and there was me thinking this thread was about a new expansion pack for Arma II. i wonder if they discuss LFS in Libyan forums.

agreed, though i can't stand people jumping on these hot topic situations stating " facts " when we can't even get the weather right.

Libya wasn't, and still isn't the worst country to be in, in Africa.