Many Libyans appear to back Gaddafi

[oberliner]

TRIPOLI — To all outward appearances, this is a city deeply enamored of Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi. His portrait hangs from lampposts, adorns shopping centers and sprouts from the gleaming new office blocks rising from the seafront. Sayings from his Green Book, required reading for all schoolchildren, are posted in government buildings, including public restrooms.

And his supporters, draped in Gaddafi green and clutching pictures of their beloved leader, noisily and passionately assert their presence in near round-the-clock displays of devotion. Hurtling through the streets in pickups or gathering in Tripoli’s central Green Square, they bellow the rhythmic chant that encapsulates the omnipotence of Gaddafi’s self-ascribed role: “God, Moammar, Libya: Enough!”

How deep that support runs in a populace that has been governed by fear for decades is impossible to tell. But six days into the allied bombardment of Libyan military targets, it is clear that Gaddafi can count on the fierce loyalties of at least a significant segment of the population in the vast stretches that lie beyond the enclave of rebel-held territory in the east.

“We don’t want anyone except him,” gushed Fatima al-Mishai, 20, who joined the crowds assembled at Gaddafi’s Bab al-Aziziyah compound to offer their services as voluntary human shields against the bombs. “He gave us freedom and everything we need.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/many-libyans-appear-to-back-gaddafi/2011/03/24/ABHShlRB_story.html

[tabatha]

1. Seventy-five percent of the people are against him

“Seventy-five percent of the people are against him,” said one dissident, who was in the vanguard of the protest movement that was crushed in Tripoli last month and who agreed to a furtive meeting with journalists in a downtown cafe. “But there are some people who really do love him. They’ve known no one else all their lives. They think he’s in their blood.”

same story.

[oberliner]

2. So that's a million plus who support him?

Scary thought.

[tabatha]

4. Probably those people who be just as happy in a

free society.

[daleo]

13. The opinion of one dissident

Hardly a scientific sample.

[Maru Kitteh]

101. Given the absolute absence of scientific samples, it's at least as valid as anything Daffy Duck

Quackdaffi says.

[LiberalAndProud]

34. I would believe that.

Considering the percentage of people who still think GWB* was a great president, I would guess that there will always be a contingent who will back the bad guy.

[Distant Observer]

125. A rebel believes "75% against" ?? And of course these "rebels" speak Gods Truth!!!

Most of what I hear in the Western press is totally different from the impressions I had when I
was living in various African countries.

But, what do Africans know?

[Tx4obama]

3. Take a look at this interactive map of Libya

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/02/25/world/middleeast/map-of-how-the-protests-unfolded-in-libya.html?src=tptw

Move the slide bar at the top over to March 1 and see how many rebel cities there were on the 1st of the month compared to now.

There are MANY in Libya that do NOT support Gaddafi.

Gaddafi's main support is in Tripoli, but not at all in the east.

[highplainsdem]

15. +1

[TorchTheWitch]

63. First, the map only shows the towns along the northern coast

99% of the country isn't addressed at all on this map.

Second, which side holds which towns has nothing to do with the personal feelings of the people within those towns of who they support. One thing for sure, if you're in a rebel controlled town and support Gaddafi you better pretend you don't if you value your life and vice versa.

So, what gives with the rest of the country? Surely there are people living in 99% of the country this map doesn't address?

Be thrilled that apparently a higher percentage of the population of Libya is in support of the rebels... that's a rare thing with most revolutions particularly in the beginning stage. Surely you can concede the point that a million or more civilians are loyal to Gaddafi by choice? I don't get this almost desperation in people trying to make it out that Gaddafi has no civilian supporters or only a handful or the ones he has are all faking it and are really in support of the rebels.

[Adsos Letter]

84. Libya's population distribution according to Wikipedia

"The unusual thing about Libya is that it's a very large country with a very small population, but the population is actually concentrated very narrowly along the coast."<179> Population density is about 50 persons per km² (130/sq. mi.) in the two northern regions of Tripolitania and Cyrenaica, but falls to less than one person per km² (2.6/sq. mi.) elsewhere. Ninety percent of the people live in less than 10% of the area, primarily along the coast. About 88% of the population is urban, mostly concentrated in the three largest cities, Tripoli, Benghazi and Al Bayda.

LINK: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libya#Demographics

[Tx4obama]

85. The MAJORITY of the population of Libya is represented on the map.

Libya has a population of 6.4 million people - the majority live in the upper quarter of the country's land mass.
In the lower 3/4 part of Libya there are less than 400,000 residents

Here's a chart and map that shows the population in each area:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libya#Administrative_divisions_and_cities

[TorchTheWitch]

124. Lovely

However, the second point still stands. The map only shows which towns are strongholds of which side, not which side the actual individual people in those towns really support. There are still at least a million people that support Gaddafi. Why is this such a bad thing? The simple fact that supposedly a good deal more than half the population are anti-Gaddafi is quite stunning particularly so soon in the revolution.

Again, can you at least concede that at around a million people are loyal to Gaddafi? Why is it so horrible to imagine that so many still do even though it is apparently less than half of the population? Most revolutions start with a relatively small faction and are lucky to have a general 50/50 split between sides.

There's always going to be a fairly significant number of loyalists no matter how disgusting the leader is. People are weird in that they very often resist change just because it's change even if that change is the opportunity for far better. Or maybe they really are brainwashed by the continual barrage of propaganda they've gotten for 40 years. Who the hell knows why so many still support the evil nutter? What difference does it make? Rejoice that over half (and perhaps well over half) hate the shithead and want him gone. That in itself is rather extraordinary as far as most revolutions go.

[aquart]

5. Can't imagine why anyone wanted to revolt, can you?

[Distant Observer]

133. Why did the South rebel. They had it good, and didn't want to be messed with

[Catherina]

6. The women in Tripoli are in modernized clothes. The Benghazi women are in Burkas & full Hijabs

Cinemas, youth centers, clubs and any activities that don't revolve around the mosques were closed in Benghazi and the mosques are very conservative preaching Jihad, fighting the West and fighting everything non Islamic in *Islamic* Libya. Gaddafi is a devil to them for being a traitor to Islam.

I've been combing through information about Benghazi dated before 2011 and the first results aren't encouraging http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=734814&mesg_id=735517 Tripoli was described as a paradise for youth and women compared to Benghazi.

I think there's more than one reason the youth of Benghazi didn't rise up to join the Benghazi movement and that Gaddafi felt so certain of this he armed the university students there. He has more support than we're being led to believe.

After reading about Burkas in Benghazi and women having to go out in groups, I'm beginning to understand why.

Watch what you're stepping into America.

Rec'd.

