StarGateWars Forums

Legendary Apophis wrote:

MEZZANINE wrote:For over 75 years people around the world have listened to the BBC world service for the truth because the BBC is the only broadcaster universally accepted as trustworthy.

That is true.
Only paranoid people would say BBC isn't reliable source.

I would say "the well informed know that the BBC is NOT a reliable source" since it has been proven time and time again from the BBC themselves that they are nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Govt and do not offer an unbiased opinion about anything....especially regarding the EU.

Juliette wrote:Sickening.

What is sickening?

[KMA]Avenger wrote:

Legendary Apophis wrote:

MEZZANINE wrote:For over 75 years people around the world have listened to the BBC world service for the truth because the BBC is the only broadcaster universally accepted as trustworthy.

That is true.
Only paranoid people would say BBC isn't reliable source.

I would say "the well informed know that the BBC is NOT a reliable source" since it has been proven time and time again from the BBC themselves that they are nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Govt and do not offer an unbiased opinion about anything....especially regarding the EU.

Oh well, I'll stick to my opinion and you to yours then I guess .

That the US shipped in and backed Al-Qaeda forces to destabilise a sovereign nation maybe?


Edit: it has nothing to do with opinion. you are welcome to your opinion and i will stick to the facts

Removed

Juliette wrote:Sickening.

That a minority is able to do the exact thing they accuse their 'tyrant' (beloved leader for the majority) of doing.
A minority which, for the most part, either didn't live in Libya while Khadafi ruled, instead having comfortable jobs in the USA, UK, France, Tunesia, Egypt.. these people are named 'freedom fighters' and are given a blank cheque and excessive air support to bring down the legitimate government of a sovereign nation, all the while reverting to a barbaric state in which they loot, plunder, kill, rape and torture with impunity. Thus intimidating the formerly appreciative majority, shoving guns in their faces and asking them whether they support Khadafi, and brutally killing and maiming those who do and those who are unable to say otherwise. If a guy with a gun tells you to cheer, you will cheer. 'Hail the conquering heroes', as they say.
Bastards.

Sic transit gloria mundi, damned **Filtered** right.

Juliette wrote:

Juliette wrote:Sickening.

That a minority is able to do the exact thing they accuse their 'tyrant' (beloved leader for the majority) of doing.
A minority which, for the most part, either didn't live in Libya while Khadafi ruled, instead having comfortable jobs in the USA, UK, France, Tunesia, Egypt.. these people are named 'freedom fighters' and are given a blank cheque and excessive air support to bring down the legitimate government of a sovereign nation, all the while reverting to a barbaric state in which they loot, plunder, kill, rape and torture with impunity. Thus intimidating the formerly appreciative majority, shoving guns in their faces and asking them whether they support Khadafi, and brutally killing and maiming those who do and those who are unable to say otherwise. If a guy with a gun tells you to cheer, you will cheer. 'Hail the conquering heroes', as they say.
Bastards.

Sic transit gloria mundi, damned **Filtered** right.

That's one view of the situation, but I'm also seeing the comment KF said:

Kit-Fox wrote:Well Pops, time will tell what the Libyan NTC can achieve.

And its not like Gaddafi didnt have chances to leave quietly if he wanted, a damn sight more chances than he ever gave anyone he didnt like, so its really his own fault its come to an end with his death. He should have slipped off quietly if he'd wanted to live like everyone told him to do including the Libyan people who are the ones who found and 'killed' him (well injured but he died of those injuries).

His death isnt at the hands of so called 'western' powers, a much more local retribution was carried out for his years of acting like an ass

Legendary Apophis wrote:

Juliette wrote:

Juliette wrote:Sickening.

That a minority is able to do the exact thing they accuse their 'tyrant' (beloved leader for the majority) of doing.
A minority which, for the most part, either didn't live in Libya while Khadafi ruled, instead having comfortable jobs in the USA, UK, France, Tunesia, Egypt.. these people are named 'freedom fighters' and are given a blank cheque and excessive air support to bring down the legitimate government of a sovereign nation, all the while reverting to a barbaric state in which they loot, plunder, kill, rape and torture with impunity. Thus intimidating the formerly appreciative majority, shoving guns in their faces and asking them whether they support Khadafi, and brutally killing and maiming those who do and those who are unable to say otherwise. If a guy with a gun tells you to cheer, you will cheer. 'Hail the conquering heroes', as they say.
Bastards.

Sic transit gloria mundi, damned **Filtered** right.

That's one view of the situation, but I'm also viewing the comment KF said:

Kit-Fox wrote:Well Pops, time will tell what the Libyan NTC can achieve.

