• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Nato strike kills Gaddafi son

Turkey doesn't oppose the mission, they oppose the killings. Erdogan was bitching about the intervention initially but that isn't the issue anymore.

Ummm.....what is the issue? Protecting the innocent or killing the innocent?

*They* oppose the killing but *they* continue to do the killing?

I'll tell you what the real issue is......Where in hell do we get the right to intervene?

Do what you want so long as exercising your rights and freedoms doesn't infringe on someone else's rights and freedoms. Ok, thats cool, but remember that also applies to individuals and nations. If we believe in individual freedom, then unless we're hypocritical, other nations have the right to decide what form of government they want. Either that or we decide we're going to be an empire and flat impose our will on people who don't want our rule.

Try to police your neighbors world and see how far that **** will get you
 
I'll tell you what the real issue is......Where in hell do we get the right to intervene?

From the same place we get all of our other rights. We have the most powerful military in the world.
 
Ummm.....what is the issue? Protecting the innocent or killing the innocent?

*They* oppose the killing but *they* continue to do the killing?

I'll tell you what the real issue is......Where in hell do we get the right to intervene?

When innocents are being slaughtered and those very innocents are asking you, as fellow human beings, to help them?

Do what you want so long as exercising your rights and freedoms doesn't infringe on someone else's rights and freedoms. Ok, thats cool, but remember that also applies to individuals and nations. If we believe in individual freedom, then unless we're hypocritical, other nations have the right to decide what form of government they want. Either that or we decide we're going to be an empire and flat impose our will on people who don't want our rule.

The type of government wanted in Libya has changed, it was changed when they took to the streets and it is them that is asking for the change, not the US. The simple reality is, the notion that "a nation should decide what gov type it wants" is just not true for Arab states. The governments there dont work like they do here. The governments there impose THEIR will on the people, and in the west the people impose THEIR will on the government.

It is therefore not NATO that is deciding who or how Libya is ruled. It is the Libyan people, and unfortunately the old is trying to cling to the status quo and will kill to ensure that happens. We are merely "aiding" that process of forceful transition.
 
Last edited:
. We are merely "aiding" that process of forceful transition.

When 3 children are killed by an air strike in a residential neigborhood, it may be an occasion to review NATO targeting practices.


"The arrest and assassination of Ngô Đình Diệm, then president of South Vietnam, marked the culmination of a successful CIA-backed coup d’état led by General Dương Văn Minh in November 1963. On the morning of November 2, 1963, Diệm and his adviser, younger brother Ngô Đình Nhu, were arrested after the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN) had been successful in a bloody overnight siege on Gia Long Palace in Saigon. The coup was the culmination of nine years of autocratic and nepotistic family rule in South Vietnam. "

Arrest and assassination of Ngo Dinh Diem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



What happened to the good old days, when the US CIA could pull off a regime change, and the news media would not figure it out for years and years?


//
 
Last edited:
My main beef with this is that Obama lied to us. NATO lied to us. We're sitting here hearing them say that this we only seek to neutralize Qaddafi's military ability. Now, we're off apparently trying to assassinate him and his son and grandchildren. I don't like the guy, but this is not right, and in violation of international law.
 
My main beef with this is that Obama lied to us. NATO lied to us. We're sitting here hearing them say that this we only seek to neutralize Qaddafi's military ability. Now, we're off apparently trying to assassinate him and his son and grandchildren. I don't like the guy, but this is not right, and in violation of international law.

How was any of this predicament planned in your mind? I'll say it once and i'll say it again. The area of target was a C3I hub for Gadaffi's soldiers. That was why it was a target, full stop.
Unless Obama is a psychic no lying was done.
 
How was any of this predicament planned in your mind? I'll say it once and i'll say it again. The area of target was a C3I hub for Gadaffi's soldiers. That was why it was a target, full stop.
Unless Obama is a psychic no lying was done.



So the misseles were inaccurate? Not just one missel, but three hit the palatial manision? How far was the hub from the mansion?

Link to an areal photo?



//
 
So the misseles were inaccurate? Not just one missel, but three hit the palatial manision? How far was the hub from the mansion?

Link to an areal photo?



//

The entire perimeter targeted WAS the hub, it's where operations where conducted in the 80's also.
 
There is no reason to believe NATO knew Gadaffi was there at the time of the bombing and there is no reason to believe he was the target of the attack.

Either they screwed up and bombed a building they didn't mean to bomb, or they deliberately bombed the home of Gadaffi's youngest son, knowing he lived there with his family. NATO is denying the whole thing, and since Gadaffi's regime isn't really big on the truth, there's no way to know what really happened.