[sad sally]

8. So maybe if the rebels take over they can get those evil

Tripoli women back in their Burkas & full Hijabs and out of the universities?

[Catherina]

19. I'm sure the thought is foremost in the minds of the conservatives there

I don't trust fundamentalists of any religion, and I doubly don't trust them when the women are subjugated like that, especially not when conservative mosques have been whipping up the populace.

It's bothered me since the start that I didn't see women out protesting with the men, like in Egypt and Tunisia.

I'm still trying to understand this more.

Oh here we go

"It's traditional to protest separately from men, and I prefer it that way," said Najwa al-Tir, an oil company employee.

...

Gallal, a 40-year-old mother of two, gave no credit to Gathafi for the advancement of women's rights under his regime, saying some of changes went so far it triggered a conservative backlash.

"One might consider that we owe him that, but he did so only to create chaos in society, as he has always done," she said.

"Our mothers wore short dresses, but because Gathafi has gone too far opening society, we decided to wear the veil."

http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=44634

[joshcryer]

31. The TNC is proposing a secular democracy, with no clerics in power.

That's what the rebels are fighting for.

[riderinthestorm]

82. Oh FFS! The rebels are hardly a cohesive group!! You can no more assert that

than I can say they all want to go to Disneyworld.

[joshcryer]

86. They have no other representitive authority.

The vast majority of them wouldn't know how to run a country if they wanted to.

This is why it's distinct from Egypt. They aren't protesting to get rid of a tyrant alone and then do gradual reforms within the system that is in place (indeed, the constitutional referendum changes were accepted by Mubarak and he was going to implement them, it wasn't an entirely new constitution).

They're fighting against the very tyrant himself to create their own system of governance, replete with constitutional democratic representation.

It's like how the revolutionaries fought against the Brits in the United States. You could not have expected every single one of them to underline each and every aspect of our new constitution, or even be able to read, for that matter. But they supported the general idea that they wanted to be free and independent.

[Bluerthanblue]

91. but it's ok to assert that they are fundementalist woman haters?

let's be fair -

[riderinthestorm]

93. Stats prove that more than 20% of the "freedom fighters" in Iraq

were from eastern Libya, associated with Islamist movements.

Yes. It is possible at this point to say with authority that many of those fighting Gaddafi in eastern Libya are definitely Islamist and would be fundamentalist women haters.

I'm sorry, it's not in my nature to assert something without links but I have a family emergency and will be heading out tomorrow early am and posted in response to you in haste. I was waiting for surgery results for my sister and was on DU but am about to sign off. Please google or search DU for links. This isn't "new" news.

[joshcryer]

98. Actually that's well disproved already.

It was a baseless smear intended to bash the revolutionaries and it's been disproven.

[Distant Observer]

129. FALSE. WHY ALL THE LIES IN THIS CONFLICT

[Bluerthanblue]

112. I hope things turn out

well for your sister.

I'll wait and see how this plays out- in terms of "who" Gaddafi's opposition really is. We can speculate all we like, but that doesn't make it truth.

I appreciate your reply, don't worry about not linking.

[Hugabear]

9. Watch yourself, you're going to get labeled as a bigot or racist

Not allowed to say anything bad about the rebels.

If you don't support using military force to support these rebels, then you're a Gadhaffi-lover

[joshcryer]

28. It's fine to say "bad things" about the rebels, it's not fine to lie about them.

[Catherina]

43. Anyone whose accusations are that contemptible automatically goes on my ignore list

It's like they don't even exist. I have no time for such intellectual shallowness.

Giving power to a bunch of people who keep their women in fucking for Burkas and eliminating secularism isn't my idea of progress. Seeing how fully this is backed by every neocon in this country and how denounced it is by progressive intellectuals should be enough to make anyone stop dead in their tracks, start asking hard questions and carefully evaluate things instead of trying to shut up critics of their hasty push to embroil this country in another war with the familiar whiff of regime change.

[joshcryer]

46. The revolutionaries are for secularism.

[Starry Messenger]

69. +1000

We have a long and complicated relationship with Libya that stretches back decades, centuries even. No one thinks Gaddafi is Mr. Wonderful, but context is becoming utmost here. Allowing a member of the Libyan royal family back in power could be as disastrous as the US seating of the Shah in Iran back in the day. Our meddling in these waters is *never* benign.

[joshcryer]

73. The Libyan royal family that fled and want asylum? The same one that supported Gaddafi?

:rofl:

Some people are so utterly out of touch with what's going on in Libya.

[druidity33]

147. Neocons are in walk-back mode...

many of the ones who wanted the US to "get rid of Qaddafi" and "arm the rebels" are now saying we should never have pushed it. Most notably Newt Gingrich, but others as well. Do you think they could have wanted mostly to bash Obama's policies?

:shrug:

[Adsos Letter]

56. People who don't support using military force to support these rebels

are hardly Gadhaffi-lovers (I suppose some could be but I would be surprised, as I'm sure you would).

I agree with you; the name-calling (Gaddafi Lover/War Monger, et.al.) sure doen't help the debate around here, and usually just throws up an immediate mental block to any subsequent discussion.

I know I have been much more open to the ideas proferred by calmer debaters.

[daleo]

14. The same was true in Iraq and Soviet era Afghanistan

Odd as it is, these leaders seem to give women more rights than their opponents who often are in favor of a religiously fundamentalist way of life. Civil wars are never simple and outsiders see what they want to see.

[joshcryer]

35. I don't recall this poster ever attempting to malign the Egyptian protesters by making...

...such a smear.

[Hugabear]

49. Is Catherina's post a smear?

Or could it be perhaps an uncomfortable truth?

This is what I meant when I asked earlier how well did we really know the people behind this rebellion. I tend to recall several very hostile responses in that thread.

[joshcryer]

55. It is a smear, there's no evidence to back it up. The Egypt protests were mostly men, too.

And when the women protested they were highly abused on Womens Day, that never happened in Benghazi.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/blog-post/2011/03/international_womens_day_march.html

[dkf]

23. So maybe it's the religious zealots who are so determined against Gaddafi?

That would be nice to know if true.

[Selatius]

27. Qadhafi destroyed any and all resistance to his regime. The only ones left were the nut jobs.

Sort of the same situation inside Iran before their '79 Revolution. The Shah left no opponents alive, and religion became really the only other game in town, sadly.

[joshcryer]

29. Utter stereotype, both Benghazi and Tripoli have women in and out of Burkas.

[PufPuf23]

30. Thank you Catherina for now and earlier.

IMO Gadaffi was on his way out anyway -- just a matter of time -- but what has occurred may leave to a stalemate and at the least many long term grudges that will impact those that want a peaceful, safe, and hopeful life for their family, friends, and Libya.

