Saif or his father, Muammar?
My money is on Saif... This guy is a fruitcake whilst his father is just a sad old has-been.
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Libya - who is most dangerous?
Sex God
I would have to say America.....the Libyans should be really worried that they are to be saved from their despotic leader by outside forces....all that oil after all does need a steadying hand
Sex God
Quote by GnV
Saif or his father, Muammar?
My money is on Saif... This guy is a fruitcake whilst his father is just a sad old has-been.
difficult one gnv.
is it the guy who wants respect or the one thats loosing respect??
both are equally dangerous
I agree both are equally dangerous.
Saif, I think, is the one that is the one that is really in charge now and comes across as a cold calculating thinker. If you look at some of the interviews he has done watch his body lanuage and the words he is saying as it does offer a lot of clues to what has gone on and is going on internally within the family.
Gadaffi, looks like he has had the push internally and really just the figurehead to be wheeled out as necessary.
He is still dangerous and holds sway but doesnt look like he is in control.
Saif, I think, is the one that is the one that is really in charge now and comes across as a cold calculating thinker. If you look at some of the interviews he has done watch his body lanuage and the words he is saying as it does offer a lot of clues to what has gone on and is going on internally within the family.
Gadaffi, looks like he has had the push internally and really just the figurehead to be wheeled out as necessary.
He is still dangerous and holds sway but doesnt look like he is in control.
Sex God
Most dangerous ?
As far as I'm concerned it's David Cameron, threatening first a no fly zone then maybe military intervention.
Not our battle, keep right out. If your so keen on helping the rebels David, get yourself a rifle and off you go................and take Nick with you.
See there are "reports" that Col. Gadaffi "might" use chemical weapons against his own people...................mmmmmmm weapons of mass destruction..........where have we heard that one before ????
John
As far as I'm concerned it's David Cameron, threatening first a no fly zone then maybe military intervention.
Not our battle, keep right out. If your so keen on helping the rebels David, get yourself a rifle and off you go................and take Nick with you.
See there are "reports" that Col. Gadaffi "might" use chemical weapons against his own people...................mmmmmmm weapons of mass destruction..........where have we heard that one before ????
John
Sex God
Quote by Geordiecpl2001
Most dangerous ?
As far as I'm concerned it's David Cameron, threatening first a no fly zone then maybe military intervention.
Not our battle, keep right out. If your so keen on helping the rebels David, get yourself a rifle and off you go................and take Nick with you.
Back-pedalling at a ferocious pace now that the realities have been explained to him though, eh?
I pity the poor civil servant who had to sit him down and explain that we're gonna struggle to maintain some sort of no-fly-zone thing for any length of time all by ourselves, given that we're scrapping the apparently unaffordable aircraft carriers and planes we'd actually need to have in our posession before we even tried to do anything of the bloody sort? 
I'll grudgingly let him have his short-lived interventionist Tony Blair moment, but the man's a complete fuckwit. We've not even got started on the need to make sure it's all nice and legal with some kind of international consensus, nevermind the whole learning lessons from history thing? :roll: ;)
N x x x ;)
Sex God
Quote by neilinleeds
fuckwit.
:shock::shock::shock:
Sex God
Quote by john469
Does anyone disagree with this:
Gadaffi's opinion of 'Parliamentary Democracy'' From the 'Green Book'.
<snip>
Shitloads of stuff, verging on a tl;dr.
</snip>
Alrite John, I'll play. It's a slow night. :P ;)
Read your post, and even read some of the Green Book. Goes on with himself a bit daft in the later parts don't he, but the bit you've quoted looks like a perfectly orthodox Marxist / Leninist style critique of the failings of liberal representative democracies in the capitalist west, that goes on to emphasise the need for a truly representative and directly democratic system led from below on a mass scale by yer idealised pro-social, politically aware, class-conscious proletariat, perhaps involving commune / soviet style conferences and committees, no doubt in a unique and novel way that doesn't necessarily lead to some sort of repressive Stalinist oligarchy?
What's your point?
N x x x ;)
Sex God
Would the idea that even the most insane people can have a moment of clarity be out of place here ??
There's actually a semblance of truth in all of that from the Green Book to be honest.