Look, I have no problem with NATO blowing up the homes of every Gadaffi in Tripoli. Gadaffi sure hasn't been shy about blowing up the families of thousands of Libyans. But if that's what the plan is, make certain that the house you blow up has a Gadaffi inside that has been actively involved in the regime's carnage, then publicly own it. Seriously, since the bomb missed the senior Gadaffi by minutes, it's clear to me that it was a failed assassination attempt. I just get annoyed when the powers that be insult our intelligence with b.s. denials and/or excuses. Man up, NATO. We'll respect you in the morning. Honest. :)
 
lol, the hypocrisy here is unreal.

The US has a long history of supporting dictators when it suits them. One of WAS ****ing gadaffi, Mubarak, Pinochet...

Need I go on.

So, we did the same thing with Saddam. Once he turned on us and on his own people, he went down. That just shows that we don't let history determine the future. I don't call that hypocrisy, I call that consistency. Just because we supported this man at some point during his 40 year reign doesn't mean we won't slam him if he starts using his own fighter jets to bomb his own innocent civilians.
 
Last edited:
When 3 children are killed by an air strike in a residential neigborhood, it may be an occasion to review NATO targeting practices.


"The arrest and assassination of Ngô Đình Diệm, then president of South Vietnam, marked the culmination of a successful CIA-backed coup d’état led by General Dương Văn Minh in November 1963. On the morning of November 2, 1963, Diệm and his adviser, younger brother Ngô Đình Nhu, were arrested after the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN) had been successful in a bloody overnight siege on Gia Long Palace in Saigon. The coup was the culmination of nine years of autocratic and nepotistic family rule in South Vietnam. "

Arrest and assassination of Ngo Dinh Diem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



What happened to the good old days, when the US CIA could pull off a regime change, and the news media would not figure it out for years and years?


//

And what followed was a decade of bloody warfare, the most divisive in our history since the civil war, followed by a stunning defeat of the greatest military power on Earth, and finally a reunification of Vietnam. Let's hope history doesn't repeat itself.
 
So, we did the same thing with Saddam. Once he turned on us and on his own people, he went down.

Bull****, the U.S. government turned a blind eye to everything Saddam did up until he invaded Kuwait. Had Saddam not done that, the U.S. would have let him continue to kill his own people. Hell, even the Taliban in Afghanistan were given a free pass by the U.S. government until they harbored Al-Qaeda after 9/11. The hypocrisy STANDS and is well noted.
 
NATO has defended its targeting for missles, rather than appologizing for killing civilians, and starting a review of targeting practicies and procedures.

Double Standards can backfire, like when Kennedy supposedly tried to assasinate Castro, with the Mafia, but he and his brother got hit themselves within a few years.

US CIA has never applogized for Guatemalla, or Viet Nam "suicides"

This is all Khadaffi's fault. He's at war, has a communications center in his home, and didn't more his family to safety. The blood is on his head.
 
From the same place we get all of our other rights. We have the most powerful military in the world.

Really??....The Arab countries know that militarily, they can't stand against the US. Hell, all of them together couldn't stand up to just the US Military if we were dedicated and resolved.

The only reason they were quiet for awhile was because they were so overmatched militarily that they couldn't do much, but you know, the tables may eventually turn. Enter...modern explosives

They have found our weakness and their comparative strength. Modern explosives allow just one individual to kill and injure dozens or 100s if he's willing to die in the process. And they ****ing are that dedicated.

Frankly, the most powerful military in the world does not know how to defeat such an enemy. Do you?
 
Bull****, the U.S. government turned a blind eye to everything Saddam did up until he invaded Kuwait. Had Saddam not done that, the U.S. would have let him continue to kill his own people. Hell, even the Taliban in Afghanistan were given a free pass by the U.S. government until they harbored Al-Qaeda after 9/11. The hypocrisy STANDS and is well noted.

So how is the USA supposed to win with bull**** liberals? If we go after all dictators who kill their people your crapwad party calls us occupiers and if we only kill a few you call us hypocrits. By all means if you dont like it here, leave. And don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
 
Aww, did some wibble wiberal get his little butt huwt by dat mean ol conswerative? Or worse, get huwt by won dat talk bad bout your messiah?

Well MY Gods Troops just got Osama Bin Ladin!!!!! Who the ass clown now? HUH?
 
I couldn't kill kids in cold blood and I couldn't order someone else to do it either.


Have a nice day :)

Well la dee daa for you.. :roll:You want a medal or something?:roll:

You have a nice night!
 
Well la dee daa for you.. :roll:You want a medal or something?:roll:

Terrorists are the target. They have more than proven themselves to meet the standard. It is therefore a valid operation.