I do not understand how such ham-handed individuals set USA (and western foreign policy) -- maybe I do understand and that racism and manifest destiny and social Darwinism create the "Truths" we are fed.

I am about as far from a tea-bagger as one could be but think POTUS Obama is listening to the wrong people or just plain ignorant by lack of curiosity for many issues.

POTUS Obama has been played by USA Hawks, SOS Clinton, France, Russia, China, Brazil, and India.

I hope I am wrong.

[tabatha]

37. Russia, China, Brazil, India

abstained.

Russia is against this, so are China, and India.

[PufPuf23]

66. Libya under Qadaffi was spreading risk and increasing market for the oil wealth.

China, India, and Brazil were being offered contracts not open to the EU or USA.

Libya oil is a national security issue for France and Italy (which have acted quite differently, Italy and Mr. B being quite friendly with Qadaffi.

Qadaffi was on his way out. Sarkozy jumped the shark (neocon and largest source of oil from Libya, relatively cheap and high quality).

I do not want this to be true but my gut instiunct is that more will die, have lives, destroyed, and there will be more distruction and a poorer future for peace (that most want in their lives) than if the Libyan had not escalated to foreign intervention.

Russia, China, India, and probably Brazil played the USA by abstaining in the UNSC and Germany was wise.

I can handle Empire through love and peace but not cruise missiles and other remote controlled death.

Qadaffi is a clown but also a dangerous clown. He made not be as smart as Obama but is smarter than GWB.

[tabatha]

68. Qadaffi was on his way out.

How? Why?

You don't think he would have handed it all over to his sons?

[PufPuf23]

92. Qadaffi likely would have tried to hand Libya to his sons.

Several like Saif were relatively westernized but would have tried to have held on to power. But Saif (graduate of London School of Economics) has been demonized even though secular and western oriented as has Libya since 2003.

There is nuance and reality you ignore.

IMO Sarkozy forced the issue and played into neo-con and neo-liberal matching agendas.

The violence and polarization just means that time to internal and external peace in Libya and Libya soveignity has been delayed with more loss of innocent life and detruction of the environment.

Read "The Peace to End all Peaces - The Fall of the Ottoman Empire" by Fromkin -- a book from the 1990s about the period surrrounding and including WWI". The Brits and French were stupid then and stupid now and brought the USA into a stupid situation. WWI resulted in WWII.

[tabatha]

94. I don't think so.

Gaddafi had the AU in his hands.

"CAPE TOWN — Foreign military strikes in Libya against Moamer Kadhafi's rule would not be needed if African leaders held their peers to account, South Africa's Desmond Tutu said Sunday.

"If Africa's leaders held their peers to account there would be no need for the people of Libya to suffer human rights violations. And there would be no need for United Nations-sanctioned military interventions in Libya," Tutu said.

"Instead, Colonel Moamer Kadhafi has for more than 40 years honed his skills in the art of resource management to win friends and influence people. And as a result, Africa seems powerless to stop him," the Nobel Peace laureate said in a statement."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jlfqXpR8ML_mI6xWeufh3f0EtHPQ?docId=CNG.26f4275431f3c791c245845a136980cf.d1

[Catherina]

87. I try. Thanks PufPuf. The US was cleverly played by Russia, China and Brazil

I don't know enough about India but China and Russia played the US big time. They abstained from the vote so the West could rush in, drains its resources and open itself to the criticisms that China and Russia are happily dishing out now. They'll laugh even harder when this blows up in the face of the West and they can swoop in and grab the oil themselves.

Brazil did it too. They pushed their standing in the world by getting a US president to go down there and try to plead with them instead of them answering an invitation to come to DC and *talk*. This pushed their standing in the eyes of South America even higher. To make things even more fun, they made sure Obama saw plenty of protests and la Presidenta declined to have dinner with them as Lula da Silva penned a strongly worded letter to Obama about his dismal lack of solidarity with US workers.



France is just out to seize its North African oil like it's spend decades doing without even an apology for the 1.5 million innocent people it slaughtered in Algeria. It needs oil for its industry and war machine too.

We've been played but I don't think Obama was. If Europe loses its Libyan oil supplies, that means less for the US since our industries are so interdependent. The first thing he did when the Egyptian uprising started was to call the neocons to the White House for a strategy meeting. Why? Why the neocons? BP can't drill in our Gulf anymore. They have a $71 Billion investment in Libya where they can drill away to their heart's content, to a depth even more dangerously deeper than they did in the Gulf. With Gaddafi gone, after his impudent recent demands that foreign companies have Libyan partners (probably members of his family I'll grant you), if the West can seize Libya and install a puppet, they won't need to worry about environmental disasters or any such silliness for decades to come. This all is on top of having a perfect base to quash future Arab rebellions since Egypt could become iffy if the revolutionaries topple the counterrevolution.

I talk too much. I hope you're wrong too, I just don't think so.

[Distant Observer]

148. Funny to see France criticizing Gaddafi for brutality given its history of massacres in Algeria

[Adsos Letter]

36. Has your research fundamentally changed your opinion of the Libyan revolution

from when you were running the Libya tweets threads? Not meant to be antagonistic, just curious. :)

Edit: spelling and wording.

[Catherina]

71. Yes but it wasn't just the research. The last few days I was doing those

certain questions kept coming up over and over again.

1. Where are all the women?

2. Where's the social and economic agenda you have with every revolution? You know, the one you plaster all over the city and internet explaining what changes you're going for?

3. Where's the youth movement in charge of this, the one that speaks officially for the revolutionaries?

4. Why did the Egyptian youth suddenly distance themselves from what was happening in Libya? At the beginning they were very supportive. Now they have nothing to do with it other than to denounce the people in the National Council.

5. Where were all the Libyans? The only information was coming from people in the Benghazi area and being relayed by people whose English was better than mine.

Those are just a few, the questions wouldn't go away and I kept foreseeing things I didn't like. After I stopped doing those, I spent the week distancing myself from tweet city and looking for answers to those uneasy questions. The stuff I found pained me and made me realize I'd been sucked in, on the back of the other 2 revolutions, and blindsighted.

Did you know the Egyptian revolutionaries are so pissed off that when Ban Ki Moon went to Tahrir Square for his photo op, they angrily chased him away because of what the UN is doing with Libya? A few days before they took out a public statement on their refusal to meet with Hillary Clinton and stated she wasn't welcome in Egypt. None of that is reported in the Western press and when it is, they change facts. In the base of Ban Ki Moon, they changed it to Libyans, pro-Gaddafi supporters chased him away. I've spoken with 2 organizers of the Egyptian movement and that's false, they chased him away.

