Can Anyone Tell Me Something About Ghadafi's Army?......

[global1]

How big is it in terms of troops and equipment? What is left after the NATO bombing? How big is there stockpile of ammunitions?
How loyal are troops? Why aren't they dropping their arms and turning on him? Is he that well protected that he isn't afraid that one of his trusted bodyguards won't off him?

[Davis_X_Machina]

1. "Why aren't they dropping their arms and turning on him? "

Why would they drop their arms?

Inspired by their struggle against US imperialism, they go from strength to strength.

Soon all of Libya will be peaceful again, and the forces of Western imperialism will have received a richly deserved bloody nose.

Shame about the massacres in reprisal, but hey, life is messy.

[defendandprotect]

17. Many have done that and joined the rebels ...

When it's possible and when they know the truth of that it is Libyans involved

in the uprising, they may do.

[Mojeoux]

2. Good Qs

[dipsydoodle]

3. In 2009 their total popualtion was 6,419,925

If we assume they've got a postman and he's neutral and also believe that the insurgents are a minority then I would guess there must be more than 3,209,982 in the army.

The real question is who CAN you believe.

[Ozymanithrax]

4. About 50,000 people, with a large amount of equpment..

in tanks and other vehicals.

Compared to the U.S., the Brits, or France, or even Egypt it is pathetic. But is is far better trained than the rebels and capable dealing a lot of death while just following orders.

[defendandprotect]

10. In particularly, in a war on mainly unarmed citizens ... !!

Including the planting of landmines by G against his own citizens!

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

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

[Ozymanithrax]

41. So G is just a misunderstood liberal...

Those peaceful protestors he began killing in February were really CIA Al Qaeda agents high on drugs in their Nescafe.

[The Magistrate]

44. There You Have It, Sir, Straight From The Horse's Mouth

Lived among the Moslems of Africa for years, he said, so he knows all this stuff backwards and forwards, better than anyone here....

[defendandprotect]

49. Kaddafi is a "liberal" ... ???

My first recommendation to you is that you read the threads of the revolutions --

Libyan protesters were not armed -- eventually they did pick up weapons discarded by

the retreating army.

And evidently, you're completely unfamiliar with the Gaddafi family and how it has armed

itself --

Kaddafi has secret prisons where he tortures those being held -- refer even to the

instances where American journalists were held and what they had to say about it --

Kaddafi has buried people under ground for years -- in darkness.

Kaddafi has brought in more than 50,000 mercenaries to fight for him to keep himself in

power -- $2,000 a day, every day.

Kaddafi has laid landmines out side of the towns he is attacking --

Kaddafi equipped his mercenaries with vodka and hallucinagenic drugs --

and his army with Viagra and condoms -- doctors report finding these items on the bodies

of dead soldiers!

Kaddafi has obviously instructed his army to rape women -- it is a recognized tool of war.


"Lies" -- "Duplicitous" -- ?

Such comments only highlight your ignorance of what has actually been going on in Libya!

[Warpy]

5. First it's not the Libyan military

Having come to power on the backs of the military, he then sought to make them poorly equipped and underfunded so they wouldn't be able to depose him.

As I understand it, his "army" is made up by members of his tribe at the top with mercenaries recruited from all over Africa to do the actual fighting. They are well paid, lavishly equipped, and loyal only to him, feeling nothing for the citizens of Libya since they're all foreigners.

The Libyan army has joined the people, in other words. They're fighting Gadhafi's private army.

[AngryAmish]

6. THis is right

[Distant Observer]

9. Please provide some link to pre-hostility data! If not at least give us a CurveBall evidence

[The Magistrate]

12. You Do Youself No Credit, Sir, Pressing This As You Do

This is drawn from well before the present contrempts....

"Qadhafi and knowledgeable observers recognized that only the army represented a separate source of power that could threaten to overturn the existing regime. A government journal warned in 1982 that "armies believe the power to bear arms is by proxy for the masses and they thus create dictatorial classes which monopolize the weapons and crush the masses with them." This was followed by an extraordinary campaign unleashed against the military in 1983. The ideological weekly of the revolutionary committees, Al Zahf al Akhdar, branded officers as reactionaries, guilty of corruption, smuggling, and smoking hashish. These fascists "must be immediately removed," said the editor, because they "mock the people and get drunk with the bourgeoisie." Although these views could not have been published without official sanction, Qadhafi refrained from associating himself fully with them. He said the army was not corrupt and that the officers with a bourgeois orientation were only remnants from the traditional royal army.

