General Politics Discussion [ARCHIVED] • Page 83

I really don't think we are. But if you think fdr is on the same level as gadaffi you are out of your mind

 

Independent

Nato leaders, opposition groups and the media have produced a stream of stories since the start of the insurrection on 15 February, claiming the Gaddafi regime has ordered mass rapes, used foreign mercenaries and employed helicopters against civilian protesters.

An investigation by Amnesty International has failed to find evidence for these human rights violations and in many cases has discredited or cast doubt on them. It also found indications that on several occasions the rebels in Benghazi appeared to have knowingly made false claims or manufactured evidence

...

Liesel Gerntholtz, head of women's rights at Human Rights Watch, which also investigated the charge of mass rape, said: "We have not been able to find evidence."

Levant Report

Two foremost examples are referenced in the latest batch of emails: the sensational claim that Gaddafi issued Viagra to his troops for mass rape, and the claim that bodies were “staged” by the Libyan government at NATO bombing sites to give the appearance of the Western coalition bombing civilians.

In a late March 2011 email, Blumenthal confesses to Hillary that:

 

I'm pretty sure most American presidents were slave owners, and rape and murder were a matter of course when it came to slaves.

 

What? There is no proof if that.

Edit: ya there probably is. My bad

 

Wow.

 

getting real delusional in here

 

Lol

 

Either way they were doomed to fail eventually. A whole economy based on oil with a world trying to get away from using it.

 

What

 

Syria funded a lot of its industries on oil.

 

Who is talking about Syria? And my "what" was because I don't understand what you're trying to justify with "they were doomed to fail eventually?"

 

This entire conversation has been a trainwreck on both sides, but carry on. It's anybody's guess how this will end up.

 

I was talking about Syria. And that even if you only want to look at what Gaddafi was doing economically it was going to have a major collapse due to it being an unstable economy.

 

I agree. But arguing is fun at least.

 

Then you're talking about Libya.

 

At least you've found a way to feel superior to everyone.

 

Yup mixed them up my bad.

 

Well this thread has turned to trash, unfollowing.

 

I'm so confused, if you were actually talking about Syria then that was quite the non-sequitur considering no one has mentioned Syria, including you, in the last few pages. Or do you actually mean Libya because then my question still stands as I really don't see what you're trying to justify with this latter statement?

 

Don't be so thin-skinned there fella. Can't be so serious all the time.

 

Gaddafi, pictured above, waving to his Syrian subjects

 

I meant Libya. People were saying Gadaffi was doing all this great stuff economically but he was propping it up with oil whos price is now dropping rapidly. So it was going to lead to major problems.

 

Internet discussion is serious bizness doncha know!

 

no one said anything about gaddafi's economic policies, one person asked for opinions on him as a resistor of western power and then you lost your goddamn mind and accused people of supporting rape

 

Oh ok I got it. Just talking about what a rebel he was but not if he ever did anything good.