From the beginning, wiser people said this was a civil war and not a revolution. The Benghazi movement did all it could to say that wasn't true and did everything it could to invite more neocon support rather than accepting and mediation to stop the slaughter. It had to be western intervention at all costs with hawks like Lieberman and McCain being forced to show their hand before we found out about the PNAC letters.

Well, well, well, whadya know. Revolutions have rules and Libya hasn't met any of them. It's more like a call for chaos with the leader of a sovereign putting down an armed rebellion as bloodily as a US President would if California rose up one day.

So yes, my research has fundamentally changed my hasty, emotional initial position that came from riding on the back of 2 other revolutions and no sleep in between to sit back and think.

Burkas. Fucking burkas now.

[joshcryer]

77. Wow, faulting the Benghazi people for not "mediating" with a tyrant!

It only gets better!

[Hugabear]

83. So you just dismiss everything she posted without even trying to counter any of her arguments?

I think she brings up some valid points. Care to go through them and explain why she's wrong? Or is all simply stereotyping?

[joshcryer]

96. Well, I'm on her ignore, but I'll do it for you and any other observers.

She told me not to "respond" to her, but my statements are generally intended so that observers can see where she's not being truthful.

1. Where are all the women?

50k women marched on Womens Day in Benghazi.

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCrSfxwstWs

Translation of various phone callers: http://pastebin.com/cF3ARvN1

Valid point?"= I don't think so.

2. Where's the social and economic agenda you have with every revolution? You know, the one you plaster all over the city and internet explaining what changes you're going for?

Internet has been down all over the entire country of Libya for an entire month. The only non-media information we were getting was from a guy who got killed a few days back, and his satellite phone was badly damaged.

The Declaration of Independence was signed July 4th 1776, the Constitution was not adopted until September 17, 1787 (after a constitutional convention of May in that same year). In effect everyone fighting against the British empire had no idea wtf they were fighting for except to overthrow the empire (ie, Gaddafi).

Valid point? Barely. They're still fighting for their lives.

3. Where's the youth movement in charge of this, the one that speaks officially for the revolutionaries?

Internet has been down all over the entire country of Libya for an entire month.

The only overwhelming sentiment you will get from all the youth is that they want Gaddafi gone.

Therefore we must look to those who are making actual governmental changes. The TNC says they want a secular democracy with no clerics in power. I have no reason to disbelieve them, and the revolutionaries would not put up with another Gaddafi.

Libya is not a social media inspired "protest for reforms" like Egypt was. Libya is a revolutionary uprising to dispose of a tyrant.

Valid point? Nope.

5. Where were all the Libyans? The only information was coming from people in the Benghazi area and being relayed by people whose English was better than mine.

All information in Libya was being funneled through phone calls through Libya Alhurra, people calling family and friends.

1. Internet is down in Libya.
2. No ingoing or outgoing phone calls from Libya are allowed.
3. Only calls within Libya are allowed.

So information is relayed through networks within Libya, translated by Libya Alhurra, and then posted online for people to understand. Unfortunately Gaddafi cut the head of that network off.

Valid point? Not even.

Did you know the Egyptian revolutionaries are so pissed off that when Ban Ki Moon went to Tahrir Square for his photo op, they angrily chased him away because of what the UN is doing with Libya?

http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/8261/Egypt/Politics-/Ban-Kimoon-attacked-in-Cairo.aspx">Gaddafi supporters are "Egyptian revolutionaries"? :rofl:

Valid point? Haha!

From the beginning, wiser people said this was a civil war and not a revolution.

Gaddafi said that, himself, from day 1. Gaddafi has learned just how wise he was, shooting on his own people.

Valid point? Bullshit.

The Benghazi movement did all it could to say that wasn't true and did everything it could to invite more neocon support rather than accepting and mediation to stop the slaughter.

The revolutionary representitives called for Gaddafi to step down in 48 hours, and they would not press charges. Gaddafi refused. This was back when the revolutionaries had well over a dozen cities under their relative control, with a flag against Gaddafi flying. Gaddafi razed 6 of them in 3 days (one of them took 3 weeks to fall).

Gaddafi offered a cease fire, and then bombed two cities, and spent a week bombing Misrata. He's a liar, and the revolutionaries were right not to trust him.

Valid point? Completely untrue point, more like.

[Adsos Letter]

116. A very small quibble...(truly small)...

"In effect everyone fighting against the British empire had no idea wtf they were fighting for except to overthrow the empire..."

It's true, to the degree that what they ended up with (the Constitution) wasn't crafted until well after the war was over. But most people thought they knew what they were fighting for, and it varied by demographic: women, men, slaves, social status, etc. (to put it with a different emphasis, each social segment knew what they were fighting for).

And many of the lower social strata didn't feel that they got it (in fact, many didn't).

It took 5+ years of dissension among conflicting interests (see Holton's work, below) before the Constitution was crafted and ratified; when the dust finally settles from all this, and who can say how long that will take, I wonder which factions within the revolutionaries will set the law of the land?

Two great works on this (which you may have read) are The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution by Bernard Bailyn

and

The Unknown American Revolution: The Unruly Birth of Democracy and the Struggle to Create America by Gary Nash

Woody Holton's Unruly Americans and the Origins of the Constitution addresses one interpretation of the period of dissension between the war's end, and the adoption of the Constitution.

EDIT: added an author's name, and a clarifying statement regarding Holton's work.

[joshcryer]

119. Fair enough. But I certainly don't believe that it'll be the fundamentalists or the islamists.

It's just absurd slandering to think that is going to be the final outcome.

[Adsos Letter]

121. I hope it isn't. Thanks for all that you are contributing to this ongoing discussion

both in terms of content and attitude. :hi:

[Distant Observer]

136. Where do you get your info re the history of the anti-gaddafi forces??

[Adsos Letter]

80. Well, History seems to run hand-in-hand with the law of unintended consequences.

All these revolutions/civil wars are moving at a very fast pace. I suspect we may all be surprised (and possibly horrified) at the results of some of them.

Some very insightful posters have pointed out the simple fact that each situation is unique, with its own set of issues and players. We err greatly if we lump them together.

[Catherina]

89. I think so too. Sunday a good friend sent me an e-mail called "Nice Recovery"

reminding me of my previous disdain for theory.

Revolutions have rules he reminded me and everyone lies. Short and to the point.

I hope we're not horrified but I too suspect we will be.

[riderinthestorm]

95. Alas. I've followed your posts with interest for quite a while and sadly I agree. nt

[Catherina]

99. Alas about sums it up. I appreciate your posts and look for them

I wish there were more of them because you bring good, concise input to this bloody mess. It's a sad agreement indeed. None of this brings joy. It would be so much easier to go along and pretend it's going to be garlands of roses and everyone will live happily ever after.

