|
Caro you crazy bastard, shine on, and for the love of god don't try to perform medicine on anyone.BeigeJacket posted:I'm still unclear on how some crazy goon managed to get into Libya and hook up with some militia without getting killed or deported. Getting into Libya is pretty easy, just take a plane to Egypt, and bus into Libya. A lot of Libyan people who were living abroad did it. In fact I believe the Tripoli brigade was full of them. I remember someone posting a video following their advance and they were lead by an Irish guy with balls of steel who one of his parents had fled from Libya years beforehand, but I believe he had never actually lived there.
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 17:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 00:45 |
|
|
He came from Egypt, got on a ammo smuggling boat from Benghazi to Misrata, and ended up fighting along side the Misratan forces. Do take into consideration these are the same forces most likely to have committed the various reported war crimes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 17:07
|
|
|
The point in the video where Caro apparently kills a man.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 17:11
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:Any of the forum Arabic speakers know what the people around him are saying? When he speaks they're relaying to each other what he's saying, they'd take his word seriously, so when he points out a position they relay it, so when he said he's trying to get a guy they're encouraging him by saying 'let this guy get his shot' or 'Did he get him yet?' the last few words are in English.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 17:13
|
|
|
Previous report said he had described himself as a consultant, so maybe they actually believe him. The Salon reported isn't a Something Awful forum member, he picked up on the story from the NPR comments, so good job those of you who posted there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 17:15
|
|
|
Not really wishing to de-rail the thread into a metaphysical debate about the course of history, but in a limited sense the view that 'history goes one way' holds some truth. Namely that when you give any freedoms to people for a sufficient amount of time, they will start to appreciate them to the point that it will be very hard to whip it out of them. Europe 1917-1945 is one example of when it didn't work so beautifully - many of the new democracies failed one by one until Germany and Soviet Union swept away the rest (except for  ).But when you let it really sink in to the culture, it becomes harder and harder to turn the direction. You will get occasional setbacks, like maybe people suddenly start to think that waterboarding people is a good idea, but it will take much to persuade people to revert to totalitarianism. Another thing is the free flow of information. First print, then radio and television and now internet have made it increasingly harder to block the sharing of ideas. It was simple to stop smugglers of opposition pamphlets and newspapers in the golden days, yet even that never worked 100% unless you wanted to fully close your borders, which never is a good idea. With later non-physical media this is even more obvious. Not even China can eternally keep employing a virtual Stasi to try to suppress dissent in the networks - at the point when every peasant, his wife and their children has a smart phone or internet computer, they would need government employed moderators in every village and street block, which simply isn't sustainable. The alternative - barring access to internet - is so costly for national economy that not even Cuba wants it. But like said, the 'march of history' is not completely irreversible, and over time, when facing great hardships, even the most progressive people's faith in freedom, equality and brotherhood can falter. And even technological advances could work against personal freedoms, but let's not go there because it's braincontrol chip zone down there. Not that there is necessarily just *one* way to go, for that matter. Eg. a semi-libertarian or a semi-socialist society are equally plausible outcomes for any modern society. Also a modern pluralistic democracy isn't objectively a better thing than a jungle tribe led by a shaman-king. That jungle tribe might still be there after our great societies have destroyed themselves through wars and eco catastrophies. Brown Moses posted:Great Steve Bell cartoon on Gaddafi's death Anything by Steve Bell is a masterpiece and He should be coronated as the Eternal God King of Political Cartoons.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 17:19
