BF2S Forums The Situation in Libya

FEOS wrote:

So are Russian tinfoil hats thicker than other styles?

nah, we simply keep our heads out of the sand here. try it sometime.

FEOS wrote:

Shahter wrote:

FEOS wrote:

So are Russian tinfoil hats thicker than other styles?

nah, we simply keep our heads out of the sand here. try it sometime.

Let me guess where you stick them instead...

guessing is a very bad way of finding out what's going on, dude. there are other ways which usually yeild better results. for starters, try using your common sence.

Shocking wrote:

Shahter wrote:

U.S. aims to funnel seized funds to Libya rebels.

yeah, it's simply a "just rebellion" of the "oppressed". no foreign power had any hand in it - none whatsoever, they simply... seize the funds of the current government and plan to support the opposition with that. freedom, democracy, and strawberry pie for everybody.

Oh come on shahter don't kid yourself, this has everything to do with the domino effect. What the US would be doing by that is directly supporting the rebellion without getting physically involved, it may be able to exert some influence when this all has blown over, too.

Nevertheless I find it a very dangerous move, have the 70s taught us nothing?

of course, it's "domino effect". one day they all got up and went "fighting for freedom". simultaniously. they'd been oppressed horribly prior to that, affraid of stucking their heads out, and then one day they... simply weren't anymore. and, conveniently enough, the police, which up to that day had been going a good job repressing all that shit, was suddently unable to deal with it anymore. army too.
/facepalm

p.s. also, tell me again: since when was it okay to simply seize one's money and give it to his enemies so that they can win?

Shahter wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Shahter wrote:

nah, we simply keep our heads out of the sand here. try it sometime.

Let me guess where you stick them instead...

guessing is a very bad way of finding out what's going on, dude. there are other ways which usually yeild better results. for starters, try using your common sence.

Instead of that, how about analyzing geopolitical events in context instead of jumping to ludicrous conspiracy theories with nothing whatsoever to back up your accusations then telling people who do have more than half a clue what's going on "not to stick their heads in the sand" when they call you on your lunacy? How about that?

Or would that be too "fed by the propaganda machine-ish"?

nvm. Already know the answer. Got it from the propaganda machine.

As to supporting the rebels with seized Libyan assets: the US doesn't want to get directly involved--particularly militarily. Our interests are not sufficiently at risk at this point. However, the US govt has stated that Daffy needs to go. Now it looks like he's starting to gain ground on the rebels, who have little in the way of resources. This is a way to help them without expending our own resources, supporting stated goals (Daffy must go) without embroiling ourselves too deeply in the conflict.

No tinfoilhattery involved. It only requires a modicum of analysis of events. But I guess it's much easier to jump to wild-assed conclusions and accuse others here of burying their heads in the sand.

Shahter wrote:

p.s. also, tell me again: since when was it okay to simply seize one's money and give it to his enemies so that they can win?

When the international community decides it's OK because you're attacking your own people?

Now. Look at the above. Compare the above to your conspiracy theory. Who has whose head buried where now?

Saddam went out of control and supporting him was an obvious mistake, we're talking about Mubarak here and the effects his removal had on the political situation in the ME.

Al jazeera tells us gadaffi is bombing the shit out of his own troops as well.

That's not exactly a western media institute.

What do you read, pravda?

Shocking wrote:

Al jazeera tells us gadaffi is bombing the shit out of his own troops as well.

That's not exactly a western media institute.

and we all know it never before so happened that western media institutes and al jazeera had all been reporting the same bullshit.

Shahter wrote:

@FEOS: look, man, stop throwing that shit at me. who are you to say "who needs to go" again? who are you to tell who's actually firing at their own people? you base you "analysis" on bullshit reported by your media - sorry, but i'm not going to discuss that crap.

By "my" media? Is the great Motherland's media reporting something altogether different? Are the facts on the ground somehow different for Russians than for the rest of the world? Give me a fucking break, "dude". Your argument regarding a great media propaganda conspiracy is a joke.

And who is the US to say so? I don't know...who is Italy? Or Spain? Or France? Or the UK? Or any number of other countries? Nations aren't allowed to have opinions on world affairs now? Really? Russia had an opinion on it. Should they have kept their mouth shut, too? Or is the Motherland's the only valid position?

Shocking wrote:

Shahter wrote:

Shocking wrote:

Al jazeera tells us gadaffi is bombing the shit out of his own troops as well.

That's not exactly a western media institute.

and we all know it never before so happened that western media institutes and al jazeera had all been reporting the same bullshit.

What about Egyptian media? As a matter of fact ALL Middle Eastern media outlets say Gaddaffi is bombing his own people.

They're part of the great media propaganda conspiracy...dude.

/sigh
if you must know, some of russian media reports it like "the opposing sides are firing at each other". that, if you didn't know, is what usually happens when there's an armed conflict going on. so, for all intents and purposes, both daffy and "freedom fighters" are firing at their own people. anybody who reports it differently is pushing an agenda.
common sence.

the question still stands: who needs this and why?

@Shocking: yet another wmd-thing... shoulda known (c).

Last edited by Shahter (2011-03-16 13:06:47)

FEOS wrote:

Nobody "needs" this. Some things happen spontaneously in this world.

judging by US actions, they certainly need this.

Shahter wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Nobody "needs" this. Some things happen spontaneously in this world.

judging by US actions, they certainly need this.

How so, Sir?

Turquoise wrote:

Apparently, American fervor for doing something about Saudi Arabia's actions in Bahrain along with the oppression of Bahrain's government against their rebels is much lower.

but to say the US/west had hands in all the events, is a bit too far imo