Just consider how much the ConDem Alliance have of late reneged (some say) on the "promises" (pledges, other say) they made in the lead up to the General Election. Once in power, or at least in their place in the Mother of all Parliaments, it seems that the electorate play no further part in the furtherance of their (the elected's) objectives (until it's time for them to persuade you to part with your vote again, of course).
But how does all of that translate into the democracy they call Libya?
Just consider how much the ConDem Alliance have of late reneged (some say) on the "promises" (pledges, other say) they made in the lead up to the General Election. Once in power, or at least in their place in the Mother of all Parliaments, it seems that the electorate play no further part in the furtherance of their (the elected's) objectives (until it's time for them to persuade you to part with your vote again, of course).
But how does all of that translate into the democracy they call Libya?
Master of Sex
Quote by Geordiecpl2001
Most dangerous ?
As far as I'm concerned it's David Cameron, threatening first a no fly zone then maybe military intervention.
Not our battle, keep right out. If your so keen on helping the rebels David, get yourself a rifle and off you go................and take Nick with you.
See there are "reports" that Col. Gadaffi "might" use chemical weapons against his own people...................mmmmmmm weapons of mass destruction..........where have we heard that one before ????
John
If Cameron wants a no fly zone, all he has to do is smuggle in a coachload of French air traffic contollers.
:twisted:
Quote by Geordiecpl2001
Most dangerous ?
As far as I'm concerned it's David Cameron, threatening first a no fly zone then maybe military intervention.
Not our battle, keep right out. If your so keen on helping the rebels David, get yourself a rifle and off you go................and take Nick with you.
See there are "reports" that Col. Gadaffi "might" use chemical weapons against his own people...................mmmmmmm weapons of mass destruction..........where have we heard that one before ????
John
:thumbup:
one word springs to mind here OIL
We saw a telly programme the other night about slums in Africa with Lenny henry in cannot Cameron and his cronies do something about that one? Oh yes no OIL. How evil and nasty the human race can be.
Tunisa, Egypt and Libya have been under the leadership/dictatorship of one person for 25, 40 40 odd years respectively. The difference between the 3 is that in both Tunisia and Egypt the opposition were silenced either by imprisonment, exiling them or worse. This mean that when they were eventually overthrown they now don't know what to do except go though the process of elections etc that they demonstrated for, it was after all the youth of the country that "rebelled".
As regards Libya it's always been more tribal than the other 2 so with Gadaffi position weakening due to in effect the copy cat youth protests, the tribes have seized the opportunity to step in and are basically flexing their muscles in a bid to assume control thus leading to the potential for civil war etc
You'd have noticed that the good old US of A did nowt regarding Tunisia ( no oil!) waffled and postured about Egypt ( hmmm Suez canal...) but are deeply perturbed by issues in Libya (Oil?!) quick someone wake the UN up etc etc.
As regards Libya it's always been more tribal than the other 2 so with Gadaffi position weakening due to in effect the copy cat youth protests, the tribes have seized the opportunity to step in and are basically flexing their muscles in a bid to assume control thus leading to the potential for civil war etc
You'd have noticed that the good old US of A did nowt regarding Tunisia ( no oil!) waffled and postured about Egypt ( hmmm Suez canal...) but are deeply perturbed by issues in Libya (Oil?!) quick someone wake the UN up etc etc.
the totally one sided anti-libyan/iranian regime propaganda we have been subjected to for many years and no anti, undemocratic egyptian, saudi, bahraini, emirati, yemini, algerian, tunisian, morrocan, omani propaganda, means there are pliant regimes and non pliant regimes to western control.
the capture of british "special forces" in libya and their release for escape aboard the hms cumberland, by the so called rebels tells all the arabs who's who in the libyan struggle. the so called rag tag of rebels able to push back a regular army is astonishing to say the least, until of coarse you now know that they are being led, advised and directed by special forces who have been there a while no doubt.
the libyan people, diverted by social networking sites like google, facebook and twitter propagating in the interests of "big oil" which was unceromoniously thrown out of libya 40 years ago and the oil industry nationalised, will find themselves starving in the desert if the western backed, financed, guided and led rebelion is sucessful in installing a pliant pro western "big oil" administration like in iraq. this is no defence or apology for the likes of ghadaffi or hussein but for the libyans and iraqi's, the worst is yet to come. whilst oil is not yet at it's heights of $148 a barrel of 20 months ago, fuel pices are at £1-30 a litre and £10 a gallon predicted shortly, conflicts with blaming trouble in the middle east being the reason. the social upheavals in the middle east are as a result of the deliberate inflationary policy of montising debt. this causes, along with cheap money speculation, food prices to soar worldwide and brings desperation for those living on the edge.
