• 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!

Gaddafi killed as Libya's revolt claims hometown

It was part of Obama's "Muslim outreach." He's handing the Muslim Brotherhood a country or three.
 
I imagine the blood thirsty are rubbing their hands in glee at this. He was a very bad person, but a human being. Well, the media will have a hay day over this...poor Obama...he'll have to wait a day or two for his loyal subjects (the media) to grant him homage again.

Or, on the flip side, they could totally spin this as a foreign policy victory for him.
 
Since when is assassination "foreign policy victory?"
 
It is good another tyrant has left us.
 
To be replaced with what? Tyranny under an Islamist label?

I don't know the future. What I do know is that it is good to be rid of tyrants, though.
 
Since when is assassination "foreign policy victory?"

When the bad guy dies...you know, the one who wears a black hat. The good guy wears a white hat so we know he's a good guy. Gosh, now we have to find someone else to hate...well I am sure the media will inform us soon who that should be.
 
I don't know the future. What I do know is that it is good to be rid of tyrants, though.

The future is pretty obvioius, since the Muslim Brotherhood was the impetus behind this coup.
 
The future is pretty obvioius, since the Muslim Brotherhood was the impetus behind this coup.

Well, I have thoughts on that. The Muslim Brotherhood is an enemy.

Hopefully our government will be wise with cleaning up the rest of this mess.
 
Well, I have thoughts on that. The Muslim Brotherhood is an enemy.

Hopefully our government will be wise with cleaning up the rest of this mess.

Dream on. Obama is content to replace Gaddafi's throat cutters with Mohammed's throat cutters.
 
Dream on. Obama is content to replace Gaddafi's throat cutters with Mohammed's throat cutters.

Well, if that be the case, then there will be hell to pay should more loss of life happens.

I do not know the future.
 
Why else would we be in there? Syria is meaningless outside of the context of oil security. It's the whole reason why the west installed Gaddafi in the first place.

Because it would undermine our image considerably if we had not intervened and allowed Gaddaffi to continue his slaughter. There is no Arab consensus to intervene in Syria - there was in Libya, and it was considerable.


That's basically what I just said. Oil security is security.

Security isnt just oil security. The destabilization of Libya had a significant impact on the stability of Europe and the world economy. As a bloc that promotes Democracy, our intervention there was symbolic of our aim to support it and promote Democracy globally, because those are the fundamental beliefs of our systems, because after trying everything else we believe it is the only system of rule that will get us as close to "freedom" in its pure definition without the complete breakup of society and because we believe it is the most important way of contributing to our fellow man. If we had held any other attitude during the Cold War, we wouldnt be here today, and the opposing bloc in the 21st century is Tyranny.


We don't need to go to war to secure those supplies. This is about us directly controling the supplies. The west has made it a policy to not negotiate for oil, but to simply invade and take it, installing dictators along the way. I'm not sulking, but simply pointing out the hypocrisy of our foreign policy. On the surface we're about freedom and democracy but our actions say otherwise.

Sad truth is, we dont live in a Utopian society. You need to accept that sometimes in life we need to go against our values at the expense of some for the common good of all. We didnt fund the Mujahedeen because we foresaw they would turn against us, even though we knew they had a violent Islamic agenda and that they would subject their populations to them.

But we did it to fight an even greater threat to our freedom; Communism. And guess what? It worked. Just like Mubarak, the Saudis, Ben Ali and Syria played a role in fighting a common enemy that was far more of a threat and represented far worse things than these individual puppets ever did, could or would. And we knew by installing an iron fisted dictator on the Western paycheck, the rebellious sympathizers could be dealt with and crushed unlike what they could under a Democracy where they would likely cease power, and as a result be a strong and reliable ally in times of conflict.

And consequentially we still are superpowers, we still only represent 15% of the worlds population but generate 65% of the planets entire wealth. If we didnt act like hypocritical arseholes in nations that in effect hold the batteries of our economy, somebody else would have beaten us to it.
Not because we are "cruel hypocritical sissies" but because we know there is a time and a place for everything, and our freedoms and our economic needs come first before all.

We went into Libya to confront old injustices, old mistakes and a help sustain a new generation and we won it.

Not to mention... our government is never up front about oil security. Invasions always happen under false pre-texts. You're ok with the government lying to your face while using your tax dollars to cause civil upheaval, kill thousands of people (in the case of Iraq, it's in the hundreds of thousands), and then transfer oil profits to private interests?