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:Qatar has admitted that it had hundreds of boots on the ground in the Libyan conflict, according to AFP. This is like the least surprising thing ever, and puts a good dent in the notion that this was an entirely popular uprising without significant military aid outside of being lent an airforce Ultras Lazio posted:and you and I both know what the best thing is about communists, they want to be iphone communists in the west but gently caress me if they go to live in Cuba/China etc...a bit like it used to be years and years ago in Italy, strongest communist party outside the Warsaw Pact and yet, no loving communist emigrated to USSR) Pasta e Fagioli communists. This is extremely ignorant, you know not of which you speak. Sounds like your knowledge of communism comes from Glen Beck or William F. Buckley. A Buttery Pastry posted:and in this case, The Capitalists.... The real cause of the Arab Spring isn't Twitter, it's food prices. And that's just not very sexy. This is just hilarious first of all because your condemning of anti-capitalism as somehow being conspiratorial is ludicrous in its brazen ignorance of reality, secondly because those food prices and the crisis revolving around it is, guess what, a well documented effect of global capitalism. There should be a tremendous amount of cognitive dissonance involved in holding both of those ideas simultaneously. Also: A Buttery Pastry posted:I think the thought that most of the leaders of the world don't really have that much of an idea of what they're doing is too terrifying for them to even consider, so they instead choose to believe that there is some kind of grand conspiracy. I think the thought that most of the leaders of the world know exactly what they're doing (or that the so called leaders of the world act all on their own without a veritable shitload of influence and assistance from various institutions)is too terrifying for you to even consider, so instead you choose to believe that events unfold due to wildly out of control mystical forces that determine outcomes seemingly randomly without any regard for past relations between entities or consideration for material conditions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 17:25
|
|
|
Ultras Lazio posted:Words About The death of islamism, Islam, and the crumbling of the saudi state. As a muslim and a saudi arabian, I disagree with your analysis of ‘the march of history’. if you read our history you'll find that for most of the last century the countries here has tried various forms of government from liberalism in Egypt at the turn of the century, to militant socialism and secularist governments later on, to hypocritical monarchism, all of which has ended and continue to end in disaster both in dealing with internal and external threats. all the options had failed, and for the last 20 years people have come to realize that not only democracy and freedom must be in place for accountability and to avoid the mistakes of unaccountable government, but that democracy must be solidified in our values and history as Islamic civilizations and provide a much more firm national compass as to who we are and how we navigate and build a future for ourselves. The problem is that many people think that the understanding of Muslims of their religion will evolve into the western model, which it won’t, because historical experience is vastly different. The trend here hasn’t been a ‘different Islam’ but rather a return to the democratic values that Islam represents from the early days of it, and a greater understanding for the populace of the region of the true meaning of what Islam is as a value system and as a civilizational compass rather than a tool for dictatorial governments. This is why Erdogan is so popular, not just because he’s a devout Muslim but because he represents the values of development for his country and democratic accountability yet unbending with his national dignity. Which is why that in democracies in the Arab world they will vote in Islamists who keep true to these values, who if they’re smart and treat people fairly, the islamists will always have a very strong voice. And thanks to democracy they will always be held accountable if they overstep their bounds. Islamism and Islam in the Arab body politic isn’t going anywhere, in fact I think it’s only beginning, and if they play their cards right, they might be the spearhead to the future for a very long time. It wont die, because the vast majority of Arabs believe it’s who we are and what our place in the universe is, and that lies in both democracy and Islam.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 17:34
|
|
|
On the topic of racist cartoons towards Arabs and Libyans, I was inspired by the recent rash of stuff coming out these days from people like Ramirez and others so I drew one myself:- Any critiques would be greatly appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 17:57
|
|
|
Ultras Lazio posted:Yes I do and yes you are right, I am just being positive... I don't mean to imply that good things never happen, or that people shouldn't be optimistic or hopeful about the future, but one should never just assume that we'd like 'evolve' past racism or religious extremism or something. The most dangerous thing someone can do is simply assume that a particular threat is 'behind us', as if we've now sorted it forever. It's fine to be an optimist, but always cut it with a bit of realism. So be optimistic that people will move away from that poo poo, but realistic to know you are never done combating it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 18:03
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:On the topic of racist cartoons towards Arabs and Libyans, I was inspired by the recent rash of stuff coming out these days from people like Ramirez and others so I drew one myself:- The threatening of Lady Liberty is good, but I feel like you need to include a niqabi somehow since there always seems to be one thrown in.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 18:10
|
|
|
farraday posted:The threatening of Lady Liberty is good, but I feel like you need to include a niqabi somehow since there always seems to be one thrown in. Yeah and she needs to look sad or scared and be in chains.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 18:12
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:As a muslim and a saudi arabian, I disagree with your analysis of ‘the march of history’. if you read our history you'll find that for most of the last century the countries here has tried various forms of government from liberalism in Egypt at the turn of the century, to militant socialism and secularist governments later on, to hypocritical monarchism, all of which has ended and continue to end in disaster both in dealing with internal and external threats. all the options had failed, and for the last 20 years people have come to realize that not only democracy and freedom must be in place for accountability and to avoid the mistakes of unaccountable government, but that democracy must be solidified in our values and history as Islamic civilizations and provide a much more firm national compass as to who we are and how we navigate and build a future for ourselves. I don't disagree, maybe is what we mean by Islamists then. For me, it is anybody that is "ists" about it. Professional, shall we say. Religion belongs to the church/mosque in an advanced society, the key in this case is "advanced" so, if you mean that in the short term, in a less advanced democracy, there will be a hanging on to diluted and adapted islamic values then I am all with you. It's natural, it's adviceable, it's fair to the sentiment. But I think and hope this will evenctually fizzle out with progress and education. To stay with a good example, the trajectory of the Democrazia Cristiana in Italy who held power for decades, after WW2, and now has been dead for a good few years, is close to my thought. (there's a derail waiting here: don't. I only mean in its historical context not how it came to its end) Naturally islam is there to stay however, its very meaning will be and already is being circumnavigated in all, all walks of life.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 18:13
|
|
|
Mr. Self Destruct posted:......This is extremely ignorant, you know not of which you speak. Sounds like your knowledge of communism comes from Glen Beck or William F. Buckley..... I do, I do. I just don’t have to justify to you. The communists I have met had tools in their hands, had red flags, there were a shitload of them and they fought in the streets of Italy for 30 odd years. Anni di Piombo means anything to you? (this derail is in defensive position and not worth more than 6 hours at best! 
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 18:22
|
|
|
Nuclearmonkee posted:Yeah and she needs to look sad or scared and be in chains. Needs more burqa.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 18:22
|
|
|
Ultras Lazio posted:Naturally islam is there to stay however, its very meaning will be and already is being circumnavigated in all, all walks of life. These truly are the end times. Ad-Dajjal (PBUH) is arrived.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 18:27
|
|
|
Ultras Lazio posted:I do, I do. I just don’t have to justify to you. Why do you suggest they should have gone elsewhere instead of continuing to fight for what they believe in where they live? There's a reason they didn't emigrate to the USSR, that would have been useless. The people you are describing are heroes but you seem to be writing them off because they were defeated, unless I'm misconstruing your point in the original quoted post in which case I apologize. It sure seemed at the time like you were suggesting people lack balls for being communists but not uprooting themselves to move to decidedly non-communist places like China and the USSR instead of trying to build communism at home and abroad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 18:31
|
|
|
OwlBot 2000 posted:These truly are the end times. Ad-Dajjal (PBUH) is arrived. Nah, just the end of a bad perception.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 18:37
|
|
|
Just a bit of trivia really... I'm currently in Geneva visiting the UN headquarters. There is a little gift shop in the building with flags of all the UN nations, postcards of the flags and pin badges. Interestingly enough, in place of the Green Libyan flags they have a UN flag now, except for the pin badges where you can buy the green Libyan flag. I was tempted to get one for shits and giggles, but not at 5 CHF. Oh their mugs and posters all have the old flag too. Some may also be interested to learn that there is a 187 day (so far) "camp/protest" of Iranians calling for UN observers to be permanently stationed at a refugee camp following the Green Revolution. I've had talks from several UN agencies, and pretty much unrestricted access to the buildings so any questions, feel free to ask.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 18:42
|
|
|
Jut posted:Interestingly enough, in place of the Green Libyan flags they have a UN flag now, except for the pin badges where you can buy the green Libyan flag. I was tempted to get one for shits and giggles, but not at 5 CHF. The only proper thing to do is buy them all and put them on sale in eBay. (Not really, a green rectangle is not quite as interesting to collectors as a swastika or hammer and sickle. Better luck with your next flag design, Muammar... oh)
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 18:49
|
|
|
Mr. Self Destruct posted:Why do you suggest they should have gone elsewhere instead of continuing to fight for what they believe in where they live? There's a reason they didn't emigrate to the USSR, that would have been useless. The people you are describing are heroes but you seem to be writing them off because they were defeated, unless I'm misconstruing your point in the original quoted post in which case I apologize. It sure seemed at the time like you were suggesting people lack balls for being communists but not uprooting themselves to move to decidedly non-communist places like China and the USSR instead of trying to build communism at home and abroad. Ok, you're right, maybe I worded my concept wrong. I'll try again starting with a solid point: what you call heroes were in large majority boys and girls and men and women totally carried away by their ideology and for it, they would fight against others, just as much carried away in other ideologies. The likes of me. Now, to me they were bastards then, not heroes. After 30 years and a lot of killings we all lost. All. There was no winner. Actually, if I want to be bitter about it, the Intellectuals and the Banks won. Champagne Socialism and Capitalism won. But I wont go there, I am a good loser. Now, the ones I refer to, the champagne socialists, the elite communists, the journalists, the sindacalists, the intellettuali...they, they never put paid to their words; they never hosed off and live in this superior system they so wanted to bring in Italy, to stay with the discussion, a bit like the various glorious imams today, you go get suicide, I drive a merc. You see, if people are just not willing to believe in your communist lunacy, if people are prepared to fight you in the streets, in the univeristies, in the bridges and train stations, if the people just don't loving want to know...what then, stops you from going to live your dream in a communist country? Your conscience is clear! You tried! Now, be selfish, go. gently caress that, you mean drive a trabant for a car?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 18:51
|
|
|
I wish I had unrestricted access to UN buildings, I would never leave. Find out if Hitler really went to Argentina, and what the UN plans to do with Syria I guess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 18:58
|
|
|
So I was in class when Gaddafi just started killing protesters with AA guns, in February? Some kids were saying how bad they felt for the Libyans and if possible they would go fight for them! I wish I had known how easy it was, they could have been like our dear crazy friend.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 19:01
|
|
|
Mr. Self Destruct posted:This is just hilarious first of all because your condemning of anti-capitalism as somehow being conspiratorial is ludicrous in its brazen ignorance of reality, secondly because those food prices and the crisis revolving around it is, guess what, a well documented effect of global capitalism. There should be a tremendous amount of cognitive dissonance involved in holding both of those ideas simultaneously. As for your other point, I don't deny that there are actual conspiracies that exploit and oppress people, that is clear as day. What I doubt is that there is a single large conspiracy holding them all together. Capitalism does not care from whom it steals, it only cares about acquiring wealth. Capitalism is a school of fish that generally move in the same way, feeding on others, but if one of them falters they all go in for the kill and cannibalize that unlucky bastard. You also kind of support my point by saying that the leaders of the world are influenced by many others. A lot of these leaders are well rewarded dupes, but not actually in on any conspiracy. Why would they need to be when you can bribe them just the same as these leaders bribe (or misdirect) their people? I'm probably quite red compared to most on this board, but that doesn't mean that I won't support an attempt at freedom by the Libyans just because capitalist interests also support it for their own reasons. My greatest hope for Libya is for them to develop some strong democratic and socialist traditions, but both parts are important to me, not just the socialist part. I don't doubt that the Libyans have to be extremely vigilant now, but I want them to at least get a chance. You might think that I'm too optimistic, but don't doubt my desire to see the capitalists be denied access to the Libyan oilfields.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 19:11
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:I'm not condemning anti-capitalism as somehow conspiratorial, I'm condemning anti-capitalism to the point that you support oppressors as long as they oppose/are opposed by capitalists. I don't really care what ideology someone claims to support, most oppressors just support whatever ideology that gets them the largest advantage. In the Soviet Union that was Communism, and in the west it's Capitalism. I don't see why the food prices should cause cognitive dissonance with me not believing in a grand conspiracy, what if I just believe that they're an effect of the natural tendencies of Capitalism to over consume and not plan ahead? I never once said I supported Gaddaffi. I never once said I didn't support their revolution. I only said I didn't support the massive intervention because I believe it would give those countries an inordinate amount of control in a newly democratic country. The military realities may have required that intervention, which just to me makes me wonder if communists in an uprising in any country could have air support from Cuba or somewhere, would have the same support. Don't make the mistake of conflating communism and dictatorship, in determining your answer.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 19:33
|
|
|
This is really veering off the course of the thread, but we seem to have a problem with terminology here. Capitalism has no needs or desires or wants. Perhaps capitalists do, but who is a capitalist? Anyone who lives in a capitalist system, or only those who benefit strongly from it, or only those who own the capital, or what? Ideologies can't have motives, only people can. I know some might say "Saying 'Capitalism' is a shortcut", but it's increasingly appearing to not be, that you really are saying the idea has these wants and desires. And the problem with that is, you're painting everyone inside it. Are you talking about the 100%, the 99%, or the 1%? That said: quote:I never once said I supported Gaddaffi. I never once said I didn't support their revolution. I only said I didn't support the massive intervention because I believe it would give those countries an inordinate amount of control in a newly democratic country.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 19:58
|
|
|
We get it, yeah. No one's actually defending Gaddafi. They're just establishing that the only people who ever had a problem with him were far worse monsters, with mean spirits and ineffective policies. And no one's saying Libyans don't have a right to rebel. Just that the ones rebelling are uniformly terrible people and/or Western shills, and that even if they're genuinely suffering they don't deserve freedoms that they can't take with their own bare hands. Dog whistle arguments on the left are typically approached a little differently than on the right, but they're recognizable. Especially when the BOOTSTRAPS! part on the end is so similar. As for not conflating communism and dictatorship, I can agree with you in principle but in practice an example of Cuban air support might raise its own questions against fighting dictatorship.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 20:01
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:Great Steve Bell cartoon on Gaddafi's death Steve Bell is a good cartoonist when he doesn't try to deliberately dehumanize the people he draws like he was Ilya Ehrenburg or Julius Streicher. In other words this is the first tolerable thing I've ever seen from him. Al-Saqr posted:On the topic of racist cartoons towards Arabs and Libyans, I was inspired by the recent rash of stuff coming out these days from people like Ramirez and others so I drew one myself:- This is a very good satire, except it's too well drawn and I wouldn't believe for a minute that the average American political cartoonist knows that Arabs drink coffee.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 20:05
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Steve Bell is a good cartoonist when he doesn't try to deliberately dehumanize the people he draws like he was Ilya Ehrenburg or Julius Streicher. Maybe you misinterprete it (or I do*). The flag in the rear end is a direct reference to the 'sodomising' video. Overall the representation alludes to the not-so-classy handling of the situation (as evidenced by the wire holding the flag afloat). *Who am I kidding, it's you that is dead wrong. Steve Bell is the God King. Please kill yourself now. Please don't let the 'please' hide the fact that his is an order.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 20:12
|
|
|
Pon de Bundy posted:So I was in class when Gaddafi just started killing protesters with AA guns, in February? Some kids were saying how bad they felt for the Libyans and if possible they would go fight for them! I wish I had known how easy it was, they could have been like our dear crazy friend. EDIT: Casimir Radon posted:Oh and make sure to bring a gun and wave it around Scott O'Grady style. 
Casimir Radon fucked around with this message at 20:20 on Oct 26, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 20:15
|
|
|
Golbez posted:But this again comes back to the question that has not been adequately answered: If the revolution would have failed without said intervention (which was likely, at least in Benghazi), would you rather it have failed rather than the intervention happening?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 20:16
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Maybe you misinterprete it (or I do*). The flag in the rear end is a direct reference to the 'sodomising' video. Overall the representation alludes to the not-so-classy handling of the situation (as evidenced by the wire holding the flag afloat). Did I not make clear that I thought this cartoon is a very good political cartoon? It's his usual  British politician is a condom and other British politician is a grotesque caricature straight out of the playbook of those who wish to dehumanize one group or another that I loathe.As for your "order", assuming you're remotely serious, straight back at you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 20:17
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:And, and as for your "order", straight back at you. I dare you! The last to kiss Steve Bell's boot after a count to three is obliged to finish himself off. 1, 2, 3 He's the perfect politoonist Sorry, you lost.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 20:21
|
|
|
I believe that Nenonen was making what is known among post-labour-value-theorists as a "joke".
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 20:25
|
|
|
Mr. Sunshine posted:I believe that Nenonen was making what is known among post-labour-value-theorists as a "joke". We've got people seriously claiming Libya is going to be worse off under a government that isn't run by a lunatic tyrant who stole more than $200 billion from them over the years. We are far beyond Poe's Law and any corollaries so at this point I am taking no chances.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 20:27
|
|
|
Golbez posted:This is really veering off the course of the thread, but we seem to have a problem with terminology here. Capitalism has no needs or desires or wants. Perhaps capitalists do, but who is a capitalist? Being a capitalist is not some title a person acquires. It is a role a person can act in when they use capital to generate more capital. Marxist critiques of capitalism generally deal with the inherent systemic aspects of capital, not with any grand conspiracies nor with the person moral failings of individuals who happen to be rich. That's the whole point, and the reason why socialists are socialists instead of liberal social democrats: they believe that the problem is not that capital is misused due to any particular personal or historical conditions that could be successfully changed, but rather due to the very nature of capital itself, how it is acquired, the incentives it creates, etc. I know this seems like a derail but the point is that "capitalism" really does have characteristics (just like every ideology) rather than being some totally blank slate within which anything, everything is possible and equally likely. The problem with Walmart, for example, is not that Sam Walton was any worse than any other retailer: the problem with Walmart is that they won the race to the bottom in retail: a race which Sam Walton certainly didn't create. So saying Walmart is "worse" than other retailers might be true, but it is synonymous with saying that they are more "successful" since the conditions for success in the capitalist system mean the "worst" will be the most successful--and if Walmart disappeared, that perverse equivalent would still exist. So no, capitalism isn't some person who has wants and needs. But it is a system that means that certain wants and needs will be fulfilled over others.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 20:28
|
|
|
Golbez posted:This is really veering off the course of the thread, but we seem to have a problem with terminology here. Capitalism has no needs or desires or wants. Perhaps capitalists do, but who is a capitalist? Anyone who lives in a capitalist system, or only those who benefit strongly from it, or only those who own the capital, or what? Ideologies can't have motives, only people can. I know some might say "Saying 'Capitalism' is a shortcut", but it's increasingly appearing to not be, that you really are saying the idea has these wants and desires. And the problem with that is, you're painting everyone inside it. Are you talking about the 100%, the 99%, or the 1%? Bulky Brute posted:It seems to me that this 'revolution' took an entirely reactionary character from it's early beginnings because of the kind of forces that came to head it (NATO, ex-Gaddafi officials, presumed CIA assets, islamists, various sectarian elites, etc.). So yes, I'd say after the dust's settled and the euphoria wanes, Libya will be in a much worse condition than it was before: half-destroyed, threatening a civil war, and with NATO on its backyard. But hey, maybe I'm wrong and it'll all work out in the end
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 20:41
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:We've got people seriously claiming Libya is going to be worse off under a government that isn't run by a lunatic tyrant who stole more than $200 billion from them over the years. We are far beyond Poe's Law and any corollaries so at this point I am taking no chances. <--- ahaha oh boy, opposing a NATO military intervention is extreme leftism now? oh boy the overton window really has shifted 
Bulky Brute fucked around with this message at 20:57 on Oct 26, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 20:46
|
|
|
Bulky Brute posted:"Gaddafi was real bad, therefore, the NTC must be better" It would be more accurate to say that "Qaddafi was horrific, and the NTC would have to work real drat hard to match that and at the moment there's little to no actual evidence they'll even try to do this". But since you have no interest in honest discourse I expect you to ignore this and prattle on about some vague unfalsifiable and tendentious claim about systemic capitalism and reactionary NATO and  .
Vincent Van Goatse fucked around with this message at 20:51 on Oct 26, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 20:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 00:45 |
|
|
Bulky Brute posted:"Gaddafi was real bad, therefore, the NTC must be better" "Gaddafi had 40 years and was bad, it's time to try something different of an unknown quality." I can live with that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2011 20:56
|
|