[sabrina 1]

107. Thank you for your thoughtful posts, Catherina.

I too initially supported the Libyan 'rebels' but also saw a few things that bothered me, unlike the Egyptian revolution.

Still, I wanted to believe it was just a continuation of the movement that swept Mubarak and Ben Ali out of power. Sometimes we just want something so much we become willfully blind.

I, like you, began to do a little more research on the country and while like everyone else I had laughed at Qaddafi's claims about Al Queda being responsible for the uprisings, when I started searching I found out that one of the things the West, Bush et al used back when they brought Qaddafi back into the fold, was that he was helping them to 'fight the war on terror' against the Extremists in the Eastern part of Libya. Never trusting anything Bush had to say, I looked around some more and discovered that Eastern Libya was considered to be a 'hotbed' of fundamentalists. I'm sure there are many decent people living there also, but the truth was that Qaddafi did not just make up the story about Al Queda, it turned out to be pretty well documented.

So, then I wondered why the U.S. and the Europeans, supposedly fighting a 'war on terror' would suddenly turn on their partner in that war?

Then I was shocked to see Wolfowitz and Kristoff among others, fully supporting intervention on behalf of the rebels.

One other thing, not especially significant, still it reminded me of Iraq and the Rendon Group's PR efforts when the 'allied forces' went into Baghdad. We saw footage of flag-waving Iraqis, cheering the 'liberators'. Later we found out that all those flags were brought in by Chalabi's group.

In Libya after the first bombs were dropped, a similar scene with hundreds of flags waving in the hands of cheering Libyans, was broadcast all over the world. I had an uneasy sense of deja vu. I wonder if the Rendon Group is still on the payroll of the MIC?

Now, like so many other people, I just feel sad, for the people who have died, and those who really were sincerely hoping for a successful revolution that would lead to democracy. I don't know what to think anymore, but as soon as the bombs began to fall, and I read that Qaddafi's air force is so insignificant that this would not stop him at all, that it was his ground troops, tanks etc. that would have to be stopped if helping the rebels was the goal.

Tonight on RT, I saw footage of the results of more bombs dropping on Tripoli with ambulances and screaming people at the scene as what appeared to be wounded or dead people being carried into the ambulances. I don't know who they were, but it was a horrible scene regardless. And way too familiar.

[highplainsdem]

108. Catherina, just which "Egyptian youth" have suddenly distanced themselves from what's happening in

Libya?

I haven't had much time for Twitter since I've been trying to find out info on ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, so I've been getting my news about Libya from news media and DU.

But when I have checked Twitter, I haven't seen the sort of attitude you're describing. And I know we follow a lot of the same people, since so often when I was trying to help you with your topics collecting tweets, we'd post the same thing.

I'm checking Twitter tonight, and finding, for instance, that Elazul, who's followed by BloggerSeif and SandMonkey and monaeltahawy and waelabbas, among others, has a VERY different take on what's happening in Libya than you have.

Look at his blog:

http://gbelazul.blogspot.com/2011/03/my-take-on-libya-situation.html

-snip-

Long story short, Getting rid of Qaddafi even with Foreign Intervention is more important and greater than having Qaddafi surviving the uprising & staying in power, See the message he's already given Syria.

Remember, Each country revolting in the mid east, isn't just fighting for itself, but for every country worldwide that yearns to be free from a brutal dictator.

-snip-

The fact remains, Politics are not ethics or morals. I'm not under any illusion that the French-German-American led attack on Qaddafi are anything but Realpolitiks, but the fact remains, I'll take the Realpolitik action when it coincides with ethics and morality rather than attack it based on idealistic principle. You want to attack & Criticize those countries for something? Attack them for not helping the freedom seekers in Bahrain, Attack them for not pressuring the Yemeni President to stop using violence, Attack them for not pressuring the Syrian Regime to stop using violence against protesters, Attack them for not Stopping the House of Saud from using force to stop protests after arresting people that tried to peacefully ask for change without a protest in it's own country, or for using it's military to put a stop to the protests in Bahrain.

But for the love of logic, don't attack them for helping the Libyan pro-freedom fighters (Please don't call them "Rebels"), especially when the action has widespread support in the free Libya and the Arab world, If not wide spread support by the Arab League, but then again, most of the Arab league members are a bunch of countries who still have brutal dictators in power, the current most powerful being Saudi Arabia, so do we really care about the Arab League? Isn't it about time to start listening to the people instead of their brutal dictators?

[joshcryer]

113. +1, would like to see a citation for that, too.

[Catherina]

135. I don't know Elazul

I remember his name but he wasn't part of the April 6 movement and it's hard to pin him down since he just started his blog on March 4. I notice he's defending Amr Moussa and Shafiq against unfair attacks, that doesn't bode well.

The people I'm talking about are people like 3arabawy who were organizers of the Egyptian revolution and and are still fighting the counterrevolution there as well as fighting the corruption of their own government that could be helping the Libyans instead of letting the former colonists in. Their sympathies are with the people of Libya who are getting slaughtered, not Gaddafi, but their trust is definitely not with the West.

Just because someone follows someone doesn't mean they agree on things. You'd probably be surprised to find out what several organizers think of one of the people you mentioned but it's not something I want to get into here.

I've followed this closely, intently without distraction and observed very much. If there's one thing I'm good it, it's keeping track of the large picture while focusing on small details. The Egyptian bloggers organized humanitarian aid (food, water, doctors) for Libya but when they noticed who the National Transition Council was and the calls to the very people crushing revolutions in the Arab world, they stepped back.

I don't think tweets are the be all, end all. There were plenty of threads here about the Pentagon's use of social media to accomplish its aims. Twitter is a source of information but not proof of anything. Do we even know who's really tweeting? Of course people are split. It's not easy watching a bunch of kids die or get maimed. But it's unacepptable to support the same people who set them up to get killed, maimed in the first place just because those same powerful ones now offer a solution.

Everything I foresaw is coming true. I hope you don't think I'm happy about this.

I understand how people can have different conclusions but all I can represent are my own thoughts and analyses. I'm strongly warning us to beware.

I urge you to watch these

Noam Chomsky Warns Against U.S./U.K. Intervention In Libya 1/2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=II9lo--U550

Noam Chomsky Warns Against U.S./U.K. Intervention In Libya 2/2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKHKDudUndY

Libya: Chomsky on the hypocrisy of western intervention
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K48zXVMldo

US:

PJCrowley Philip J. Crowley
While protecting civilians, the military operation gives the #Libyan opposition time to present itself as a viable alternative to #Qaddafi.
47 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply

UK France:

ajimran Imran Khan
President Nicolas Sarkozy said France and Britain were readying a "political and diplomatic solution" on Libya, AFP reported.
56 minutes ago

It was a partition plan all along just as I noted over 3 weeks ago. Warning.

