Quote: (11-25-2014 08:11 AM)zidhai89 Wrote:
Sure. The Arab League, African Union were also in favor of this intervention. So perhaps instead of merely pointing fingers at the West we can say it was more or less a global stance
I wouldn't say it was global, but yes other supporters of the intervention also share responsibility.
Quote:Quote:
They were trying to gun down air crafts using machine guns mounted on the back of trucks. When the uprising picked up they had no air force.
That changed, and even if it didn't it still doesn't render Gaddafi's use of military force illegitimate or illegal. Martial force doesn't suddenly become wrong if the opposing force lacks good enough weaponry. Was Gaddafi supposed to give the rebels warplanes and tank divisions to make things fair?
Quote:Quote:
A military is also answerable to a government not a proxy dictator. Like I said they rebels were not armed and hostile at the start. They came to the table. The colonel drove their backs against the wall and planned to slaughter them when they had no other option.
"Rebels", by the definition of the word, are armed and hostile. And say what you like about Gaddafi's dictatorship, it was the recognized government of Libya; overthrowing a government because it's adjudged insufficiently democratic is in violation of national sovereignty, and is itself undemocratic.
Moreover, the rebels were the ones who slaughtered Gaddafi and many of his supporters without so much as a drumhead trial. The rebels have no moral high ground.
Quote:Quote:
Not particularly. In Rwanda it happened on the basis of ethnicity, in Bosnia because of Serb fascism. In Libya it would've been a power hungry sociopath who would have put Assad's father to shame.
"It would've been" and "[he] would have" isn't a factual argument, it's a hypothetical, and one without any basis.
Quote:Quote:
Apart from the first hand accounts of pilots seeking refuge in Europe who testified that they were asked to open fire on unarmed civlians and the Colonel himself advocating killing the inhabitants of Dernah. He then blamed it on foreign 'dogs' from Egypt and Tunisia and advocated killing all of those nationalities that were present in Libya.
Defectors' statements aren't reliable, and if what they said was true, there would certainly be hard evidence to support it after the fall of the government. In reality, there is none. There's as much evidence to support this line of reasoning as there is the idea that Gaddafi was planning to conquer all of North Africa and move the pyramids to Libya.
Quote:Quote:
Yeah, no thanks. I can see you disagree so I'll leave it.
No problem, agree to disagree.