"Although Al Zahf al Akhdar moderated its charges following Qadhafi's intervention, its campaign, focusing on the luxurious cars, dwellings, and working quarters of the officers, was resumed in 1984. Assuming that Qadhafi could muzzle these denunciations of the military if he chose, he may have failed to do so because of suspicions of military disloyalty and a desire to deflate the prestige of the military establishment as a potential competing political force. Thus, in spite of his dependence on the armed forces to execute his wide-ranging ambitions, Qadhafi may feel constrained to seek some balance by giving freer rein to the Revolutionary Committees and by strengthening the People's Militia.

"The revolutionary committees introduced into workplaces and communities were not at first extended to the military (see The Revolutionary Committees , ch. 4). When they were later imposed, there were complaints that they were controlled by officers with insufficient revolutionary zeal. After the early 1980s, however, a paramilitary wing of the Revolutionary Committees, the Revolutionary Guards, became entrenched within the armed forces. They served as a parallel channel of control, a means of ideological indoctrination in the barracks, and an apparatus for monitoring suspicious behavior. The Revolutionary Guards reportedly held the keys to ammunition stockpiles at the main military bases, doling it out in small quantities as needed by the regular forces.

"The influence of the Revolutionary Guards increased after a coup attempt in May 1985 (see State of Internal Security , this ch.). The Guards, assisted by the Revolutionary Committees, set up roadblocks and arrested thousands of individuals suspected of being implicated. The Revolutionary Guards were believed to be no more that 1,000 to 2,000 strong, but they were outfitted with light tanks, armored cars and personnel carriers, multiple rocket launchers, and SA-8 antiaircraft missiles. Most had been recruited from Qadhafi's own tribal group in the Surt region."

[leftstreet]

15. What's that from?

[The Magistrate]

18. An Odd Compendium, Sir, Dating To The Late Eighties

http://www.mongabay.com/history/libya/libya-the_armed_forces.html

[leftstreet]

20. Thanks n/t

[The Magistrate]

22. Kind Of A Fly In Amber, Sir, But Useful Still

Came upon it a while back in on one of my periodic forays after more information on colonial campaigns in the region, the Senussi invasion of Egypt, and the Italian campaigns after the Great War, in particular.

[The_Casual_Observer]

26. This is like using 1992 reports to make claims about Iraqi WMD.

[The Magistrate]

28. You, Sir, Wanted Description Pre-Dating The Present Situation --- Then Complain When Such Appears

Try not to make it so obvious.

And feel free to point out any manner in which the case has changed substantially....

[JoseGaspar]

30. And you don't reclaim any credit by your answer...

Your odd compendium seems to repeat verbatim (without attribution and with its paragraphs reordered), the narrative at GlobalSecurity.org.

Here, for example, are your first two paragraphs, but coming at the end and not the beginning of a GlobalSecurity narrative:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/libya/overview.htm

As we both know, GlobalSecurity is both quite conservative and has a reputation for being "connected" (it is the product of John Pike)... just as Distant Observer implied.

In any case, the narrative at both sites is vague and out of date.

More to the point, the same set of articles at GlobalSecurity describe the "high morale" of the Libyan Army due to modern equipment and other factors... again supporting Distant Observer's implication.

There are no links anywhere which support the idea that the entire Libyan Army has defected to the "rebels", and that Quadaffi is merely supported by "mercenaries". Quite the contrary, the handful of Libyan units which are supposed to have gone over to the "rebels" have somehow not appeared on the battlefield as has been reported in the Guardian, by MSNBC's Richard Engel and in the NYT. In fact, some sources believe that it was simply the officers who "defected" and that the soldiers "melted away". On the other hand, the mercenary stories have somehow magically gone away. In part, this is because of the conflation of "African mercenaries" with the very real African Legion dating back to the 1970s.

You also missed this assessment in your "source", which even included the disarming of the Cyrenaican tribes (King Idris' only loyal subjects):

"The military has been among the most representative institutions in the country, drawing its membership from all strata of society. The integration of the different forces, organized before 1969 under separate commands, and the disarming of the Cyrenaican tribes were generally regarded as significant first steps toward establishing national unity. According to some authorities, these steps will eventually breakdown tribal, regional, and parochial tendencies."

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/libya/overview.htm

Distant Observer is right to be skeptical and, despite your tone, you have offered up nothing at all.

[The Magistrate]

33. It Is Unlikely To Be Original There, Sir: Too Old In Its Focus

Elements from the entries at the link provided can be found on various wikis, and other loci: it is useful to have it all in one place. Indeed, the person you are defending has previously cited material found there, posted at another site in a slightly altered form. No particular inaccuracies have struck me, when it touches directly on matters familiar to me from my personal interests, and recollections of events in my lifetime. The item you trumpet as 'missed' was certainly read, and included knowingly. Libya is one of those patchwork things, originally three separate jurisdictions, and uneasy as a whole under the King, owing to regional favoritism. Gaddahfi did indeed rise as a nationalist, and certainly took steps to break local powers. There is nothing exceptional about that; it is what was done in some form by all the generation of Arab Nationalist leaders after the Second World War.

What has been stated about the Libyan army is that some units in the east have defected from the government, and that loyal units are those with some tribal connection to Gaddahfi, or cultivated as 'guards' units dedicated to the regime. There is no doubt there are elements of 'party army' in the military structure, with superior combat power to the regulars. There has been a good deal of exaggeration about 'African mercenaries'. but there is a sort of 'African Legion' maintained, and its members could be counted on to be loyal to the regime. Again, use of foreigners is a pretty standard move, when they are available, as one of the dangers in suppressing rebellion is that the soldiery may identify with the unruly populous.

[JoseGaspar]

35. It is a considerable retreat you have undertaken already...

...but, sadly not enough, if you read the assertion that you originally weighed in on.

If you understand the details, you know that the African Legion dates back to the 1970s and early 1980s and was motivated at least as much by politics (and NOT internal Libyan politics) as it was by pay... in contrast to say, the French or Spanish Foreign Legion or Blackwater, all three of whom have been very active in Africa.

The fact is that the majority of the Libyan Army seems to remain loyal to Qaddafi, the reasons are not hard to discern, and there is nothing but rumor to support anything else. Your quotes implied that Qaddafi had undermined his own support within the Army. Facts do not support that, at least as of yet.

As far as minor points go, you have once again raised some points in your latest post which are simply debatable. A "party army" is a fabrication, as is a "party" of any significance in Libya.

On another point, either the Army is primarily a national force or a tribal one. You claim one thing but your source claims the exact opposite.

I don't wish to quibble on these however, as they are minor issues in comparison to the major ones.

As with everything else, life is more complex than immediate partisanship would like it to be.

[The Magistrate]

36. If You Say So, Sir

The query was for accounts pre-dating the present situation indicating frictions between Gaddahfi and the regular army, and the same was provided. You will search long and fruitlessly for claims of mercenary fighters being the principal support of Gaddahfi made by me in comment on this matter. The rest of this is not really worth engaging, as you do not seem to have much understanding the history behind the present situation, or of military organization and recruitment, or political structures and how they are imposed and maintained.

[JoseGaspar]

38. Somehow, I never think you really mean "sir" when you say "sir"...

But, let me summarize your complaint: if I contest your sources, your conclusions, or your "do yourself no credit" line, then it is obvious that I "do not seem have much understanding the history behind the present situation, or of military organization and recruitment".

We can make it about me if you like... but there is a word (actually two words) which describe that tactic.

Harrumph all you like... you have not presented anything.

[The Magistrate]

39. You Think This Has Been Made About You, Sir?

People will read the exchange, and draw their own conclusions.

[defendandprotect]

19. McCarthy Hearings ... embarrassed to say don't know name of gent who spoke them!!

[Distant Observer]

7. The first sentence is true. The rest is twisted propaganda to justify killing the "enemy"

If you have real data please provide the evidence from sources pre-hostilities.

[The_Casual_Observer]

8. This "information" appeared around the same time as the claims of

genocide & 10's of thousands of civilians being killed, along with other various other psyops bullshit.

[sabrina 1]

13. Yes, it did. totally unreliable information as always from the U.S.

MSM and from party loyalists who seem incapable of even asking questions. I watched Ed last night and I felt sorry for him because he was in a position of trying to defend something he knows so little about. Laura Flanders tried to inject some facts and it was a wierd sensation to watch someone I have appreciated for so long for his stand against Republicans, actually try to drown her out. I found myself yelling at him 'let her talk, Ed'.

If only the country was the primary concern of a majority of Americans, rather than their political parties, we would never be so easily fooled as to go to a war like Iraq, or now, this one.

[Distant Observer]

11. Western journalist are on the ground. Maybe they should try going to a pro-gaddafi town and

ask some questions rather than just hanging out with the rebels or in Tripoli hotels.

[The Magistrate]

16. You Mean Be Squired Around By Government Minders, Sir

"My god, man, slap yourself and think!"

[defendandprotect]

21. BBC, for one, regularly covers the pro-Gaddafi demonstrations --

armed them with vodka and hallucinagenic drugs --

just as he has armed his troops now with viagra and condoms --

[Warpy]

43. That would be a good idea, only I doubt the reception

would be all that friendly.

[Bluerthanblue]

46. maybe you'd like to

do it yourself if it's so simple?

"Foreign journalists covering events in the Libyan capital, Tripoli, are facing increased government pressure. State television regularly denounces Western media coverage of the conflict, and there are billboards around the city condemning news organizations by name. The situation for the media in the Libyan capital has become ever more sinister and weird.

Events are never scheduled in advance. The only warning journalists normally get is a trilling over the speaker system in the Tripoli hotel where almost all of the Western media are based.

Sometimes it's a magical mystery bus tour that can take you to something as simple as a gas station or as frightening as a town five hours away that may be under aerial bombardment — as happened to journalists who went to Moammar Gadhafi's hometown of Sirte this week.

The expression "No matter where you go, there you are" perfectly encapsulates the experience.

At the end of every ride, there is a supposedly spontaneous pro-Gadhafi demonstration, where men and women wearing green chant and hold up pictures of the "Brother Leader."

.....more at:

http://www.npr.org/2011/03/30/134968914/in-libyan-capital-reporters-encounter-the-surreal

[defendandprotect]

14. Gaddafi paid to bring in more than 50,000 mercenaries -- probably many more than that --

If they were paid it would have been something like $2,000 each per day --

Mercenaries came from Chad, for one -- which is still supplying him with weapons.

[The_Casual_Observer]

23. Where does this kind of odd shit come from anyway?

[defendandprotect]

24. You mean you simply don't know about the mercenaries ... ???

Many here ignored the Libyan Revolution threads --

if you had been watching them, you'd have know that --

Pleasant talking with you -- ??

[The_Casual_Observer]

25. This shit has been circulating since the CIA got involved about 3 weeks ago.

[defendandprotect]

27. You want to be in denial... fine. If you want to know the truth, check the threads ...

[The Magistrate]

29. Only Three Weeks Ago, Sir? Rather Sluggard, It Seems To Me....

"There's always some sonuvabitch that's slow to get the word...."

[The_Casual_Observer]

45. All the old shit has been churned up in the last 3 weeks or so.

Before that nobody gave a god damn about it. And it looks like I'm right, the CIA has their hands all over this motherfucker.

[The Magistrate]

51. This, Sir, Is Well Short Of Establishing The Rebellion Is An Agency Construct

[JoseGaspar]

32. It is always worth doing the math...

If what you say were true, these "mercenaries" would cost, just by themselves, 30 times the Libyan Defense budget.

There are a dozen other ways to stamp this as fiction, not least of which is the idea of one of the poorest countries in the world, Chad, supplying anyone with weapons... or anything else for that matter.

[walldude]

31. Hang on.. the receipts for all that shit are around here somewhere

Who do you think paid for his army?

[JoseGaspar]

34. A good source for the simple facts is the IISS...

(the International Institute for Strategic Studies). They will list units, equipment, manpower, etc. as far as it's known.

The basic answers are that Libya has an Army of 50,000, half of which are conscripts. There was also a Peoples Militia of that same size, an African Legion of from 7 to 10,000 and an Islamic Legion which was supposed to be 5000. The status of the last 3 are really not known and it is not clear if those numbers are current.

As far as equipment goes, Libya has bought a lot more equipment than the Army can use at its present size (and more ammunition, though the surplus is more in infantry weapons than in heavy equipment). Qaddafi's stated goal has been to arm the "whole people" (including women, which was the source of considerable controversy) and most of the heavy equipment is distributed in depots around the country (which is where the rebels got their weapons) while some portion of the light arms are distributed among the populace.

As for the rest, do not wholly believe a single word you read... the reality will become apparent soon enough.

[Distant Observer]

37. It is so refreshing to see a post with solid information rather than the usual MSM garbage

designed for Western self-justification of psy-op purposes.

[The Magistrate]

42. You Do Read These Things, Do You Not, Sir?

http://www.iiss.org/whats-new/iiss-in-the-press/march-2011/kadhafis-elite-forces-key-to-libya-conflict/?locale=en

'Gary Li, of the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), said there were signs Kadhafi was altering his military strategy away from air attacks to more ground-based assaults.

"The forces that took Zawiyah last Friday were the dreaded Khamis Brigade, one of the best equipped of Kadhafi's forces," Li told AFP.

"Arguably even their tanks would have been vulnerable to RPG (rocket-propelled grenade) attacks from the lightly armed rebels but what seems to have been the deciding factor was artillery.

"The Kadhafi forces moved away from relatively ineffectual air attacks to more traditional ground based artillery barrages."

He said using artillery "smacks of desperation", but the psychological impact of artillery strikes on untrained volunteers "far outweigh actual damage -- which in itself was already considerable".

Li believes the change of tactics was a sign of Kadhafi's increasingly ruthless approach towards the rebels.

"I think the general feeling is that Kadhafi has abandoned any thoughts of possible reconciliation with the rebels and the gloves are now well and truly off so to speak," Li said.

"The employment of heavy artillery on his own people is ten times worse than air strikes." He also conceded that a a no-fly zone would have "no impact" on an artillery-led battle.'




'Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi's elite forces hold the key to crushing the rebellion in the north African country as he can no longer count on the regular army, analysts said Monday.

Kadhafi's forces have won a string of victories in recent days as they move east from Tripoli, and were battling on Monday for Ajdabiya, a key town which the rebels have vowed to defend at all costs.

Dave Hartwell, a Middle East and north Africa analyst for IHS Jane's, the London-based defence information group, said Kadhafi's paramilitary unit, the Revolutionary Guard Corps, was seen as his most loyal forces.

"The revolutionary guard is about 3,000 strong, and we are confident that they are fighting at the moment," Hartwell told AFP.

"They have access to a variety of weapons, including battle tanks, armoured personnel carriers and helicopters."
Known as Liwa Haris al-Jamahiriya, the guard is hand-picked from Kadhafi's tribal region around the port town of Sirte, "and their main duty is to protect Kadhafi and his family," Hartwell said.

"They are pretty well knitted into the fabric of the regime."

Soviet-made battle tanks T72s, dating from the early 1970s, are the most modern vehicles available to Kadhafi's forces, the analyst said.

A second crack battalion, the Khamis Brigade commanded by Kadhafi's youngest son, Khamis, in theory has access to 260 of the tanks, though it is unclear how many are fully functional.

The regular Libyan army, meanwhile, numbered 45,000 before the rebellion started, but Hartwell said only a third are still fighting after several thousand either defected to the rebels or "just melted away."
"Loosely, we estimate that only 10,000-15,000 troops are loyal to Kadhafi -- but this is probably still enough to seize the initiative," Hartwell said.'

[JoseGaspar]

47. Why yes, I do...

I indirectly quoted Li above. That does not mean that I hold with the political content of either IISS or Jane's which are about as establishment conservative as it gets. I simply suggested IISS (and the Military Balance in particular) because it tends to be fairly accurate about Orders of Battle. I do not agree with Li on much beyond some factual details, and probably don't agree with Hartwell on anything, related to Libya or not. You can see Li's political attitude from his description of the use of artillery ("on his own people", etc) after the fighting had already become a conventional battle (i.e. "civil war").

Hartwell's analysis is much worse. He talks about the revolutionary guard which is properly "para-military" and part of Qaddafi's internal security apparatus and then switches to the Khamis Brigade (did you notice that it is now a "battalion"... and with 260 tanks...) which is part of the Army, proper. He then essentially supports what I told you: that only "several thousand" defected to the rebels, that the conscripts seem to have "melted away" (although he has them melting away on both sides, which has yet to be confirmed), and then claims that only 10-15,000 are still loyal to Qaddafi. My guess is that this is wishful thinking on Hartwell's part, but we shall see. I have no doubt that this is typical of the "optimistic thinking" that led to European intervention.

In any case, there is no talk here of thousands of mercenaries from Chad or anything else. Nor is there any evidence of the "several thousand" defectors showing up on the battlefield in support of the rebellion.... which is the very point which you weighed in on. There is only a potential disagreement on how much of Qaddafi's Army remains operational... or will remain operational in the future under NATO bombing.

You are not responding to this post but still stinging from the ones up-thread. There you declared me unworthy of further discussion on military matters. Now you seem to want to quote me two articles which quote each other and tell me about T72s. Will we be discussing the relative merits of mechanical loaders for 125mmm tank guns, next?

Decide what it is that you want to debate -- and whether I am worthy of it -- first.

[Runework]

48. There is a lot of BS "info" going around

Hard to tell the numbers

A reporter from the NYer was on Spitzers show (cnn), by phone,

he said the rebel force that was on the move was about 1500 people ?

[JoseGaspar]

53. There is also a lot of what used to be called "disinformation"...

... going around.

[The Magistrate]

50. Just Noting Your Link Does Not Support Your View Of The Matter, Sir

Though it aligns pretty well with mine.

[JoseGaspar]

52. That is just simple nonsense and you know it...

The statement that began this "debate" was:

"As I understand it, his "army" is made up by members of his tribe at the top with mercenaries recruited from all over Africa to do the actual fighting. They are well paid, lavishly equipped, and loyal only to him, feeling nothing for the citizens of Libya since they're all foreigners.

The Libyan army has joined the people, in other words. They're fighting Gadhafi's private army."

This statement was then supported by another poster, challenged by a third (who asked for a link), and then it was your turn. You decided to lecture the challenger ("it does you no credit to press the matter", etc.).

Nothing you or anyone else has come up with supports the original contention in the slightest, despite the use of 3 sets of right-wing "military analysts". There was GlobalSecurity, IISS, and Jane's. None of them remotely support the original contention which you weighed in on. Qaddafi's army is composed of the Libyan Army. The debate is over whether it is all of the Libyan Army or less than that. There is no evidence that any more than "several thousand" have defected and none of those are anywhere to be seen yet.

Hartwell, the worst of the lot, claims that the paramilitary Revolutionary Guard is playing a leading role (although it only totals 3000 across Libya, and presumably a portion actually "defends" Qaddafi himself). He then brings up the 45,000 Libyan Army and the 40,000 Peoples Militia just as I did (and disagrees with nothing except the proportion which remains "loyal"). The "foreign mercenaries" are nowhere to be found even though the "analysts" are itching to talk about them.

It does the original challenger great credit to have asked for a link supporting the original contention, which is utter bullshit. There are no such links because the statement is not even remotely true. It does you no credit to have then attempted to bully the original challenger. Let me repeat again, everything since is dental floss...

Finally, you have restarted an earlier conversation. Nothing of my present post is under challenge nor do I support (or indicated that I support) the perspective of the tools at IISS who pass for analysts (as an example, name the last time that the US military attempted to take a town or city held by armed "civilians" ("insurgents", etc.) and did not use artillery). I merely pointed out that their publication, the Military Balance, is a good source for basic facts... no more.

This is sophistry, SIR... and I am perfectly willing to let our "discussion" stand on its own merits.

[The Magistrate]

54. And Of Course, You Quote Selectively, Sir

The beginning of the comment you quote part of was "Having come to power on the backs of the military, he then sought to make them poorly equipped and underfunded so they wouldn't be able to depose him." My post was in reply to a comment asking for material pre-dating the heat of the immediate present on the topic, and my material abundantly demonstrated that relation between Gaddahfi and the 'regulars'. The person addressed has compiled something of a record over recent days, and was growing increasingly transparent in his agenda, and was addressed inn light of his entire 'contribution' to the debate on the matter.

What remains established by even the material you provided yourself is that you have no authoritative basis for your description of the situation, or on which to ground disagreement with the views of anyone else concerning it, and you have certainly not provided any grounds for considering you possessed of any particular knowledge, or demonstrating understanding, sufficient to compel your being regarded as your own authority for your statements.

[Distant Observer]

55. It is heartening that this back and forth is over substance rather than empty rhetoric

as useful as empty rhetoric sometimes is.

[tiny elvis]

56. kick for JoseGaspar's lessons