And its not like Gaddafi didnt have chances to leave quietly if he wanted, a damn sight more chances than he ever gave anyone he didnt like, so its really his own fault its come to an end with his death. He should have slipped off quietly if he'd wanted to live like everyone told him to do including the Libyan people who are the ones who found and 'killed' him (well injured but he died of those injuries).

His death isnt at the hands of so called 'western' powers, a much more local retribution was carried out for his years of acting like an ass

And where would the few local mongrels who rose up have found the courage to rise up if not for the Western bombs dropping like candy showers on Halloween?

Juliette wrote:

Juliette wrote:Sickening.

That a minority is able to do the exact thing they accuse their 'tyrant' (beloved leader for the majority) of doing.
A minority which, for the most part, either didn't live in Libya while Khadafi ruled, instead having comfortable jobs in the USA, UK, France, Tunesia, Egypt.. these people are named 'freedom fighters' and are given a blank cheque and excessive air support to bring down the legitimate government of a sovereign nation, all the while reverting to a barbaric state in which they loot, plunder, kill, rape and torture with impunity. Thus intimidating the formerly appreciative majority, shoving guns in their faces and asking them whether they support Khadafi, and brutally killing and maiming those who do and those who are unable to say otherwise. If a guy with a gun tells you to cheer, you will cheer. 'Hail the conquering heroes', as they say.
Bastards.

Sic transit gloria mundi, damned **Filtered** right.

SPOT ON!

Removed

Personally, if I lived in a nation and didn't like the ruling party's actions,
where I wouldn't be able to vote against it,
where I couldn't hear in public/TV/newspapers the opinion(s) of "opposition" regarding the current party,
where I wouldn't have the possibility to voice my disagreement about the current governing party,
where I couldn't debate about current party with others from opposition and others who are pro-ruling party (whether it's in private, on the internet, in public or on a broadcast media),
I think I would be tempted to rise up, if, let's say, the current power wouldn't even have wanted to do a compromise with opposition (considering the ruling power couldn't be defeat in elections, and/or that he wasn't elected for what he would be doing).
I am not in this situation, but I'm inclined to think that is the feeling some people had in Libya. Not all of these who didn't like the regime, were sub-parts/followers of Al Qaeda, at least, I'm inclined to think so.
Also, I'm curious, what would each of you think you would be doing, if you were to be in the situation I listed above (note the fact it's the whole above situation I'm talking about, not bits of it)?


That said, I do *not* condone the acts of revenge/violence done by the rebel forces. But as I said previously, I'm not in this situation, so one could argue (or not, lol) that if I was in same situation as they are, I would react the same as they...that however, I cannot know.

Legendary Apophis wrote:Personally, if I lived in a nation and didn't like the ruling party's actions,
where I wouldn't be able to vote against it,
where I couldn't hear in public/TV/newspapers the opinion(s) of "opposition" regarding the current party,
where I wouldn't have the possibility to voice my disagreement about the current governing party,
where I couldn't debate about current party with others from opposition and others who are pro-ruling party (whether it's in private, on the internet, in public or on a broadcast media),
I think I would be tempted to rise up, if, let's say, the current power wouldn't even have wanted to do a compromise with opposition (considering the ruling power couldn't be defeat in elections, and/or that he wasn't elected for what he would be doing).
I am not in this situation, but I'm inclined to think that is the feeling some people had in Libya. Not all of these who didn't like the regime, were sub-parts/followers of Al Qaeda, at least, I'm inclined to think so.
Also, I'm curious, what would each of you think you would be doing, if you were to be in the situation I listed above (note the fact it's the whole above situation I'm talking about, not bits of it)?


That said, I do *not* condone the acts of revenge/violence done by the rebel forces. But as I said previously, I'm not in this situation, so one could argue (or not, lol) that if I was in same situation as they are, I would react the same as they...that however, I cannot know.

Why do you keep talking about a 'party'? These nations exist based on entirely different values from our own. You value individuality. In Libya, individuality does not exist. The imported Libyans who bring these crazy ideas about democracy, are ruining the country. Have you seen the state Libya was in January 2011, and the state it is in now, 10 months later? It is devastated. Not by Khadafi, but by mongrels who felt the need to 'express their individuality' and NATO bombs which were oh-so-happily sent flying.
As if Arabs and Africans need a choice in the matter. Certain cultures simply cannot survive without a strong central leadership. A chieftain of all chieftains, an imam of all imams, a capo of all capi.. it is natural for such states to exist. The Western arrogance that we have the Divine Measure for civilisation and government is ludicrous, and does not stand at all when you look at the Arab world after the Arab Spring. Look at Egypt; back to a military government. Look at Iraq; falling apart at the seams.

KF: This 'Arab' Spring is hardly 'Arab' in origin. It is the herd going wild after a few bites at the ankles by Western hyenas and a widely publicised and vilified response by their sovereign governments.