Here's my bottom point, the guy with the lovely brogue speaks for me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpSA12QiCPc


I'm hitting post now because this answer could go on forever. My wish is what's best for the people of Libya.

[highplainsdem]

141. My wish is for what's best for the people of Libya, too, and I don't think being crushed by Gaddafi

and subjected to more years of tyranny by Gaddafi and his family would be best for them.

It certainly won't do Libya or the wider region any good if the opposition to Gaddafi is crushed.

3arabawy identifies himself as a socialist journalist and he was critical of the US well before this UN mission in Libya.

On the other hand, Ramy Raoof, a blogger and human rights activist, linked to the Human Rights Watch site with its director's statement in support of this military action.

RamyRaoof Ramy Raoof
Civilians in Benghazi, #Libya, Face Grave Risk http://goo.gl/RTWR7 International Community Should Act to Protect Population. #Feb17
18 Mar Favorite Retweet Reply


I'm not happy about neocons supporting military intervention in Libya either, Catherina. But sometimes people with very different attitudes and intentions can temporarily agree on the same action as a step toward very different ends.

And I don't know of anything other than this military action that could have averted Gaddafi's brutal suppression of the opposition.


Editing to give the full-length URL for the page Ramy Raoof linked to:

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2011/03/17/libya-benghazi-civilians-face-grave-risk

[blindpig]

130. Yes, where are the class issues?

Your point about 'better English' is important, who in any of these countries speaks the Queen's English? Virtually only the minuscule middle and upper classes, whose class affiliation certainly shades their communications.

[Catherina]

137. That's another thing that bothered me

If this is a real revolution, where are the class issues?

The most oppressed class in Libya is fleeing this *Arab* revolt in terror. Why is it so important for the Benghazi movement to insist this is an *Arab* revolt? Are the Black Libyans less Arab? Are the poor of all colors who benefited from the schools, hospitals and social programs Gaddafi instituted after deposing the monarch whose flag they're waving less worthy now?

This war masquerading as a humanitarian intervention is nothing more than the violent imperialist subjugation of a former colony, *regime change* as they call it now.

France, one of the imperialists with the worse human rights records is leading the call. What a joke. If we want this to be a revolution, it's the job of the Libyan masses themselves, not imperialism, to rid themselves of the elements oppressing them- and that includes the bearded ones in Benghazi whose women are walking around in Burkas and full hijabs.

This is civil war not revolution. Smarter people called it from the start. Kick me now.

[blindpig]

140. It is also an attempt by the West to manage the Arab Revolt.

They are desperate to do this.

No kicks for you, they had me going for a day or so, had me wondering if Fidel was out of touch. Silly person, the old boy was spot on as usual, I have apologized.

It can be difficult, they have practiced manipulating us forever and are right good at it. We must always attend to material causes first and trust no 'given wisdom'.

[Catherina]

143. At least they only had you for a day

They had me for 2 weeks and the first week I didn't even question anything. God was I slow. Thanks for the consolation.

[thewiseguy]

52. So now you have turned into a Ghaddafi supporter?

:rofl:

Must be fun to kick up your old threads.

[joshcryer]

58. Calling his police state "secular" beggers imagination.

[Adsos Letter]

60. dupe!!!

delete...

[thewiseguy]

62. Only because of the UN getting involved

Otherwise she would be posting about day 40 in Libya with mass killings in Benghazi.

[sabrina 1]

111. That is false. Catherina expressed doubts way before

any intervention by the UN. Your attacks on someone who had genuine questions and who was honest enough not to go on supporting something she believed she might have been wrong about, and now your false statement as to her reasons why especially since she made them so clear in a post to DU, back BEFORE any intervention, just about destroys your own credibility.

[Adsos Letter]

64. I don't think she's a Gaddafi supporter

but her enthusiasm for the revolutionaries seems to have chilled substantially...

Knowledge about this whole thing is evolving; the law of unintended consequences is certainly ripe for display.

[Name removed]

90. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sabrina 1]

109. No, she's an honest person without an agenda, just looking

for the truth and willing to say she may have been wrong.

I guess you were a Saddam supporter back when Bush was president. I know I was accused of that by Freepers because I did not support Bush's illegal invasion of Iraq.

Sad to see that kind of rhetoric here.

[Catherina]

144. Thanks for the honest support and having paid enough attention to understand

There's a reason you've always been one of my favorite posters. Even when we disagree it's always been with respect and never with silliness. I can't see what you're responding to but I have a general idea. So it's an agenda now? Thank you DU for the ignore feature.

[blindpig]

146. And now a word from Emerson.....

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.

At least she was able to see the manipulation and make the correction, nothing but merit in that and more than can be said for those who continue to take the bait.

[joshcryer]

67. The Women in Benghazi protesting on Women's Day (Libya Alhurra):

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCrSfxwstWs

Translation of various phone callers: http://pastebin.com/cF3ARvN1

If you weren't aware the guy who covered this was killed a few days back. :(

I memorialize him in every daily Libyan thread.

[David__77]

102. Thank you for your thoughtful research.

Of course the main thing is to oppose US intervention. The Libyan people should be free to choose Islamism, liberalism, or whatever set-up they want; but, "freedom" cannot be imposed by gunpoint.

[joshcryer]

114. I do not think an unsupported smear qualifies as "thoughtful research."

[sabrina 1]

118. No, you are correct, which is why my comment was directed

at Catherina, rather than at you.

[joshcryer]

120. I'm not the one saying that the Benghazi women are persecuted while Tripoli women...

...are free. :puke: :mad:

[Catherina]

139. That's how I see it too. This is their civil war, their choice

For relevant example, if the women of Libya accept to be bound in Benghazis burkas, that's their choice but it doesn't look like they do. For this to be a true revolution, the oppressed people in Libya need to be able to rid themselves of both Gaddafi and the Libyan elite ON THEIR OWN WITHOUT THE INTERFERENCE of do-good Westerners who are only now trying to catch up and learn the first thing about Libya's history.

Western gunpoint intervention on behalf of corporations and Arab monarchs isn't going to go well at all.

[Distant Observer]

126. Social, Libya was one of the best countries in Africa or the Arab world

The Benghazi rebellion is very much a parallel to the Taliban of Afghanistan.

[DutchLiberal]

128. From what I saw and read, it was *the youth* in Benghazi who started the protests...

Because they have no chance of getting work, no chance of getting educated, no prospect for the future under Qaddafi.

