SpecialAttack.net :: Libya discussion

Don't suppose any wants to drag this back on topic? It was getting interesting.

America invaded AFGANISTAN BECAUSE OF 9-11!!!!!!

Iraq had a Q in it like Al Qaida. Because they didn't find ANY weapons of mass destruction. So your whole opinion is now obsolete

O yeah, so the other people who don't rise up against Khaddafi are Crazy? Come on man, geez, don't be naive like a 12 year old.

Orange I really admire you for trying to make a topic of serious discussion in these forums but within one page it has already devolved into exactly what we knew it would: Crackhead has gone totally militant and is attacking SpA members like we are in fact the UN, Balls has started cracking wise and posting funny gif's and McMoist is picking a side argument over semantics. (BTW, Moist: you are wrong. Africa IS called the Near easr and the Middle east. It is a term left over from when the British Empire ruled the world

).

So - business as usual really...

Minor spelling mistakes on the internet appear to make arguments null and void now.

Why's that?

America had troops in Afghanistan before 9-11 to combat the Taliban. 9-11 just basically gave us a reason to deploy a full out invasion on the country.

Al Qaeda were located in Iraq too. The weapons of mass destruction was just an excuse for us to fully invade them as well. Why not smother the embers before they become a full burning flame?

And I don't seem to recall saying that people who didn't go against Gaddafi were crazy...I just merely stated that IN MY OPINION it was inhumane to kill your own citizens.

I believe your spelling errors make your point obsolete...

Have a nice day!

I believe your naive arrogance makes your points obsolete.

Have a nice day!

I think something had to happen after 9-11, Americans aren't like the Brits, if you spit on their shoe they'll bomb the shit out of your country. One of the reasons I think Britain got dragged in on their war, is because the Americans are far less concerned about hearts and minds, and god knows what would have happened if Tony Blair had not gone over to the states when the towers fell, the war would have been a lot more bloody. Saddame had to go anyway, he was a mad murderous tyrant, he even gave a ethnic cleansing a go, they should have fucked him out after the whole Kuwait thing.

I don't understand why people are so ashamed about using oil as a reason, not on it's own of course, but another reason to take action. It's basically the bloodline of the world, and considering the west buys most of it's oil in the east, you could see why it would want to protect it, Saddame set fire to the oil wells in Kuwait, and that was a disaster. Though I still think the Iraq war was questionable, I just didn't see the Americans sitting there feeling sorry for themselves, but yeah like someone else said, one less dictator in the world.

Saddam hadn't done anything too outrages the last 10 years of his life, he just got fucked over by the west. The whole mustard gass incident took place a long while back before the west attacked him, using that arguement is a tad bit stupid IMO. Yes he was a dictator, yes he was evil as fuck, but look at iraq now... it's a goddamn anarchy man....

And I know a few arabs telling me that iraq was far better when saddam was in charge, at least then you had some feeling of safety and not the paranoia when the next suicide bombing or car bombing would take place(this is the highest priority for some). And you have to know that the values of other countries differ then from yours. Saddam had to use brute force to keep all those people in line. Look at them now? Killing each other all the time, because they are being cuddled by the new government

who is ofc corrupt AS FUCK!!!!!!

I don't personally support the war, but I can see why the Americans went into it, the WOMD stuff was bullshit though obviously.

I thought this thread was about Libya?

Blergh, I just wish humans were eradicated already. Libya crisis, please start WWIII

Samiak_ wrote:

Blergh, I just wish humans were eradicated already. Libya crisis, please start WWIII

Yesssssss.....allow my crabby minions to take over! We will create a new world!

KingCrab72 wrote:

Yesssssss.....allow my crabby minions to take over! We will create a new world!

An itchy world!

[SpA]Crovax20 wrote:

I thought this thread was about Libya?

It is, as with supporting the rebells in Lybia, Al Queda gets support too.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... links.html

Author:	[SpA]Dekar [ 21 Mar 2011, 12:53 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
I too think Germany should do more to support the rebels. Maybe this all will lead to all dictatorships and other opressing regimes getting swept away by the rebelling masses one by one, ending with a massive revolution in China after half of the internet was zensored to hide the revolutions in other countries. BTW Japan deployed a new secret weapon to end the combat down there:

Author:	[SpA]JuncoPartner [ 21 Mar 2011, 15:29 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
I think Howard's packaged this pretty well actually Don't suppose anyone wants to drag this back on topic? It was getting interesting.

Author:	[SpA]Howard [ 21 Mar 2011, 15:30 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
JuncoPartner wrote: Don't suppose any wants to drag this back on topic? It was getting interesting. Here here.

