Libya no-fly zone

1) it is not pretty clear that at least some are honest freedomfighters,btw,even if there are some,it is irrelevant :never heard of fellow travellers,or of Kerensky ? The Egyptian Kerensky is already known :El Baradei
2) in the past,there have been AQ rebellions in Libya (not directed by honest freedom fighters) and now a new rebellion,a coincidence ?
3) Still translating the situation in the ME in US terms,of course :the rebellions are 1776 again :the people of the ME fighting against the Arab versions of king George III,directed by the ME Washington,Jefferson,Hamilton,.....and LaFayette (an idea,why not Colin Powell?) How is it clear that the concept of (western) liberty is well known ?
It is 1979 again :the same false forecasts (Andrew Young:Khomeini will eventually be hailed as a saint,CIA analysis in 1978:Iran is not in a revolutionary,or prérevolutionary situation),the same wishfultlhinking :if an Arab is talking about liberty,he must be a US friendly democrat .The same irresistible tendency to blindly follow a rat-catcher.
All these expensively Harvard etc educated people at the CIA,State Department,White House,have no common sense .Of course,they never heard of the civil war in Algeria between the local dictator and ...the Islamists,with some 100000 people (women and children) massacred and never were thinking that the same could happen where the Islamists would take power .

 

To anyone with an open mind it is.

Not really. But I brought it up because you stated it wasn't even a concept they were familiar with. It thus illustrates the quality of your "observations" and the extent of your biases if nothing else.

I will also note that the political system that defined that term failed utterly. I'll also note that there were quite a few communist in the America First movement that hardly meant they controlled it.

HOw about telling us a little about them then? Like dates and numbers.

What makes you think so? I certainly haven't suggested it. Or is this just another attempt to dodge questions?

By the quotes from Lybians as well as others of ME origin.

Or not. Most likely not.

I don't know what you are forming your opinions on but that's hardly what is reported here.

I see you are refering to a myth to support your position on the opinions and attitudes of a large divergent group of people. Right .....

That is rather obviously fallacious. I'd say it was based on ignorance but the only way that anyone could be that ignorant is if they were blinded by their own vision of reality.

A rather inane assumption to make. I'd venture to guess most know more about it than you do. By the way where did you get the numbers from?

 

Lates news :Fights near Brega. The Rebellion has asked for a cease fire which was refused by Kadhafi.

 

IMHO, Insurrection of Libya is that the eastern tribes, out of power, have rebelled against K, who´s power is based on the tribes of the West. There is not much oil, the rebels are the "army" of Pancho Villa ... We do not know what is the purpose of allies ... What are we doing there?

 

what are we doing there :diggering our own grave.

 

about the Islamist insurrection in Algeria:
"Algeria civil war 1992-present " is giving 70000 civilians slaughtered
"BBC News Algeria country profile":more than 150000 people were slaughtered.

 

why would there be freedom fighters? Because they are saying so ? Hitler also was talking about peace .

 

About El Baradei (the darling of the western liberals) :he already has been booed and threatened in Egypt.Why ?
He is talking as a Western (English,about democracy)
He is dressed as a western
He is living (in wealth) abroad
He has no feeling with the average Egyptian
For the average Egyptian,he only is an Uncle Tom,a Benedict Arnold .
But,still,there will be people cherishing the illusion that the Western ideals of the Enlightenment are universal,and that the Islam world is waiting to adopt them ,and that they are willing to become westernized,under the direction of a western intellectual elite.
It is the opposite :the Islam world-Moslims are considering that their civilisation-institutions are superior to the West,and that the West has to adapt,not the Islam
ex:today news :in Southern Afghanistan,7 UN staff have been murdered because of a Koran burning in Florida
exn the site of O9/11,Moslims are demanding place for a mosque
ex:in a lot of European cities,Moslims are chasing (non Moslim) gays .

 

The rebels anounced earlier today they had retaken Marsa el Brega but later reports state fighting around that location is still heavy. Apparently 10 "rebels" were killed by a coalition air strike.

Two refugee boats were reported lost today.

Hate to agree with K but I think a ceasefire at this stage, with no defined front lines, is impossible to implement and is merely aimed at foreign consumption (read propaganda). I also very much doubt the "rebels" have the necessary command and comunications structure to enforce their side of a ceasefire. This battle looks like it can have only two possible outcomes K regains control or K is decisevey defeated. What happens in the second case is anybody's guess the "rebels" look like a mix of islamists, tribes, idealists, foreign "help", and other groups. IMO it's not likely they will solve their differences by free elections if they win but one can always hope.

 

From what little I have seen I agree with TOS, Khadaffi has no need for a ceasefire now. The rebels do, and that is reason enough for Khadaffi to say no. It seems clear that the rebels, even with coallition airpower, cannot win without a large influx of weapons and people to show them how to use them properly. Even so it could take a couple of years to equip and train the rebels to the point where they could overcome Khadaffi's regular army.

 

So how does that translate into over 100,000 women and children? Even if it is relevant.

 

You have made some statements above that I can see no way at all you could in any way support with fact or logic and others that are closely approaching that. Based on your record to date I see no reason at all to accept your analysis.