it should be noted here, there are/were no people starving in libya or iran for if there were, it would have been all over the western news media. but if the rebels in either country are sucessful, there certainly will be.
now i ask the fudamental question. in whose interests does all this chaos serve ?
the capture of british "special forces" in libya and their release for escape aboard the hms cumberland, by the so called rebels tells all the arabs who's who in the libyan struggle. the so called rag tag of rebels able to push back a regular army is astonishing to say the least, until of coarse you now know that they are being led, advised and directed by special forces who have been there a while no doubt.
the libyan people, diverted by social networking sites like google, facebook and twitter propagating in the interests of "big oil" which was unceromoniously thrown out of libya 40 years ago and the oil industry nationalised, will find themselves starving in the desert if the western backed, financed, guided and led rebelion is sucessful in installing a pliant pro western "big oil" administration like in iraq. this is no defence or apology for the likes of ghadaffi or hussein but for the libyans and iraqi's, the worst is yet to come. whilst oil is not yet at it's heights of $148 a barrel of 20 months ago, fuel pices are at £1-30 a litre and £10 a gallon predicted shortly, conflicts with blaming trouble in the middle east being the reason. the social upheavals in the middle east are as a result of the deliberate inflationary policy of montising debt. this causes, along with cheap money speculation, food prices to soar worldwide and brings desperation for those living on the edge.
it should be noted here, there are/were no people starving in libya or iran for if there were, it would have been all over the western news media. but if the rebels in either country are sucessful, there certainly will be.
now i ask the fudamental question. in whose interests does all this chaos serve ?
Sex God
Quote by GnV
snip...
now i ask the fudamental question. in whose interests does all this chaos serve ?
Bio-technology non carbon fuel developers
And if they are any good at there job, they will be very highly paid not to do there job..
:lol: So, the good Colonel offers the rebels an olive branch - talks on the future of Libya (the price being safe passage for him and his family).
Is that too much to ask when the west have fuelled most of what Gaddafi is as a being to his own people?
And now that they have refused even to talk to him, how can the west (in the shape and form of Cameroon and Sarky) continue to make demands for a no fly zone?
Who has the moral high ground at this moment?
A dictator (of there are still many in Africa - Zimbabwe immediately comes to mind about which neither Cameroon nor Sarky have taken a close interest thus far) protecting his interests with weapons supplied by the west or a disorganised equally murderous rabble baying for blood at any price?
What about a kleptomaniac Cameroon who sees himself too high up on the world stage without an armed forces to back him up and a Foreign Secretary who seems so washed out and despairing that he can't even appear to be enthusiastic about backing his boss?
Sarky? well, he's in trouble at home as the tempo increases for the next Presidential elections with far right candidate (Le Front Nationale) Mme Marine Le Pen increasing her popularity by the day - remembering that her father got through to the second round in the head-to-head against Sarky last time round!
Kaddafi? Not seem him without a smile on his face recently and Saif always smiles...
I don't see see Gaddafi as a hero, far from it but I feel the hand of others on the shoulders of the rabble here. It's too much like the Egyptian and Tunisian uprisings to be coincidence.
Is that too much to ask when the west have fuelled most of what Gaddafi is as a being to his own people?
And now that they have refused even to talk to him, how can the west (in the shape and form of Cameroon and Sarky) continue to make demands for a no fly zone?
Who has the moral high ground at this moment?
A dictator (of there are still many in Africa - Zimbabwe immediately comes to mind about which neither Cameroon nor Sarky have taken a close interest thus far) protecting his interests with weapons supplied by the west or a disorganised equally murderous rabble baying for blood at any price?
What about a kleptomaniac Cameroon who sees himself too high up on the world stage without an armed forces to back him up and a Foreign Secretary who seems so washed out and despairing that he can't even appear to be enthusiastic about backing his boss?
Sarky? well, he's in trouble at home as the tempo increases for the next Presidential elections with far right candidate (Le Front Nationale) Mme Marine Le Pen increasing her popularity by the day - remembering that her father got through to the second round in the head-to-head against Sarky last time round!