Author:	[SpA]SaintK [ 21 Mar 2011, 17:41 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
http://gigapica.geenstijl.nl/2011/03/th ... libya.html

Author:	Smokeybacon [ 21 Mar 2011, 20:54 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
Something tells me British Petroleum won't be happy with this whole affair. Their exclusive Gaddafi deals have gone down the shitter it seems.

SpecialAttack.net https://forum.specialattack.net/

Libya discussion https://forum.specialattack.net/viewtopic.php?t=9958	Page 2 of 3

Author:	KingCrab72 [ 21 Mar 2011, 21:33 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
[SpA]CrackHead wrote: America invaded AFGANISTAN BECAUSE OF 9-11!!!!!! Iraq had a Q in it like Al Qaida. Because they didn't find ANY weapons of mass destruction. So your whole opinion is now obsolete O yeah, so the other people who don't rise up against Khaddafi are Crazy? Come on man, geez, don't be naive like a 12 year old. America had troops in Afghanistan before 9-11 to combat the Taliban. 9-11 just basically gave us a reason to deploy a full out invasion on the country. Al Qaeda were located in Iraq too. The weapons of mass destruction was just an excuse for us to fully invade them as well. Why not smother the embers before they become a full burning flame? And I don't seem to recall saying that people who didn't go against Gaddafi were crazy...I just merely stated that IN MY OPINION it was inhumane to kill your own citizens. I believe your spelling errors make your point obsolete... Have a nice day!

Author:	[SpA]Ivanosauros [ 21 Mar 2011, 21:46 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
Minor spelling mistakes on the internet appear to make arguments null and void now. Why's that?

Author:	DrMcMoist [ 21 Mar 2011, 21:52 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
[SpA]Howard wrote: Orange I really admire you for trying to make a topic of serious discussion in these forums but within one page it has already devolved into exactly what we knew it would: Crackhead has gone totally militant and is attacking SpA members like we are in fact the UN, Balls has started cracking wise and posting funny gif's and McMoist is picking a side argument over semantics. (BTW, Moist: you are wrong. Africa IS called the Near easr and the Middle east. It is a term left over from when the British Empire ruled the world ). So - business as usual really... Arrogant bloody Victorians.

Author:	[SpA]Revenge [ 21 Mar 2011, 22:03 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
Ivanosauros wrote: Minor spelling mistakes on the internet appear to make arguments null and void now. Why's that? With the age of spellchecking available , It would seem a fair point that if you make a comment , it should be spelt correctly. If its a few mistakes though it can be overlooked

Author:	annarack [ 21 Mar 2011, 22:18 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
But you can't really blame a person who's native tongue is not English to have spelling and grammatical errors.

Author:	ProtectMyBalls [ 21 Mar 2011, 22:30 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
What's a nubian?

Author:	[SpA]cardboard [ 21 Mar 2011, 22:44 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
KingCrab72 wrote: America had troops in Afghanistan before 9-11 to combat the Taliban. 9-11 just basically gave us a reason to deploy a full out invasion on the country. Al Qaeda were located in Iraq too. The weapons of mass destruction was just an excuse for us to fully invade them as well. Why not smother the embers before they become a full burning flame? And I don't seem to recall saying that people who didn't go against Gaddafi were crazy...I just merely stated that IN MY OPINION it was inhumane to kill your own citizens. I believe your spelling errors make your point obsolete... Have a nice day! Al Qaeda were operating in Malaysia, Sudan, Qatar, Lebanon, Syria, Oman, Pakistan, India and of course Saudi Arabia. Not to mention cells in operation in the UK, Denmark, the USA. Now explain why these countries haven't been invaded? Al Qaeda is a modern day bogey man allowing the US to press its agenda on other countries. The hilariously missing "weapons of mass destruction" are the bogey man's magic abilities its a myth and you've been sold lies on lies to cover lies. As for smothering embers, we lit the fire, it was stupid to expect anything other than this and the idea that you can kill an idea with violence is the single most stupid fallacy on the face of the planet, the more violence you plow into its destruction the stronger it becomes. I believe your naive arrogance makes your points obsolete. Have a nice day!

Author:	Crovax20 [ 21 Mar 2011, 23:10 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
The problem with Libya is who will govern when and if Khadaffi is gone? The state Libya is a conglomeration of loads of tribes and what do you think those tribes will do when mister dictator is gone? It is seemingly impossible for a lot of the African states to leave behind their tribe allegiances and form an actual nation state. Gellner has some interesting views (perhaps slightly outdated) on why, written in the book Nations and Nationalism. Pretty much the reason why Khadaffi still has supporters is because they are of his tribe, and who do you think will get WTFPWND when he is gone? I wouldn't want to be part of his tribe when someone else takes over. I am personally forseeing a UN peacekeeping mission in the future, if Khadaffi is gone. By putting the no-flight zone into effect you have basically commited yourself to hand holding the country to prevent future destabilization.

