gaddafi - ugly bastard

[Slapper]

Who are you to judge them!?

You live in America! America is no better than Nazi Germany and the Taliban.

Never judge anyone else especially non-whites and non-Americans because whites and Americans have always done something worse!

Dude, stick to what is being said, not what I have to say.

[pellius]

Who are you to judge them!?

You live in America! America is no better than Nazi Germany and the Taliban.

Never judge anyone else especially non-whites and non-Americans because whites and Americans have always done something worse!

So if you had no other choice but to live in either America, Nazi Germany or under the Taliban you would flip a coin since one is no better than the other.

Where do you live?

[jtsunami]

Who are you to judge them!?

You live in America! America is no better than Nazi Germany and the Taliban.

Never judge anyone else especially non-whites and non-Americans because whites and Americans have always done something worse!

whoa whoa whoa, hold on a second, America no better, that is talking like Nazi Germany and the Taliban are bad?  They are far superior to America or USA as you call it will ever be.

jt

[24KT]

Oh well.  How many peoples daughters did Khaddafi cause to die?

Why don't you tell us Showstoppa?

Yes, his rise to power in Libya came about as a coup, ...however it was a bloodless coup,
...one he accomplished as a teenager. What kind of man, with what kind of ideas, has the ability to execute a bloodless coup in his teens?

[The Showstoppa]

Why don't you tell us Showstoppa?

Yes, his rise to power in Libya came about as a coup, ...however it was a bloodless coup,
...one he accomplished as a teenager. What kind of man, with what kind of ideas, has the ability to execute a bloodless coup in his teens?

So just because he execute a coup at a young age, he's someone to admire?  I guess his aiding and harboring of terrorists thru 3 decades is ok by you right?  If he's so innocent, which you seem to believe, why did he give funds to the family members of the Lockerbee bombings?  It was an admittance of guilt by association.  The guy has backed Hamas and Hezbollah for years.  Just because you might agree with their cause, doesn't excuse their tactics.  And not sure if you are aware of it or not, but terrorists actually kill innocent people in the real world.  Which by deduction would include men, women, kids, etc... indiscrimantely.  Hope this helps...

[24KT]

So just because he execute a coup at a young age, he's someone to admire?

I didn't say that, ...you did. but now that you bring it up, ...the evidence suggests that a lot of his fellow countrymen felt the same way, ...along with the British gov and all the other governments who recognized his governement so quickly.

I guess his aiding and harboring of terrorists thru 3 decades is ok by you right?  If he's so innocent, which you seem to believe, why did he give funds to the family members of the Lockerbee bombings?  It was an admittance of guilt by association.

From what I understand, his refusal to turn over suspects in the lockerbie bombing was based upon a lack of evidence and a refusal to be bullied.  That 007 flight had a lot of similarities to 911 in that at the last minute, alot of US government officials transfered off the flight. Mant received forewarning NOT to travel on that flight. obviously there were some Americans in high places who had advanced knowledge of what was to take place on that flight. I believe all Ghadafi wanted was proof and he would gladly turn them over. He was not about to turn over 2 people to the US just because they demanded it... provide some proof. In the end, he did turn them over to a court in the netherlands, and they were convicted, ...however, we know know they were convicted using false manufactured evidence. Big surprise there.

  The guy has backed Hamas and Hezbollah for years.  Just because you might agree with their cause, doesn't excuse their tactics.  And not sure if you are aware of it or not, but terrorists actually kill innocent people in the real world.  Which by deduction would include men, women, kids, etc... indiscrimantely.  Hope this helps...

Why do you assume I'm in any way in agreement with Hamas and Hezbollah? ...or is that simply wishful thinking on your part, ...or perhaps an impotent attempt to deflect the issue away from the original question posed to you?

Don't give me some general BS common knowledge about terrorists.
I asked you how many people's daughters did Ghadafi cause to die?

[pellius]

Why don't you tell us Showstoppa?

Yes, his rise to power in Libya came about as a coup, ...however it was a bloodless coup,
...one he accomplished as a teenager. What kind of man, with what kind of ideas, has the ability to execute a bloodless coup in his teens?

What? Where did you get the idea that he was a teenager when he seized power? He was born in 1942 and seized power in 1962. He did it while King Idris I was out of the country in Turkey getting medical treatment.

And while seizing power was bloodless holding on to it was far from it. He finance and supported terrorism and terrorist groups, including the PLO. He was responsible for the Munich Massacre at the 1972 Summer Olympics, the 1986 bombing of a disco in Berlin, planting  of bomb on the Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland...

Seeing the writing on the wall he did open up his country and turn over and abandoned his nuclear ambitions after we invaded Iraq. In fact, that's all Saddam would have had to do to avoid an invasion. But he called our bluff and lost.

He is not a handsome man. In fact, he's gruesome looking. Still, gets more tail than anybody on ths board x10. He seems to have settled down considerably and just wants to enjoy the rest of his days.