But once you deviate, the course of action and start blowing up innocent women and kids, you forfeit your right to continue to live.

That is all there is and that's enough.
 
Either they screwed up and bombed a building they didn't mean to bomb, or they deliberately bombed the home of Gadaffi's youngest son, knowing he lived there with his family. NATO is denying the whole thing, and since Gadaffi's regime isn't really big on the truth, there's no way to know what really happened.

The compound bombed was where Gadaffi lived but also the command centre of operations. He has a bunker that he doesn't use (we know that now anyway), because he would - much to the surprise of NATO - rather house his family inside a military target. Not our problem.
 
A Nato air strike in the Libyan capital, Tripoli, has killed the son of the Libyan leader, Colonel Gaddafi, a government spokesman has said.

I am beginning to have nothing but sympathy for Gaddafi.
Libya under his reign, despite suffering casulties is in a much better position than 60+% of Africa and he is probably a merciful leader compared to the dictators US funds and supports.

I'll believe this is a freedom mission when the US and the West with their "humanitarian efforts" turn the guns on Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria and countless others including allies who is killing their own people but ofc, that won't happen for a long time.
This is even more stupid than Iraq.
 
I am beginning to have nothing but sympathy for Gaddafi.
Libya under his reign, despite suffering casulties is in a much better position than 60+% of Africa and he is probably a merciful leader compared to the dictators US funds and supports.

I'll believe this is a freedom mission when the US and the West with their "humanitarian efforts" turn the guns on Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria and countless others including allies who is killing their own people but ofc, that won't happen for a long time.
This is even more stupid than Iraq.

Why do people who so desperately try and paint NATO as hypocrites forget reality? Do you think from a military point of view it is possible to intervene in those countries the way we have in Libya? The geopolitical nature of Iran and Syria is substantially different to that of Libya.

We leave you people to slaughter each other and it's our fault, we lend a helping hand and we want oil. It's borderline pathetic.
 
Why do people who so desperately try and paint NATO as hypocrites forget reality? Do you think from a military point of view it is possible to intervene in those countries the way we have in Libya? The geopolitical nature of Iran and Syria is substantially different to that of Libya.

We leave you people to slaughter each other and it's our fault, we lend a helping hand and we want oil. It's borderline pathetic.

You'd have a point if your people weren't funding these people and have been for decades.
There is one reason we are in Libya. It begins with O and ends in L and the middle letter is I.

Humantarian reasons. The ****ing cheek of the West especially UK. Where was British integrity when we were funding Libya eh? Where was it when we gave them weapons and planes and bombs and invited them over to UK for some bloody tea and scones

I have nothing but sympathy for Gadaffi and is the lesser of two evils.
If he is removed, I can't wait to see what happens with the potential civil war. I hope the West maintains it's invisible high moral ground then but no doubt it'll do the usual.
Fund a side to win and then bribe it off
 
You'd have a point if your people weren't funding these people and have been for decades.
There is one reason we are in Libya. It begins with O and ends in L and the middle letter is I.

B A S E L E S S C O N S P I R A C Y would be a better description. We "funded" Muammer BEFORE he started bombing his own people. It's not called hypocrisy, it's called consistency. At the end of the day, and i know you've said it yourself before, we have no reason to actively harm a regime unless the people of that nation call upon regime change and then met with a violent response.

How exactly are you suggesting this is for oil?

Humantarian reasons. The ****ing cheek of the West especially UK. Where was British integrity when we were funding Libya eh? Where was it when we gave them weapons and planes and bombs and invited them over to UK for some bloody tea and scones

The UK prioritized it's national interests, sorry, is that a crime? Last i checked those very interests protected YOU as a British individual (remember what happened last time we pissed Muammer off?).

It was acceptable to prioritize our safety as a nation over the oppression of some but the outright massacre of entire towns and cities cannot be tolerated and that is what we are seeing now. THAT is the harsh reality of things, not this left wing idealism. The world isn't black and white no reason why foreign policy should be.

I have nothing but sympathy for Gadaffi and is the lesser of two evils.

Then i call into question your respect for the dignity of human beings.
 
Then i call into question your respect for the dignity of human beings.

The UK prioritized it's national interests, sorry, is that a crime?

Lol.

Don't bother Kaya
Clearly national interests is superior to that of the dignity of human beings when we were funding weapons and bombs to those same monsters we are now apparently fighting for in the name of said human dignity.
You have no morality on this issue. No one in the Western countries do so take off your mask and stop pretending you hold any right to preach to others about the morality of humanity and dignity.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom