Libya viewed from another point of view

[aztecwin]

www.debka.com/article/20807/

Debka gives yet another take. Note how the rebels and AQ are linked.

[Bob Forsythe]

Tell me something; do you have any notion of the political dichotomy that exists between east and west Libya? King Idris was from the Eastern area of Libya and historically the eastern area was the most vigorous in opposing colonial rule. Gaddafi and a small group of military officers, as is often typical in 3rd world nations engaged in a coup in '69. No big surprise there other than the fact that Gaddafi was 27 years old at the time.

But to bring it current, Gaddafi proclaimed the uprising was AQ inspired and the right wing fools you constantly offer links to on here have run with it (yeah, like Gaddafi is all that when it comes to sources).. Oh wait, I'm sure you'll bring up Gates or whoever it was who suggested there might be some AQ activity in the east. Tell ya what; since you offer this horseshit link, it's up to you to defend it. Damn, that means you actually have to do some research and at this point I doubt you have the ability to do so (not that I think you ever did).

=Bob

[Bob Forsythe]

Back in the '90s, Gorbachev stated that he was going to do the worst thing to the U.S. he could possibly do - he was going to take away our enemy. In that he was quite correct because between the fall of the Russian Empire and 9/11 we had no enemy and having no enemy puts a lie to our defense industry, the greatest jobs program this country has ever seen.

But of course that has now gone by the wayside - we have our enemy, "radical Islam" that allows us to waist a massive amount of our national treasure in order to support the defense industry because more and more we are becoming a nation whose only manufacturing is cars, software and weapons.

Right wing nuts like Pooh and military advocates like Stu love to defend our totally over-bloated defense budget while offering platitudes about how this or that weapons platform that makes up a minor amount of the budget could be cut. We have upwards of 1,000 overseas bases (I will admit that number may be incorrect but I challenge anyone to tell me we don't have a ton of them). And with all those bases it becomes very easy to argue that this country is an imperial power.

One of the few things I like about the few rational teabaggers is they are willing to put defense spending on the table. Quite frankly I'd love to see our defense budget cut by half but that won't happen because doing so would destroy a massive number of jobs and cost at least half of the House's representatives to lose their phony jobs to go away.

Let's face a simple fact - the defense industry controls this country and it taints every social issue we should be addressing. Until we get rid of its influence that won't happen, but unfortunately, due to the most politically activist Supreme Court we've had since Dred Scott, it won't happen because those idiots ruled corporations are individuals.

Needless to say that will make the military retirees on here who live off the government dole while bitching about unions happy, but it really says a lot about how our government is run.

After all, if we didn't engage in wars, thereby constantly increasing the military budget, how would they survive if they weren't allowed to retire until they were at least in their 50s?

=Bob

[aztecwin]

Debka is a widely read source with much more credibility than NYT or Time in the eyes of most folks. I am amused at the emotional reaction of some folks when we continue to ask who are these "rebels".

Now it makes little difference since the unfocused Obama policy has taken yet another turn and pulled out of Libya without accomplishing anything.

I have to laugh again at the rambling rant of an envious little runt about what some people have. I know that if I was relegated to living in Hillcrest rather than some place decent, I would do something about it rather than rail at what other people had and how they earned it. Sad!

[Deleted]

Apr 2, 2011 19:32:54 GMT -8 Bob Forsythe said:

Back in the '90s, Gorbachev stated that he was going to do the worst thing to the U.S. he could possibly do - he was going to take away our enemy. In that he was quite correct because between the fall of the Russian Empire and 9/11 we had no enemy and having no enemy puts a lie to our defense industry, the greatest jobs program this country has ever seen.

But of course that has now gone by the wayside - we have our enemy, "radical Islam" that allows us to waist a massive amount of our national treasure in order to support the defense industry because more and more we are becoming a nation whose only manufacturing is cars, software and weapons.

Right wing nuts like Pooh and military advocates like Stu love to defend our totally over-bloated defense budget while offering platitudes about how this or that weapons platform that makes up a minor amount of the budget could be cut. We have upwards of 1,000 overseas bases (I will admit that number may be incorrect but I challenge anyone to tell me we don't have a ton of them). And with all those bases it becomes very easy to argue that this country is an imperial power.

One of the few things I like about the few rational teabaggers is they are willing to put defense spending on the table. Quite frankly I'd love to see our defense budget cut by half but that won't happen because doing so would destroy a massive number of jobs and cost at least half of the House's representatives to lose their phony jobs to go away.

Let's face a simple fact - the defense industry controls this country and it taints every social issue we should be addressing. Until we get rid of its influence that won't happen, but unfortunately, due to the most politically activist Supreme Court we've had since Dred Scott, it won't happen because those idiots ruled corporations are individuals.

Needless to say that will make the military retirees on here who live off the government dole while bitching about unions happy, but it really says a lot about how our government is run.

After all, if we didn't engage in wars, thereby constantly increasing the military budget, how would they survive if they weren't allowed to retire until they were at least in their 50s?

=Bob

According to our feckless incompetent president we now have a new enemy; anyone who "kills civilians".

[aztec70]

I don't see what the conservatives are upset about. The sale of arms is one of our few growth industrys. We have been doing this for years. Who did we arm to fight the Russians in Afghanistan? This is what we do. Don't conservatives want us to have a strong defense, and thus a strong defense industry?

[Deleted]

Apr 3, 2011 9:59:11 GMT -8 aztec70 said:

I don't see what the conservatives are upset about. The sale of arms is one of our few growth industrys. We have been doing this for years. Who did we arm to fight the Russians in Afghanistan? This is what we do. Don't conservatives want us to have a strong defense, and thus a strong defense industry?

We did but we didn't sell arms to the Russians, which would be a better analogy.

And yes, we need a strong defense industry and this is where bob and I agree. There is far to much waste in the Defense procurement process. Some of the things the Obama defense department has done in this area are good, such as canceling F-22, canceling FCS and reigning in F-35 are spot on as is getting rid of many of the Joint commands which were really nothing more than Department of Redundancy departments. There are many more things that can be done such as someone asking WTF is going on with JTRS.

They totally screwed the pooch on KCX. The end result will be a less capable, more expensive platform.