Author:	KingCrab72 [ 22 Mar 2011, 00:24 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
[SpA]cardboard wrote: I believe your naive arrogance makes your points obsolete. Have a nice day! Arrogance??? Nah. I personally don't agree with many of the things America has done. I wish America would keep its nose out of others peoples business. And I never denied the fact that America and other countries helped "fuel the fire." As a matter of fact, I know we did. There's no denying that. And I did say earlier that the UN doesn't want to involve itself in every single conflict or situation that happens around the world. Some things its just best to stay out of. That's fine by me. I do so enjoy the argument, but unfortunately we've gone off topic into a more general category. It was fun but I'll cease to post in this topic to keep it from derailing again Crab, out!

Author:	[SpA]CrackHead [ 22 Mar 2011, 11:42 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
Owk, let's start. Ahem... (voice clearing, coughing) The UN has more on his plate that he can handle, almost every UN country has a huge ass debt they need to clear. Funny how the liberators spend millions of euros(dollars), maybe even billions, but somehow they are able to do so? Where does this money come from? They just magically conjure it up? Nope, they don't. No one in their right minds would spend so much money and no one would loan money to such people if there isn't profit involved. Last time I checked a no-fly zone isn't bombing the shit out of military installations. Or even attacking ground units. But somehow in this case, when high quality oil is involved it SURE DAMN IS THE CASE. Now they want khaddafi gone? What the hell? That wasn't the UN mandate, none of what the UN is doing now apart from stopping the Libyan air force is in my eyes ligitimate. Even then, they have no reason to be there, its the Arabic liga's job to do so. Seriously, this just proves my point on how dumb and selfish the arabic people are. They still live in their 2000 year old custom of MEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEME. And no crabby boy, no american soldiers were in afghanistan before 9-11.... please get your facts straight man.

Page 2 of 3	All times are UTC+02:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited

Author:	[SpA]JuncoPartner [ 22 Mar 2011, 13:01 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
I think something had to happen after 9-11, Americans aren't like the Brits, if you spit on their shoe they'll bomb the shit out of your country. One of the reasons I think Britain got dragged in on their war, is because the Americans are far less concerned about hearts and minds, and god knows what would have happened if Tony Blair had not gone over to the states when the towers fell, the war would have been a lot more bloody. Saddame had to go anyway, he was a mad murderous tyrant, he even gave a ethnic cleansing a go, they should have fucked him out after the whole Kuwait thing. I don't understand why people are so ashamed about using oil as a reason, not on it's own of course, but another reason to take action. It's basically the bloodline of the world, and considering the west buys most of it's oil in the east, you could see why it would want to protect it, Saddame set fire to the oil wells in Kuwait, and that was a disaster. Though I still think the Iraq war was questionable, I just didn't see the Americans sitting there feeling sorry for themselves, but yeah like someone else said, one less dictator in the world.

Author:	KingCrab72 [ 22 Mar 2011, 14:48 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
Dekar wrote: BTW Japan deployed a new secret weapon to end the combat down there: YouTube video Idk who you really are....but I love you for that

Author:	[SpA]CrackHead [ 22 Mar 2011, 17:44 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
JuncoPartner wrote: I think something had to happen after 9-11, Americans aren't like the Brits, if you spit on their shoe they'll bomb the shit out of your country. One of the reasons I think Britain got dragged in on their war, is because the Americans are far less concerned about hearts and minds, and god knows what would have happened if Tony Blair had not gone over to the states when the towers fell, the war would have been a lot more bloody. Saddame had to go anyway, he was a mad murderous tyrant, he even gave a ethnic cleansing a go, they should have fucked him out after the whole Kuwait thing. I don't understand why people are so ashamed about using oil as a reason, not on it's own of course, but another reason to take action. It's basically the bloodline of the world, and considering the west buys most of it's oil in the east, you could see why it would want to protect it, Saddame set fire to the oil wells in Kuwait, and that was a disaster. Though I still think the Iraq war was questionable, I just didn't see the Americans sitting there feeling sorry for themselves, but yeah like someone else said, one less dictator in the world. Saddam hadn't done anything too outrages the last 10 years of his life, he just got fucked over by the west. The whole mustard gass incident took place a long while back before the west attacked him, using that arguement is a tad bit stupid IMO. Yes he was a dictator, yes he was evil as fuck, but look at iraq now... it's a goddamn anarchy man.... And I know a few arabs telling me that iraq was far better when saddam was in charge, at least then you had some feeling of safety and not the paranoia when the next suicide bombing or car bombing would take place(this is the highest priority for some). And you have to know that the values of other countries differ then from yours. Saddam had to use brute force to keep all those people in line. Look at them now? Killing each other all the time, because they are being cuddled by the new government who is ofc corrupt AS FUCK!!!!!!