[killbotfactory]

7. Being murdered if you publicly oppose Gaddafi might have an influence on people.

Also being burned alive if you disobey orders...

Just sayin'

[highplainsdem]

11. +1

[Distant Observer]

132. Washington post is ATTACKED for DARING TO MENTION THE TRUTH

[ProgressiveProfessor]

10. Rebels are rarely the majority and this case appears to be no different

[oberliner]

12. They sure seemed to be in Egypt

Didn't see a lot of Mubarak-love in that particularly rebellion/revolution.

[Catherina]

32. Egypt was united on economic and social issues for their uprising

To this day, I still haven't seen a revolutionary pamphlet from these guys explaining what social or economic issues they stand for.

They made it clear at the beginning that unlike Egypt and Tunisia, this wasn't a bread revolution.

The picture I'm beginning to get here is that the old center of the monarchy is rising up waving the monarchy's flag while the heir to the throne is ready to come back, but it's not for bread, and that the people outside of Benghazi didn't perform the way they were expected to by rushing out of their homes to join an uprising coming from a conservative center and with unstated goals.

Egypt was united in their opposition. The April 6 Youth group was very vocal with a ton of literature out before and during the uprising. I'm not seeing this here. Benghazi can't even have a unisex protest march. What kind of unity could they possibly hope to expect from more liberal parts of Libya?

[joshcryer]

45. "Benghazi can't even have a unisex protest march." Tripoli can't even *have* a protest march period.

You get disappeared if you try it in Tripoli, remember reporting on that? Oh, no, you forget so easily. :puke:

I haven't seen a "unisex" protest in Benghazi, that's certainly true, but on womens day tens of thousands of women came out and protested. I didn't see any in full on Burqqua garb, just a headscarf.

[Fool Count]

79. Can you have a protest march against the rebels and in

support of Qaddafi in Benghazi? There you go, that's all you need to know about "the freedom" the anti-Qaddafi revolution brought.
And, please, don't tell me that there isn't a single Qaddafi supporter in Benghazi. There must be at least thousands of them there.
Why can't they declare their views openly? That's just a preview of the kind of "democracy" new Libyan regime has in store for their people.

[joshcryer]

81. Can you have a pro-Nazi march in Germany?

Or a pro-Batistia march in Cuba?

There are probably "pro-Gaddafi" people in Benghazi, however, they are likely part of an upper echelon group and if they actually "believed" their pro-Gaddafi rhetoric they'd actually put themselves in danger and make it known. In reality it's about the class status that they got by being a Gaddafi lackey more than anything else.

However, we do know for a fact that there were anti-Gaddafi protestors in Tripoli, who came out against Gaddafi and lost their lives for it. This illustrating which side believes in their support more.

[Fool Count]

123. You can certainly have a pro-Nazi march in Germany,

what are you implying - that the would-be marchers are afraid of prosecution? Or that there are no neo-nazis in Germany? The rest of your post is just
a wild and unsubstantiated conjecture sucked directly out of your finger. We do know for a fact that there were anti-Qaddafi protestors in Tripoli, but
whether any of them "lost their lives for it" is just another speculation of yours, I am yet to see any proof that any of them actually did. If pro-Qadaffi
demonstrators tried that in Benghazi, there is little doubt in what their fate would have been.

[PufPuf23]

51. Recall how Egyptian Generals were in DC when the protests began?

What occurs in Egypt is still open to question.

In Libya, gasoline was poured on a fire that just needed time rather than violent confrontation => war.

There was plenty of Mubarak-love over D and GOP administrations for years and mixed messages once there was a "crisis".

Gadaffi was on board the WOT post 2003 and secular.

Mubarak maintained a peaceful border with Israel for years but did not have the disposition, morality, nor vision of Anwar Sadat.

I recommend anyone read "The Peace to End all Peaces -- the Fall of the Ottoman Empire" by Fromkin. This a not a particularly new book (1990s) but reads like a spy novel with idiots in charge in the years that included World War I.

Most of us at DU see world events through a glass darkly.

[Distant Observer]

145. In Egypt there were peaceful protestor, not armed rebels

[Tx4obama]

16. Tripoli = 1.2 million people. Total population of Libya is 6.4 million people.

That is really not all that many people.
Here in Texas (Houston) my county (Harris) has 4.1 million people.

[Cerridwen]

17. That old 1/4-3/4 split...seems to run the same country to country.

Remember the 27% supporting shrub? How freaking weird is that?

[backscatter712]

18. Libyan teabaggers.

There's always that 20%-30% of the population that is authoritarian and is looking for an abusive daddy-figure they can fawn to.

[oberliner]

22. Where was that group in Egypt?

Didn't seem to be that kind of support for the Mubarak regime once the dominoes started to fall.

[backscatter712]

25. Are you kidding?

Who do you think was working for Mubarak's secret police? They had thousands of thugs, they were using snipers, provocateurs, rapists, the works!

Every dictator has his authoritarian worshipers.

[oberliner]

38. The thugs you mention didn't seem to have much popular support

How long was it between the beginning of the thuggery on behalf of Mubarak to try to stop the rebellion and Mubarak stepping down?

Not long.

[EFerrari]

48. That had nothing to do with popular support.

It was a dictatorship, remember?

That was about the army throwing Mubarak under the bus.

[oberliner]

53. Can't you be a dictator and also have popular support?

Isn't Libya a dictatorship too? And Saudi Arabia?

Some dictators are more popular than others.

[EFerrari]

57. Sure but that support isn't the decider.

The Egyptian generals made a calculation and he was out.

They are the ones who have a relationship with the Pentagon. That's where their power comes from, not public opinion.

[oberliner]

61. Why have the Libyan generals not made a similar calculation?

Considering the fact that the international community and NATO is involved - one would think that there would be massive defections to join what one would think would end up being the winning team when all is said and done.

[EFerrari]

72. Yep. Well, in Egypt, the military has a decades long relationship

with the Pentagon. In Libya, not so much. So, there isn't the same infrastructure to communicate with.

[sabrina 1]

117. Well, some of the Libyan military and police were being trained in Europe

Kind of embarrassing now for those very recent allies of Qaddafi.

[EFerrari]

39. And they're still working for the army on demand. n/t

[sabrina 1]

115. Egypt has a population approx. four times the size of Libya's

The country had a secret police force of 200,000. A miniscule number considering the size of the population. And they were pretty much universally hated, although no one dared say so out loud. But when they did, it was loud and clear, and currently some of them are being prosecuted for the murder of civilians during the revolution. Many more will be prosecuted for crimes against the people during Mubarak's reign. Like South America where criminals from the old dictatorships, are now being prosecuted.

