And the UN Security Council closed session of yesterday was just for dinner or something!

Tomorrow, Friday, 25th, there will be a protest march against Kadhafi's Regime in Tunis, Tunisia. Like I mentioned it in "Tunisia Freed" topic, students have already answered the call and we hope that the number of protestors will be considerable as we believe it will be in the region of 1 million people. We'll first go to the Libyan embassy and then join the rest of the protestors urging the current transitional government of Tunisia, "escorted" by Ghannouchi (who was a key ally of the ousted president), to resign.


Also, congratulations to Egypt! You're a great country and you deserve the best like everybody else in this world.

They were rumors in the press that NATO was going to interfere with military forces, while the US threaten Kadhafi they will come after him.

What Kadhafi is doing is maddens...I don't see how the military could do something like this in Egypt.
anyone knowledgeable in the demography there?
From what I understand it's much more tribal, maybe that is what makes it possible.

A video of clashes from today if I'm not mistaken (lots of gun firing, and even a sound of a ricochet)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17LJxVv08Ck&feature=player_embedded#at=185

Written by Candlemass on 24.02.2011 at 20:35

They were rumors in the press that NATO was going to interfere with military forces, while the US threaten Kadhafi they will come after him.

What Kadhafi is doing is maddens...I don't see how the military could do something like this in Egypt.
anyone knowledgeable in the demography there?
From what I understand it's much more tribal, maybe that is what makes it possible.

A video of clashes from today if I'm not mistaken (lots of gun firing, and even a sound of a ricochet)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17LJxVv08Ck&feature=player_embedded#at=185

For all I've heard in France (well, reading Al-Jazeera blog, mostly), neither OTAN nor US nor Europe really do plan to do something. They threaten, but that's all. After all, since he said he wouldn't be a terrorist anymore in the early 2000's, the western governments were quite happy to deal with him. Plus, in Europe our governments are afraid for oil and immigrants coming... Khadafi had a lot of leverage on our poor bastards sitting in their high-ups chairs.
But threats won't move Ghadaffi, as he is quite a crazy bastard. And sadly, I'm pretty sure military intervention would actually give him more leverage...

Lmfao. just saw news footage of Iran's Aquavelvajad criticize Qaddafi for his violent response to protesters. Pot, meet kettle.

as for the US response... the white house can't even SPELL Libya.



not sure you should expect us to do fuck all, either. don't you all hate us for the last time we came in and dumped a dictator who had been killing his citizens?

Written by BitterCOld on 24.02.2011 at 21:25

not sure you should expect us to do fuck all, either. don't you all hate us for the last time we came in and dumped a dictator who had been killing his citizens?

The most serious observers did point up that too. And while an internaional armed (or at the very least humanitarian) response would have been much needed in Lybia, it would only have added more weight to Mr Madman-daffy ramblings...

Here is a part of the answer I was looking for...It's not only the military. It's foreign mercenaries too (according to rumors) .
The soldiers who refused to obey an order - were executed.

Why is the international community is so quite about this? How would support help Madman-daffy?

Written by Candlemass on 25.02.2011 at 08:52

Why is the international community is so quite about this? How would support help Madman-daffy?

Simply because some have no power to speak/react and those who have, they love dictators who oppress their people! - specially those of the middle east - they used to support the Arabian dictators for many years... Regarding Libya, Obama started to talk after 4 days! so fast response, he should have waited 1 week I guess! - when thousands were killed already - and what he said; ''there are some suggestions to discuss regarding the current situation in Libya!'' bowahahaha
USA, UK, the fake facades of human rights

Btw, i couldn't help but explode with laughter when Israeli officials where bitching about Mubarak and how must the world support him, and then bitching again about urging the world to 'force' Egypt to keep its peace treaty with Israel, and lastly when the pipes delivering Egyptian gas were blown up they're like: "oh this is it, we're ready for anything now, bring it on, bitch !!" ... but when Egypt allowed two Iranian war ships through Suez canal into the Mediterranean, Israel is now like: "Friends again ? we were joking with you"

LMFAO

I'm not in favor of further war and destruction, but i strongly ask every foreign country to stay the fuck out of Egypt's internal affairs, thank you very much but we can manage.

Written by Zombie on 25.02.2011 at 17:19

Btw, i couldn't help but explode with laughter when Israeli officials where bitching about Mubarak and how must the world support him,

Why am not surprised

Yep, those were the other comic events!

Written by Darkside Momo on 21.02.2011 at 19:15

According to some guy of Britain's Foreign Office, Gadhafi and family are flying to Venezuela.

Meanwhile, rumors are flying high of planes bombing the protesters in Tripoli. This bastard should be hanged.

I second that.