Author:	ProtectMyBalls [ 22 Mar 2011, 17:50 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
slightly off topic, but what happened with the whole north korean / south korean shit that kicked off a couple of months ago?

Author:	[SpA]JuncoPartner [ 22 Mar 2011, 20:02 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
[SpA]CrackHead wrote: Saddam hadn't done anything too outrages the last 10 years of his life, he just got fucked over by the west. The whole mustard gass incident took place a long while back before the west attacked him, using that arguement is a tad bit stupid IMO. Yes he was a dictator, yes he was evil as fuck, but look at iraq now... it's a goddamn anarchy man.... And I know a few arabs telling me that iraq was far better when saddam was in charge, at least then you had some feeling of safety and not the paranoia when the next suicide bombing or car bombing would take place(this is the highest priority for some). And you have to know that the values of other countries differ then from yours. Saddam had to use brute force to keep all those people in line. Look at them now? Killing each other all the time, because they are being cuddled by the new government who is ofc corrupt AS FUCK!!!!!! That's true, but "I've been a good boy for the last 10 years" wouldn't stand up in court, and people claim he was supporting terrorism or Al Queda, including the 911 attacks, but I don't know how much truth there is and evidents to support that. Not read up about Mexico, but the mexican government were in cahoots with the drug cartels, and were inmmensely currupt, when that government was kicked out, they didn't deal with the cartels, so now people get murdered throughout the day, because the gorvernment have nothing on them anymore. So well, are leaders better currupt? I think we probably fucked up afghanistan a long time ago, after WW2? and the west have been sticking its nose in since, I doubt we'll see any peace there for a long time. I don't personally support the war, but I can see why the Americans went into it, the WOMD stuff was bullshit though obviously.

Author:	KingCrab72 [ 22 Mar 2011, 21:33 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
JuncoPartner wrote: I don't personally support the war, but I can see why the Americans went into it, the WOMD stuff was bullshit though obviously. Even us Americans coulda told you there were no WOMDs...not sure what they were thinking there

Author:	[SpA]CrackHead [ 22 Mar 2011, 22:17 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
They used the arguements he had done a decade ago... isn't that odd? If it was that big a deal for them, they should've killed his arse then and there, not 10 years later. Thats what I ment.

Author:	Smokeybacon [ 23 Mar 2011, 14:14 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
Defence chiefs weren't happy with the conclusion of round 1 of the Gulf War, the resurgence of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda somehow justified a re-invasion. Bush-Blair "special relationship" brownnosing was well in it's prime and we were dragged into the fray.

Author:	Crovax20 [ 23 Mar 2011, 21:47 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
I thought this thread was about Libya?

Author:	[SpA]Dunken [ 29 Mar 2011, 20:45 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
[SpA]Crovax20 wrote: I thought this thread was about Libya? It is, as with supporting the rebells in Lybia, Al Queda gets support too. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... links.html

Author:	[SpA]Dolf [ 30 Mar 2011, 02:21 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
Blergh, I just wish humans were eradicated already. Libya crisis, please start WWIII

Author:	KingCrab72 [ 30 Mar 2011, 03:04 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
Samiak_ wrote: Blergh, I just wish humans were eradicated already. Libya crisis, please start WWIII Yesssssss.....allow my crabby minions to take over! We will create a new world!

Author:	ProtectMyBalls [ 30 Mar 2011, 10:03 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
KingCrab72 wrote: Samiak_ wrote: Blergh, I just wish humans were eradicated already. Libya crisis, please start WWIII Yesssssss.....allow my crabby minions to take over! We will create a new world! An itchy world!

Author:	[SpA]cardboard [ 30 Mar 2011, 10:42 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
[SpA]ProtectMyBalls wrote: KingCrab72 wrote: Yesssssss.....allow my crabby minions to take over! We will create a new world! An itchy world! Not for me I've got a standing order for Elimite.

Author:	[SpA]Toresson [ 30 Mar 2011, 14:55 ]
Post subject:	Re: Libya discussion
[SpA]Dunken wrote: [SpA]Crovax20 wrote: I thought this thread was about Libya? It is, as with supporting the rebells in Lybia, Al Queda gets support too. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... links.html Yeah, better be supporting stability. Qhadaffi is a sane, stable character. Let's all support him.