Kaddafi? Not seem him without a smile on his face recently and Saif always smiles...
I don't see see Gaddafi as a hero, far from it but I feel the hand of others on the shoulders of the rabble here. It's too much like the Egyptian and Tunisian uprisings to be coincidence.
Quote by MidsCouple24
Saif or his father, Muammar?
My money is on Saif... This guy is a fruitcake whilst his father is just a sad old has-been.
The USA followed by the United Nations is my bet for being the most dangerous in this situation.
Yes Mids, I quite agree. The goal posts have moved considerably with the passage of time and since I first wrote the quote above you have helpfully provided.
Quote by gulsonroad30664
the capture of british "special forces" in libya and their release for escape aboard the hms cumberland, by the so called rebels tells all the arabs who's who in the libyan struggle. the so called rag tag of rebels able to push back a regular army is astonishing to say the least, until of coarse you now know that they are being led, advised and directed by special forces who have been there a while no doubt.
Could it have been that there was no grouping of his armed forces and it takes time to arrange? He has now brought them together and is now driving the "rebels" out of the areas that were "liberated".
I would say he was surprised and unprepared. A bit like Uncle Joe in WWII when Barborossa was launched. Taken by surprise, totally unprepared but given time he was able to bring his forces together and reverse the gains taken at the beginning
Dave_Notts
Sex God
Sex God
Seems to be a fairly good precis of the current situation if you ask me?
I take it we've thoroughly checked everything out and properly thought things through this time? N x x x ;)
oh no. USA and UK coming to the aid of libya. god help them
funny how mugabi gets away with murder and we and the USA sit back and do nothing about that one.
i actually rather admire gaddafi for the way he has not roled over and given in like they have in countrys like egypt and tunisia.
we and the USA should keep our noses out as i bet we would not dare do this with china
obama tonight looked rather pathetic on the telly.
no wonder the middle east hate us and them
funny how mugabi gets away with murder and we and the USA sit back and do nothing about that one.
i actually rather admire gaddafi for the way he has not roled over and given in like they have in countrys like egypt and tunisia.
we and the USA should keep our noses out as i bet we would not dare do this with china
obama tonight looked rather pathetic on the telly.
no wonder the middle east hate us and them
Quote by starlightcouple
oh no. USA and UK coming to the aid of libya. god help them
funny how mugabi gets away with murder and we and the USA sit back and do nothing about that one.
i actually rather admire gaddafi for the way he has not roled over and given in like they have in countrys like egypt and tunisia.
we and the USA should keep our noses out as i bet we would not dare do this with china
obama tonight looked rather pathetic on the telly.
no wonder the middle east hate us and them
Stagger's cartoon link says it all starlight. There is no oil in Zimbabwe and it's not just on the borders of Europe
Quote by GnV
oh no. USA and UK coming to the aid of libya. god help them
funny how mugabi gets away with murder and we and the USA sit back and do nothing about that one.
i actually rather admire gaddafi for the way he has not roled over and given in like they have in countrys like egypt and tunisia.
we and the USA should keep our noses out as i bet we would not dare do this with china
obama tonight looked rather pathetic on the telly.
no wonder the middle east hate us and them
Stagger's cartoon link says it all starlight. There is no oil in Zimbabwe and it's not just on the borders of Europe
yes that is a shame gnv. innocent peeple being murdered anywhere gnv should have the UN taking action.
i saw on the tv last night a picture of gadafi and blare smiling together i neerly was sick.
Yes Oil is the motivation for countries like the UK and USA to take an interest in the mass murder of populations, I do not support this and would like to see us assist other countries with similar problems should it be deemed necessary regardless of the countries wealth or mineral deposits, Uganda certainly could have done with help in the Amin days, Pohl Pot needed a good spanking but that is the reality of life, it is because of you people and me, those who mock the protection of oil should bear in mind that without it supermarkets would be empty unable to be resupplied since trucks could not move, factories could not produce, ships could not sail, schools would close with no heating, and our very way of life would be threatened. Oil belongs to the Countries that own the land/sea it comes from but the rest of the world are forced to ensure that it is produced and made available to everyone else. Morally crap but regretfully needed.