Anyone else furious with the comparison of Qaddhafi to Charlie Sheen? http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/quiz/2011/mar/01/muammar-gaddafi-charlie-sheen-quiz , http://www.theatlantic.com/search/?sort=time&source=magazine&q=gadhafi+sheen , etc. A clear attempt is being made by (sometimes) respectable journalists to laugh off a sadistic liar and murderer. This sort of thing doesn't bother me when it's done by comedians (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AS-ts5_nuF8&feature=related), but how can a morally serious journalist possibly compare an illegitimate leader of a struggling country who has ordered the bombing of his own people to a coke-sodden sitcom actor? It's disgusting.

Written by wormdrink414 on 04.03.2011 at 00:32

Written by Darkside Momo on 21.02.2011 at 19:15

According to some guy of Britain's Foreign Office, Gadhafi and family are flying to Venezuela.

Meanwhile, rumors are flying high of planes bombing the protesters in Tripoli. This bastard should be hanged.

I second that.

Anyone else furious with the comparison of Qaddhafi to Charlie Sheen? http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/quiz/2011/mar/01/muammar-gaddafi-charlie-sheen-quiz , http://www.theatlantic.com/search/?sort=time&source=magazine&q=gadhafi+sheen , etc. A clear attempt is being made by (sometimes) respectable journalists to laugh off a sadistic liar and murderer. This sort of thing doesn't bother me when it's done by comedians (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AS-ts5_nuF8&feature=related), but how can a morally serious journalist possibly compare an illegitimate leader of a struggling country who has ordered the bombing of his own people to a coke-sodden sitcom actor? It's disgusting.

It's an age old political tactic. When you are genuinely scared of something, you ridicule it so that the fear doesn't spread to the general populace. You should watch the movie "The Dictator" with Charlie Chaplin playin Adolf Hitler made during WW2. It is a way to act like you are not scared of the events. Even movies like "Team America" follows the same agenda. Ridicule what you fear. You trivialize it so that the general populace needn't be bothered.

Right now, Americ<a is trying to act like the events in North Africa are small trivial shit that doesn't really bother them. Ridicule is a cery effective way to do so, and thus keep the general public uninterested in the events and go about their daily lives.

Mubarak's governments Prime minister resigned yesterday (its about fucking time, no revolution in the world has ever thrown off its president but kept his PM, lol)
Hopefully the political and economic reforms and stability would start now.

Written by Zombie on 04.03.2011 at 17:31

Mubarak's governments Prime minister resigned yesterday (its about fucking time, no revolution in the world has ever thrown off its president but kept his PM, lol)
Hopefully the political and economic reforms and stability would start now.

What type of reforms are expected to occur in your opinion?

I'd read some stuff here in Sweden but I don't really trust western media on the issue.

I wasn't here from start of Topic,
I just hope US won't invade Libiya now :/ .... Libiya belongs to ppl of Libiya and africa not to US

About time the West intervened in Libya total bloodbath and massacres once again today. The problem is that the people of Libya are unarmed and being slaughtered by Kadhafi's troops and mercenaries.

I guess some countries just cares about the oil in Libya.

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 04.03.2011 at 22:52

About time the West intervened in Libya total bloodbath and massacres once again today. The problem is that the people of Libya are unarmed and being slaughtered by Kadhafi's troops and mercenaries.

The question is, once the west has established a presence in Libya, will they leave? If so, how long would that take?

Written by [user id=28526] on 05.03.2011 at 13:01

I guess some countries just cares about the oil in Libya.

offcours
none of us shouldn't be surprised if in future comes out truth that US had fingers in this situattion, maybe they just used those protest in Libiya's neighbourhood and start mess there, cause everyone knows that OiL is only what USA cares for,.... no humans no anything else just OIL

Well, the "dissolution" of the Egyptian secret service (kinda like the equivalent to the CIA) is a major public request right now, as they have been linked to various corrpution crimes including flase-flag operations, bombings, killings, assasinations, torturing, kidnap, spying, providing misinformation, and crimes related to money and economy.

also the police officers who were involved in killings of protesters and sniping them down from rooftops need to be put to trial.
and Mubarak's wealth needs to be investigated for possible (well, obvious) inflation due to corruption and misuse of power, so he needs to be put to trial and his wealth (well, our wealth) returned to us again.

the formation of a new constitution that reduces the power of the leader and changes our country from an authoritarian regime to a democratic one, also that constitution needs to include a bill of rights with at LEAST the basic human rights agreed upon by the UN

hmm, what else? ... oh the elections for a new parliament need to be done as we would have representatives for the people instead of having to go to Tahrir square every weekend and protest about our demands that have not been met yet

the declaration of the 'emergency state' has to end, as under emergency law the police have the power to arrest anyone anywhere and detain them without a trial (PS: Egypt has been in emergency state for the past FIFTY years which means that we've had ZERO human rights)

...

these are some of the main reforms that need to be done, urgently.

@Zombie: Agree with your whole post! Hopefully all that is done very soon.

No agenda here. "Why would you bring an agenda anyway, wormdrink?" Silence! I need someone to explain to me what exactly the argument against establishing a no-fly zone over Lybia is. Obviously there must be a reason for not doing it, other than, of course, a case of the weak-knees.