[24KT]

What? Where did you get the idea that he was a teenager when he seized power? He was born in 1942 and seized power in 1962. He did it while King Idris I was out of the country in Turkey getting medical treatment.

{blush} Seems we're both incorrect. 

There's plenty of false info out there. For some reason I thought the coup took place Sept 1, 1960.
Infact, I double checked the date before making that post. Now, ...either the site corrected the info, or I'm blind. 

All the info coming up is that he seized power in 1969. Oh well.

And while seizing power was bloodless holding on to it was far from it. He finance and supported terrorism and terrorist groups, including the PLO. He was responsible for the Munich Massacre at the 1972 Summer Olympics, the 1986 bombing of a disco in Berlin, planting  of bomb on the Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland...

Being responsible for and being suspected of are two different things.

Seeing the writing on the wall he did open up his country and turn over and abandoned his nuclear ambitions after we invaded Iraq. In fact, that's all Saddam would have had to do to avoid an invasion. But he called our bluff and lost.

Yep, you guys were bluffing. You said if Saddam agreed to search teams you wouldn't invade. He acquiesed in the end, ...and you guys still invaded. You showed the world the US was not to be trusted. 

He is not a handsome man. In fact, he's gruesome looking. Still, gets more tail than anybody on ths board x10. He seems to have settled down considerably and just wants to enjoy the rest of his days.

They always seem to go out peacefully in the end don't they? Always reflecting on what kind of parents they were.

[pellius]

I don't know why I said 1962. I have a friend who was born in the same year Gaddafi took power and it was in 1969.

As far as Saddam, he did not back down.  We were not bluffing. Bush was no Clinton. Hussein called our bluff. What makes you think he acquiesce? Remember resolution 1441? That was something like the 16th "line in the sand." (I'm too lazy to look it up). When Bush went in front of the UN Security Council he demanded that they enforce their resolutions. No more warnings. If they don't enforce it then the council is meaningless. Merely, a debating society. Bush gave the ultimatum that if they don't enforce it the US will take matters into their own hands. The UN, once again, prove impotent.

I know people claim that Bush lied because he said there were WMDs when none were found. A lie is saying something you know is false. Every major intelligence agency: British, US, French, German even Russian intelligence said that they had evidence that Saddam was developing/had WMDs. Even Clinton believed he had WMDs. After Hussein kicked out the inspectors were we suppose to just take him at his word? Before the invasion did you believe Hussein had WMDs? If not, what information did you have that every other intelligence agency didn't. If Bush lied what makes you think that he was so smart or had access to information that no one else had that he KNEW Hussein had no WMDs but just lied about it just so he could go to war?

BTW, you sure you want to give Gaddafi the benefit of a doubt? Is he someone you want to trust and take him at his word that he never had anything to do with acts of terrorism?

BTW (again), where are you from?

[24KT]

I don't know why I said 1962. I have a friend who was born in the same year Gaddafi took power and it was in 1969.

As far as Saddam, he did not back down.  We were not bluffing. Bush was no Clinton. Hussein called our bluff. What makes you think he acquiesce? Remember resolution 1441? That was something like the 16th "line in the sand." (I'm too lazy to look it up). When Bush went in front of the UN Security Council he demanded that they enforce their resolutions. No more warnings. If they don't enforce it then the council is meaningless. Merely, a debating society. Bush gave the ultimatum that if they don't enforce it the US will take matters into their own hands. The UN, once again, prove impotent.

I know people claim that Bush lied because he said there were WMDs when none were found. A lie is saying something you know is false. Every major intelligence agency: British, US, French, German even Russian intelligence said that they had evidence that Saddam was developing/had WMDs. Even Clinton believed he had WMDs. After Hussein kicked out the inspectors were we suppose to just take him at his word? Before the invasion did you believe Hussein had WMDs? If not, what information did you have that every other intelligence agency didn't. If Bush lied what makes you think that he was so smart or had access to information that no one else had that he KNEW Hussein had no WMDs but just lied about it just so he could go to war?

BTW, you sure you want to give Gaddafi the benefit of a doubt? Is he someone you want to trust and take him at his word that he never had anything to do with acts of terrorism?

BTW (again), where are you from?

All this is too old, too boring, and too over discussed for me to want to revisit the topic... yawn

As for giving Gadafi the benefit of the doubt vis-a-vis terrorism, ...you've got to be kidding me?
I think there are precious few nations on this planet that haven't had a hand in terrorism in some form or other,
...and certainly none of the G8 or G20 are immune. I think all their hands are probably dirty... including peace-loving nations like my own Canada.

[George Whorewell]

pellius- You seem intelligent, so I am going to give you a word of advice. Avoid discussing reality or world history with Jaguar unless you are seeking help for insomnia, are desiring comic relief, or want a first hand experience with mental illness.