Response to MADem (Reply #45)
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 01:32 PM
freshwest (50,760 posts)
52. From that first link, where you sit certainly does decide where you stand!
...Mr Cameron said he was "proud" of the role Britain played in Nato airstrikes to protect Libyan civilians after the uprising against Gaddafi's rule began in February.
DUers fought over American planes being sent there. Those who supported NATO were labeled warmongers, not caring about killing civilians with the air strikes, and that Obama wanted endless war. There were rumors CIA agents manufactured civilian groups to make people think there was opposition to a loved Qaddaffi. I fell in the 'let them fight it out alone' camp, as I thought the past had been forgiven. I did not know the history of the region, other than Reagan bombed to kill Qaddaffi. I couldn't see that man doing anything right, and still can't.
Different groups pumped up opposition during the NATO bombing runs, such as the GOP and Infowars. They claimed it was not humanitarian, that Qaddaffi was being targeted as part keeping a PNAC-style foreign policy for the oil. Or that Obama was doing dirty work for all the global banksters. The different currency they said Qaddaffi was going to use was the basis of the attacks. That idea was floated about Iraq and Iran going to the Euro thus becoming bankster targets. That's why I've let up on that theme, it's crying wolf now, it's as convenient as the red scare on the right. It's almost as deep as the Assange story has become.
And he said today was a time to remember Gaddafi's victims, including those who died when Pan-Am flight 103 was bombed over Lockerbie, Wpc Yvonne Fletcher who was gunned down in a London street and all those killed by the IRA using Semtex explosives supplied by Libya...
I haven't heard anyone argue about those events, except to say the UK was the offending party historically and bring up police state tactics to excuse the actions of the IRA. In the USA, it was Ireland that was seen as the victim, but over time I learned the relationship between the Emerald Isle and England goes back much further and is very complex. IDK if anyone would have supported Qaddaffi in those days except as part of revolution against the Empire in some form.
There is a built-in bias against police in many quarters, even the unarmed police as the UK had at that time. Police reflect the population, and we have plenty in this country who insist on arming themselves in full military gear, ready to go to war with the government and want to be able to outgun the police. There have always been outrages committed by those in power historically. But in modern America, they reflect the reality of the public's martial mentality.
Anyway, I've got to go out and do some things. Appreciating another thought provoking thread where I get to put in my little two cents in and get some good information from DUers with a wider perspective on events than I have been focused on most of my life.
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
From that first link, where you sit certainly does decide where you stand!
|Nye Bevan||Feb 2013||#21|
Please login to view edit histories.