Hitchens is the only person I've been reading and trusting on the current situation in Lybia: http://www.slate.com/id/2287506/

(Question: Does Libya qualify as a Middle-Eastern country? The map in my room is suggesting that it doesn't.)

Hmm.. it could count as 'mid-world' not mid-east

Written by Zombie on 09.03.2011 at 21:30

Hmm.. it could count as 'mid-world' not mid-east

Speaking of Morocco, that's in the West... in fact : )
مغرب

Written by [user id=28526] on 05.03.2011 at 13:01

I guess some countries just cares about the oil in Libya.

I am really rather certain that there are easier ways to get more oil than by invading countries. I won't believe for a second that the Iraq war happened because American companies needed oil. That would be like killing children to get your hands on some hair for your wig factory, it makes no sense.

Written by [user id=105293] on 09.03.2011 at 23:56

I won't believe for a second that the Iraq war happened because American companies needed oil. That would be like killing children to get your hands on some hair for your wig factory, it makes no sense.

Hate to spoil your fun or ruin your rainbow-colored view of the world, but that's the sad fact of a world we live in
we shouldn't give up though, always have hope in a better tomorrow and actually WORK towards achieving it instead of denying that today's world is shit and refusing to believe obvious facts

Written by Zombie on 10.03.2011 at 02:29

Written by [user id=105293] on 09.03.2011 at 23:56

I won't believe for a second that the Iraq war happened because American companies needed oil. That would be like killing children to get your hands on some hair for your wig factory, it makes no sense.

Hate to spoil your fun or ruin your rainbow-colored view of the world, but that's the sad fact of a world we live in
we shouldn't give up though, always have hope in a better tomorrow and actually WORK towards achieving it instead of denying that today's world is shit and refusing to believe obvious facts

There's no need to be condescending just because I do not agree with you. Ever heard of offshore drilling? It carries a lot of environmental risks and it's expensive, but nowhere near as expensive as a war. The contracts that American companies got in Iraq were incidental, they were not the reason why U.S.A. invaded Iraq. I think it makes more sense that Iraq was invaded out of the fear that Saddam Hussein might one day acquire nuclear weapons and become a world-power, instead of just a regional power. If you find that the idea of world leaders being paranoid and thinking they can see into the future is rainbow-colored, then be my guest.

Written by [user id=105293] on 10.03.2011 at 10:24

Written by Zombie on 10.03.2011 at 02:29

Written by [user id=105293] on 09.03.2011 at 23:56

I won't believe for a second that the Iraq war happened because American companies needed oil. That would be like killing children to get your hands on some hair for your wig factory, it makes no sense.

Hate to spoil your fun or ruin your rainbow-colored view of the world, but that's the sad fact of a world we live in
we shouldn't give up though, always have hope in a better tomorrow and actually WORK towards achieving it instead of denying that today's world is shit and refusing to believe obvious facts

There's no need to be condescending just because I do not agree with you. Ever heard of offshore drilling? It carries a lot of environmental risks and it's expensive, but nowhere near as expensive as a war. The contracts that American companies got in Iraq were incidental, they were not the reason why U.S.A. invaded Iraq. I think it makes more sense that Iraq was invaded out of the fear that Saddam Hussein might one day acquire nuclear weapons and become a world-power, instead of just a regional power. If you find that the idea of world leaders being paranoid and thinking they can see into the future is rainbow-colored, then be my guest.

Bravo. My fellow lefties over here have the nasty tendency to assume that whenever we use our military power its done for our own economic gains. The argument that, imo, the Bush administration should have made is this: Since Saddam was a fascist who was slaughtering the people he controlled, burning Iraq's land (not to mention, seeking nukes and to burn the lands and control the peoples of other countries), we entered Iraq for the sake of the Iraqi people, particularly the Kurds. Throw on top of that that Saddam was seeking nukes and already had used WMD, and all of the argument that needs to be made is for the "anti-war" movement to make. The Team America argument, though hilarious and fair, takes the morality and superpower question and makes light of it.

Liberals here, however, through their indulgence of their anti-republican impulse, can't recognize real enemies when they see them. Case in point: http://www.youtube.com/watchfeature=player_embedded&v=xd9OYJMX9t4 .

(What's most infuriating about that video is the comparison the woman makes of Japanese-American concentration camps during WWII to Islamophobia. Hardly anyone appears able to distinguish between religious groups and races. Muslims are not a race. Religious groups are religious by choice. The same obviously doesn't apply to racial groups. On top of that, the people who fear Islam, aren't trying to send Muslims to "relocation centers". But this argument isn't really related to Iraq, so I digress.)

I can't blame people being paranoid about western intervention in Libya or any other middle-eastern country with a similar situation, I'm not saying that the statements people always make are totally true or false, but those kinds of interventions have earned certain reputation, hence the reason why people act paranoid. Sadly, we live in a world like this one.