Legendary Apophis wrote:Personally, if I lived in a nation and didn't like the ruling party's actions,
where I wouldn't be able to vote against it,
where I couldn't hear in public/TV/newspapers the opinion(s) of "opposition" regarding the current party,
where I wouldn't have the possibility to voice my disagreement about the current governing party,
where I couldn't debate about current party with others from opposition and others who are pro-ruling party

Funny i thought you already lived in such a nation. especially this "if I lived in a nation and didn't like the ruling party's actions,
where I wouldn't be able to vote against it".

And before you try and argue that France still has a Govt of the people, for the people and by the people....you do not, your laws come from Brussels...end of story.

Unless you are planning on a revolution and asking for western help in the form of bombing your country into the stone age...please don't be so hypocritical!

Juliette wrote:

Legendary Apophis wrote:Personally, if I lived in a nation and didn't like the ruling party's actions,
where I wouldn't be able to vote against it,
where I couldn't hear in public/TV/newspapers the opinion(s) of "opposition" regarding the current party,
where I wouldn't have the possibility to voice my disagreement about the current governing party,
where I couldn't debate about current party with others from opposition and others who are pro-ruling party (whether it's in private, on the internet, in public or on a broadcast media),
I think I would be tempted to rise up, if, let's say, the current power wouldn't even have wanted to do a compromise with opposition (considering the ruling power couldn't be defeat in elections, and/or that he wasn't elected for what he would be doing).
I am not in this situation, but I'm inclined to think that is the feeling some people had in Libya. Not all of these who didn't like the regime, were sub-parts/followers of Al Qaeda, at least, I'm inclined to think so.
Also, I'm curious, what would each of you think you would be doing, if you were to be in the situation I listed above (note the fact it's the whole above situation I'm talking about, not bits of it)?


That said, I do *not* condone the acts of revenge/violence done by the rebel forces. But as I said previously, I'm not in this situation, so one could argue (or not, lol) that if I was in same situation as they are, I would react the same as they...that however, I cannot know.

Why do you keep talking about a 'party'? These nations exist based on entirely different values from our own. You value individuality. In Libya, individuality does not exist. The imported Libyans who bring these crazy ideas about democracy, are ruining the country. Have you seen the state Libya was in January 2011, and the state it is in now, 10 months later? It is devastated. Not by Khadafi, but by mongrels who felt the need to 'express their individuality' and NATO bombs which were oh-so-happily sent flying.
As if Arabs and Africans need a choice in the matter. Certain cultures simply cannot survive without a strong central leadership. A chieftain of all chieftains, an imam of all imams, a capo of all capi.. it is natural for such states to exist. The Western arrogance that we have the Divine Measure for civilisation and government is ludicrous, and does not stand at all when you look at the Arab world after the Arab Spring. Look at Egypt; back to a military government. Look at Iraq; falling apart at the seams.

KF: This 'Arab' Spring is hardly 'Arab' in origin. It is the herd going wild after a few bites at the ankles by Western hyenas and a widely publicised and vilified response by their sovereign governments.

While I can see where you are coming from, that doesn't solve a particular problem. If these countries are 'naturally' led by authoritarian regimes, where will the ones who disagree with it (situation I listed) go? (because there are people like this, and some who pretend it too) That leads to the problem of immigration...
That said, how peculiar is it that the ones who ran away from let's say Tunisia and are now in France for a while, barely any of them did come back to Tunisia to provide their help and working force to rebuild country. Also, I noticed that among the parties running for Tunisia's upcoming elections, some are using thug methods to silence the "real" parties running in (I mean by "real", the ones who play the game of elections properly).
That in fact leads me to think there is indeed a % of people who are truly in need of democracy and ready for it, but on the other hand, there are parties who aren't better than the past regime and use the parties system to try to get in power, in spite of not believing themselves to the democracy/parties system.

All this to say, your post is rather true. But there's also people who really want democracy. Now, one can wonder how many are they...

_____________

Funny i thought you already lived in such a nation. especially this "if I lived in a nation and didn't like the ruling party's actions,
where I wouldn't be able to vote against it".

And before you try and argue that France still has a Govt of the people, for the people and by the people....you do not, your laws come from Brussels...end of story.

I SO expected this to be said, that's why I logically said

(note the fact it's the whole above situation I'm talking about, not bits of it)?

Unless you are planning on a revolution and asking for western help in the form of bombing your country into the stone age...please don't be so hypocritical!

Oh..my..God! Do I even need to answer that twisted-to-death-and-beyond of my words part?

Well what do you expect mate, you was the one that said it...not me!


Also please note, i quoted the whole situation as you laid it out

Removed