I am sure there are still Mubarak suppporters in Egypt, but they have lost their power and are very much in the minority. Still, they will need to be completely marginalized and prosecuted for crimes committed against the Egyptian people. Evil doers, to quote our very own would-be dictator, don't go away, they just go underground. Which is why it is so important that the Egyptians succeed in establishing a true Democratic society where such evil is not tolerated and treated as the threat that it is.

[Amonester]

20. “He gave us freedom and everything we need.”

Typical I got mine, so screw everyone else's freedom, right to live without being terrorized or tortured for nothing, and everything they need.

Nice "modern" and "educated" people in Tripoli, indeed.

[joshcryer]

40. The 40k plus students and engineers on foreign soil would better tell the story.

And I don't see them coming in defense of Gaddafi. But they're "expats" and shouldn't be listened to. Frankly I'd listen to a student who was lucky enough to get a visa to fly elsewhere far quicker than I'd listen to someone in Triploi waiving a green flag.

[Amonester]

44. On edit: Agreed 100% n/t

[EFerrari]

50. Do you have anything to say about the issue itself?

[Amonester]

59. Yes, I agree with what josh wrote.

Thanks for reminding me. Sorry for I digressed.

[Distant Observer]

142. All education, including scholarship to foreign university is free to Libyan citizens

[bhikkhu]

21. Jim Jones was quite popular with his bunch too

I hear they would do anything for him...

Of course people are entitled to their dependencies and devotions, but that has little to do with the grown-up business of democracy and running a country.

[Tx4obama]

24. Hitler had his followers too. n/t

[highplainsdem]

26. Wow, it's almost enough to make you forget all the protesters killed in Tripoli last month!

:sarcasm:

Quoting from that WaPo article:

To enter the world of the Gaddafi believers is to enter an “Alice in Wonderland” realm...

[joshcryer]

33. And in a dozen other cities, for thatmatter.

[oberliner]

41. One question is - will he step down like Mubarak did?

Or does he have enough resources and manpower to keep the fight going for a very long time?

[joshcryer]

42. They're already looking for an exit stragtegy.

[oberliner]

47. Here's hoping

So much conflicting info from his camp - hard to know what to believe.

[center rising]

54. Most people are scared of Gaddafi

Because they'll probably be killed if they back the rebels.

[revolutionnow45]

65. who are you going to trust? Twitter and the thousands of people that stood together to say Thanks!

or the Washington post that helped Bush publish his lies and attempt to give them validity in the lead up to the war in Iraq?

[Romulox]

70. LULZ. *Twitter* says BOMB HIM!!!!

:wtf:

[EFerrari]

75. There's aren't thousands of people posting from Libya on Twitter.

[joshcryer]

78. I doubt anyone *in* Libya is posting on Twitter.

Internet has been cut off in Libya for a month.

[riderinthestorm]

88. Don't tell Bobbolink! She's convinced it's all live. nt

[joshcryer]

97. But most twitterers have contacts in Libya...

...?

[Throd]

74. Lots of citizens benefit from their dictators.

But the majority do not.

[Tx4obama]

76. Watch this short video clip. A captured Gaddafi soldier says that ....

if they refused to fight then they'd be killed.

At the 1:40 minute mark: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/03/2011324145513428106.html

---------------------

BEFORE the no-fly zone

Below are graphic photos of LIBYANS that were killed on the orders of Gaddafi BEFORE the UN's no-fly mission

WARNING VERY GRAPHIC - Photos of dead Libyan protesters below - WARNING VERY GRAPHIC

http://yfrog.com/h4oacietj

http://yfrog.com/h7ucplxj

and video of Libyan Soldiers Loyal to Citizens Burnt by Gaddafi - refused orders to attack citizens (graphic)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x556426


Over 8,000 protesters were killed before the no-fly zone, all of their blood is on the hands of Gaddafi.

[David__77]

103. Libyan state TV also shows similar statements by captured rebels.

I think we need to take prisoners' statements with a grain of salt. Often, torture can do what it is intended to do.

[David__77]

104. I think the Western elites are in for a surprise.

I could be wrong. But since this thing began, I did not think the Libyan state would easily fall. Now we have hundreds of missiles raining down on Libya, and (so far), the strategic picture is not appreciably changing.

[joshcryer]

106. I bet you that within the next week Ajdabiya will be controlled by the revolutionaries again.

And the people of Ajdabiya will be extremely grateful because no longer will they have to deal with tanks in their city and shelling and shooters.

(I don't consider them "snipers" because they appear to be using typical rifles, they're just shooting from a distance, still effective.)

[Tx4obama]

110. The big picture has changed dramatically since the no fly zone started.

Gaddafi's air force has been basically completely demolished.
The UN coalition forces have total control of the sea at the north completely cut off any incoming deliveries of arms to Gaddafi.
The rebels are pushing the Gaddafi forces back out of Ajdabiya and Misurata.
And it as been ONLY SIX DAYS!

[joshcryer]

105. I remember a government provided "terrorist" was asked by Libyan presenter...

...why he was a terrorist and he said he wasn't. :rofl:

[David__77]

134. There's plenty of ones where they "admit" it.

I put it in quotes for obvious reasons: when someone is captured and under duress, you have to take what they say with skepticism.

http://en.ljbc.net/facts.html

[grillo7]

100. I find this quote the most troubling...

"Moreover, he said, the powerful tribal structure that forms the backbone of the government has remained behind Gaddafi, despite initial reports in the early days of the uprising that powerful tribal leaders had defected. Gaddafi has apparently been helped in this regard by making good on a pledge to distribute weapons."

From http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/many-libyans-appear-to-back-gaddafi/2011/03/24/ABHShlRB_story.html

This would seem to complicate things immensely.

[Adsos Letter]

122. Well...this has been an interesting thread. n/t

[DutchLiberal]

127. Does the WaPo really not know how *propaganda* works?

Does the WaPo not know that those people will be locked up, will 'disappear' or just be shot if they refuse to act like they support Qaddafi? Does the WaPo not know how (Middle Eastern) dictatorships work? Does the WaPo not know how the regime's secret police controls everything?

Are they really that clueless? I almost can't believe it. I guess they take Qaddafi's propaganda tv seriously, too. :eyes:

[Name removed]

131. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CJvR]

138. I doubt that.

I don't think Gaddafi's support is more than a few %. His tribe, a few who have been bought and all those who stand to loose big if Gaddafi falls. He has enough support to field an army but really outside Sirte just about every city in Libya have revolted against him and none have reverted spontaneously as would be expected if Mad Dog had any substantial support anywhere.

[Octafish]

149. Enough to put it up to a vote?

Which is what we used to call an election in a democracy.