• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Libya

Steve

Well-known member
by most accounts the military of Libya has split, and the wackjob is losing his grip.. Hillary has weighed in with a strong statement,

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says in a new statement:

The world is watching the situation in Libya with alarm. We join the international community in strongly condemning the violence in Libya. Our thoughts and prayers are with those whose lives have been lost, and with their loved ones. The government of Libya has a responsibility to respect the universal rights of the people, including the right to free expression and assembly. Now is the time to stop this unacceptable bloodshed. We are working urgently with friends and partners around the world to convey this message to the Libyan government.


(Ex)Libyan Ambassador calls for stronger Obama statement

Now here's a situation pretty much without precedent: The Libyan Ambassador to the U.S. just called on the Untied States to denounce his country's leaders -- and his employers -- more forcefully.

"I want the U.S. to tell the world and to work with the countries who love peace...they have to stop this," Ambassador Ali Ojli said, suggesting that he had resigned his post, in an interview with Al Jazeera English.

"I would never ask us to intervene physically in Libya," he said, but called on the Obama Administration to "take a strong position that what's happening in libya must be stopped now...and to avoid giving the impression to the Arab world that the West "has only a materialist mind -- they don't care about human rights...except when it comes to their own interest."

The Libyan Ambassador to the United Nations has also denounced Qaddafi.

President Obama urged restraint in a written statement Friday on Libya and two other countries,

so where is the champion of democracy today?
he seems so concerned about golf issues,
(no that wasn't a typo)
obama-golf.jpg
 

rammtein7

Well-known member
When another country revolts, is it really any of our business anyway? The only way it would really effect us is our OPEC interests there, which we need to get off of by the way.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
rammtein7 said:
When another country revolts, is it really any of our business anyway? The only way it would really effect us is our OPEC interests there, which we need to get off of by the way.

It depends if your President had influenced the people to revolt or not.

What happened to left boasting that they were responsible for these democratic revolutions?
 

Steve

Well-known member
rammtein7 said:
When another country revolts, is it really any of our business anyway? The only way it would really effect us is our OPEC interests there, which we need to get off of by the way.

ok, lets start with the basics.. Do you care if people are slaughtered?
 

rammtein7

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
rammtein7 said:
When another country revolts, is it really any of our business anyway? The only way it would really effect us is our OPEC interests there, which we need to get off of by the way.

It depends if your President had influenced the people to revolt or not.

What happened to left boasting that they were responsible for these democratic revolutions?

People said it was W. People said it was Obama. Some even said it was Twitter. It doesn't matter who says they are responsible. The only one responsible in my eyes is Gahdafi or Kaddafi or however he spells his name this week. If the people sick of him, then they are sick of him.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
rammtein7 said:
hypocritexposer said:
rammtein7 said:
When another country revolts, is it really any of our business anyway? The only way it would really effect us is our OPEC interests there, which we need to get off of by the way.

It depends if your President had influenced the people to revolt or not.

What happened to left boasting that they were responsible for these democratic revolutions?

People said it was W. People said it was Obama. Some even said it was Twitter. It doesn't matter who says they are responsible. The only one responsible in my eyes is Gahdafi or Kaddafi or however he spells his name this week. If the people sick of him, then they are sick of him.




They were not sick of him, until the left started this false idea of democratic reform and that Obama would save them from the shackles.

The problem with people believing in Obama is it either makes them poor, dead or under the rule of Islamics.

edited to add: Community organizers, Alinsky variety, are trained in promoting chaos, so they can "save the day"

but their method of "saving" is flawed and only produces more chaos.

You're seeing it in Wisconsin too.
 
rammtein7 said:
hypocritexposer said:
rammtein7 said:
When another country revolts, is it really any of our business anyway? The only way it would really effect us is our OPEC interests there, which we need to get off of by the way.

It depends if your President had influenced the people to revolt or not.

What happened to left boasting that they were responsible for these democratic revolutions?

People said it was W. People said it was Obama. Some even said it was Twitter. It doesn't matter who says they are responsible. The only one responsible in my eyes is Gahdafi or Kaddafi or however he spells his name this week. If the people sick of him, then they are sick of him.
I'm inclined to agree with this. It's a grassroots movement, and antipathy toward tyranny is what motivated it.
 
Top