This is a very good example of poor logic. Just taking a look at your examples.
1) The murder of UN staff in Afghanistan in no way implies anything about the position of the "Islamic World". Indeed it's not even clear that the Koran burning was the cause it may simply have been an excuse. Even if it was the cause there is little to indicate that the majority of Muslims support or condone it.
2) They are not demanding a mosque on the 9/11 site. They were asking quite reasonably to build one in the area PLS note that there are already mosques in that area. So you are wrong and even if you were right it wouldn't be relevant to your point.
3) Again nothing to indicate that these actions are sanctioned or approved by the "Islamic World". Indeed such things have happened in the US with Christians being the culprits there's even a preacher that shows up regularly at military funerals to complain about homosexuals.

 

Heh heh, they never told you whom shot that Lybian jet out of the sky but I CAN tell you, that he was a Knights Cross Recipient and the highest scoring fighter pilot ever-and is a German ;-))

They are afraid to let it out that Germans are fighting them now ;-))

 

Still defending the indefensible
Facts
1)Muslim terrorists are responsible for the dead of 3000 US citizens
2)anti christian pogroms by Moslims in Nigeria,Pakistan,Egypt,Iraq,... are warp and woof
3)pogroms in Western Europe against people who are not Muslim and homosexual are warp and woof
4)in Western European districts populated by a Muslim majority,all christian symbols must disappear
5)all these things are condoned by the Islam world
6) none of these things are condemned by the Islam world
7)but ,the opinion of LWD is still that the demands for a mosque near the 09/11 site (in a district with very few Muslims) are reasonable .

 

About El Baradei :a very quick search on the web was resulting in 9 references on the attack on El Baradei .
ex:following Al Arabya,he was attacked by people crying they did not want an American agent (=some B.Arnold,or Uncle Tom) in their country .
ex:El Baradei came under criticism for his frequent trips abroad and was accused of being out of touch with the reality of Egyptian life.
Remember my description of El Baradei as some one speaking as a Western,dressed a a western,living(in wealth)abroad,having no feeling with the average Egyptian?
Of course not,you don't remember,because it would contradict your world-picture (that of a tolerant Muslimworld,sharing with us the same ideals and aspirations)

 

Heavy fights in Misrata (West) and two red Cross ships have escorted dozens of wounded Rebels , some armless and worse to Benghazi (east) or Tunesia. The US. and the French are bombing the Brega front , the US has agreed to extend the strikes for some time. Italy wants to expel the illegals that reached Lampeduza Island.

 

Most Lampedusa "refugees" are from Tunisia not Lybia but as they are nearly all "papers-less" we don't know for sure. Lampedusa is a very small island with limited fresh water sources and the influx of refugees has more than doubled the local population with obvious problems, yesterday the bodies of around 70 people from one of the boats which "didn't make it" were washed ashore.
Fighting close to Misurata and Brega continues.

In a rather unexpected volteface Italy has officialy recognized the rebels, is that the second official recognition after France or where there others in betwen?
Informaton about Italian military involvement is very confused.

Al Jazeera reported "spontaneous" demonstrations in Bengazi today against current NATO policy, but whether they wanted less or more "intervention" is not clear.

 

Thanks for this extra information Tired, I wasn't aware Italy has now recognized the Rebel Government too.

 

Here's a French reporter's view on just what the Libyan rebels may have in mind. Somehow democracy and islam just aren't compatible.

Pajamas Media » Libyan Rebel Commander: ‘Cut Gaddafi

 

I'm sorry, but saying that Islam and democracy aren't compatible is ignorant and slanderous. There is nothing about Islam itself that would inhibit the establishment of a democracy. The majority of Muslims would embrace a democracy and are willing to fight for it as we saw and are seeing now in the Middle East. However, when was the last time you read an article or saw a news story discussing a poll done in the Muslim world about democracy and freedom? Or a news story on the day in the life of an average Muslim? Arabs have been systematically denigrated by the media and and film industries to such an extent that the idea of Muslim deviance has been cemented in the brain of the average American, a process that transpired indirectly and over a long period of subconscious movie- and media-viewing. The only people you ever hear about are the extremists.

Here lies the danger of a single story. If a small group (say 10,000 out of 2 billion) U.S. citizens went viral in opposing democracy and calling for the demise of the United States, no one would think to say that all Christians oppose democracy and freedom. Yet, we continue to equate all Muslims with this a small group of extremists because it is the only story we are hearing.

Perhaps democracy is not compatible with terrorists and radicals. But this has nothing to do with Islam or with the majority of the Muslim population. These terrorist and radicals are not terrorists and radicals because they are Muslim. They are terrorists and radicals because they like to cause terror, kill, and oppress, NOT because they are Muslim. Islam has been perverted in the name of violence just as any other religion could or has. Look at the Ku Klux Klan, the Inquisition, or other white supremacists. If Jarad Laughtner was Muslim, we would have seen a tremendous outcry against Islam and the attack would have been labeled one of Islamist terror, even if there was no connection to the Middle East. Yet do we hear a similar outcry against Christians? Is he being labeled as a terrorist and held without trial? No, he is not. Why?