Evidence?

Not anymore I don't. I used to believe that we stood for something greater, but I'm glad that delusion didn't last long. Our governments are no different in behavior toward foreign countries that some of the worst dictators in history. We slaughter millions to secure our luxury goods, and then the biggest insult of all is that we conceal it behind the tidy face of democracy and freedom.

We go about slaughtering innocent civilians for oil do we? I believe you are my deluded now then you was when you held your previous stance.
 
Last edited:
This is Al Jazeera's 'front page'. Various report available from this page say multiple government entities are confirming the body is Gaddafi. AJE - Al Jazeera English

Looks legit. Still, the NTC is going to look pretty silly if Gaddafi shows up on camera in a few days, as his son Saif al-Islam did during the Battle of Tripoli, nearly a day after he was supposedly captured. I'm not sure if that was just plain incompetence in the confusion of battle, or if it was a deliberate misinformation campaign to demoralize Gaddafi's loyalists...but either way it made the NTC look less-than-credible.
 
Does anyone have any info on how to ensure yet another corrupt politician doesn't replace Gaddafi? Does the White House have a strategy that seems practical?
 
Does anyone have any info on how to ensure yet another corrupt politician doesn't replace Gaddafi?

As opposed to an honest politician. Isn't that an oxymoron? :lol:

Does the White House have a strategy that seems practical?

I doubt it, and I hope not. It's really not our concern.
 
As opposed to an honest politician. Isn't that an oxymoron? :lol:



I doubt it, and I hope not. It's really not our concern.

I can understand and appreciate your prior statement, but for the latter I'm skeptical. If it is true that the Muslim Brotherhood wants to assume a leadership position, is it really impractical to think they might try to attack America with such newfound power/ability? Hasn't the Muslim Brotherhood attacked us before?
 
The Muslim Brotherhood isn't even the main motivating source behind the rebels, stop with the conspiracy theories.
 
The Muslim Brotherhood isn't even the main motivating source behind the rebels, stop with the conspiracy theories.

I don't have enough knowledg to say it is or isn't a conspiracy theory.

They may, they may not. Some evidence sure would help, though.
 
I don't have enough knowledg to say it is or isn't a conspiracy theory.

They may, they may not. Some evidence sure would help, though.

Do you have a wit of evidence to way that it is?
 
Do you have a wit of evidence to way that it is?

Do you have a "wit" of evidence to say that it isn't? To me, I understand there are different sides of the story. It's not in my nature to completely dismiss something as not even possible even though there are a large group of people who seemto think otherwise. As it stands, I'll not make any rush judgments until either side provides sufficient evidence to tip the scales.

It would be interesting to see what evidence Reg puts up to help his case.
 
Last edited:
I can understand and appreciate your prior statement, but for the latter I'm skeptical. If it is true that the Muslim Brotherhood wants to assume a leadership position, is it really impractical to think they might try to attack America with such newfound power/ability? Hasn't the Muslim Brotherhood attacked us before?

Not to my knowledge. But it's important to keep in mind that the Muslim Brotherhood is not a powerful organization working on a sinister plot behind the scenes. It's just a collection of people...some conservative Islamists, some mainstream Islamists, and some who aren't Islamists at all but simply like being part of the group for whatever reason. Furthermore, I have seen no indication that it's played a large role in Libya up to this point. In fact the conflict has been conspicuously secular in nature...I don't believe it would be possible for that many people to simply hide their true motives if they had something else in mind. And finally, even if the Muslim Brotherhood did come to power in Libya...meh. I see no reason to think it would be the end of the world. Libya deserves to have its chance at democracy just like anyone else. That probably won't happen overnight; it will probably be one step forward and one step backward for a while. But that's OK. That's the only way democracies can evolve.
 
Where are the Islamist democracies in the middle east, anyway?
 
Where are the Islamist democracies in the middle east, anyway?

There aren't any democracies in the Arab world period, secular or otherwise. Lebanon and Iraq have the contours of democracy, but even there the people don't truly have much say in who leads them. Hopefully that will soon change with Tunisia, Egypt, and possibly Jordan holding free and fair elections...but whether the government that emerges is secular or Islamist shouldn't really be our main concern. It's far more important that the government that emerges is stable, committed to democracy, at peace internally and with its neighbors, and is able to get its economy back on track.
 
Last edited:
Oh, excellent. I'm glad that whole thing's done with. Now if only they can manage to actually hold their country together.
 
Back
Top Bottom