Military intervention in Libya

25 Aug 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
it is still part of the UK.
and on that basis the UK had every right to take it back from an agressor regardless of what or what is not under the sea.

Who disputed that? The difference of opinion was about oil or no oil.......or at least knowledge of it.
Dave_Notts
pay some atention please mr notts.

Quote by mr staggers
Not really relevant but .... I would suggest that the Falklands conflict had less to do with principle and more with their position in relation to the Antarctic .... and it's potential oil and mineral reserves

the insinuation being...well i am sure you can work that one out from the above coment mr notts. wink

Isn't that what I said? Or am I reading this all wrong rotflmao

I'll go for a lie down
Dave_Notts

25 Aug 2011

Quote by HimandHer
Oil?.... really - if that was the case then we would have the cheapest oil in the world and not amongst the most expensive.
We will be in Libya for political reasons - not humanitarian, or economic - I don't know what those reasons are since I don't operate in government - but we will be there whether we like it or not.

9th largest oil reserves currently in production, with an estimated 41 billion barrels available with a potential output of between 1.8 and 3 million barrels per day, at a production cost as low as one Dollar per barrel in some fields, and that's just the reserves currently known about. 80 years worth of oil at current rates of production, and much of Libya remains unexplored. There may be more. I'd say western military intervention in support of the revolution was very much about oil.
That's not to say the intervention wasn't equally motivated by political and strategic considerations. I suspect the fact that we're still waiting to see what kind of regime comes out of the revolution in Egypt for one is a major consideration, and the strategic interests of the western powers might well be best served at the moment by boots on the ground for a while that might make both Libya and Egypt a little more pliant for a bit, just in case Egypt is tempted to go in the opposite direction. Israel to the right of them, NATO to the left of them is definitely something for them to think about. Think we've very much exploited that little opportunity once it presented itself entirely for our own reasons, not because we're ordinarily humanitarian interventionists. I'd not be too quick to dismiss the war for oil argument altogether though. Remains to be seen if a more pliant, pro-western regime comes out of this, but whatever happens Italy's ENI and France's Total are likely to be big winners, given their investment in the area and their respective countries support for the rebels.

Quote by Dave__Notts
Isn't that what I said? Or am I reading this all wrong
I'll go for a lie down
Dave_Notts

I think it is, and not sure you are Dave? dunno

Best have a lie down with you. lol

N x x x ;)

25 Aug 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
it is still part of the UK.
and on that basis the UK had every right to take it back from an agressor regardless of what or what is not under the sea.

Who disputed that? The difference of opinion was about oil or no oil.......or at least knowledge of it.
Dave_Notts
pay some atention please mr notts.

Quote by mr staggers
Not really relevant but .... I would suggest that the Falklands conflict had less to do with principle and more with their position in relation to the Antarctic .... and it's potential oil and mineral reserves

the insinuation being...well i am sure you can work that one out from the above coment mr notts. wink

I wasn't insinuating anything .... there are two reasons why Maggie sent troops in 1: her poor showing in opinion polls at the time and 2: the potential oil and minerals to be had in the antarctic and south atlantic

25 Aug 2011

Agrees with Stagger on that one
Any one who saw interviews with Charrington and Luce (FO Ministers) recently will know similar.
poor polls = good foreign distraction, rally behind the flag, opportunity

26 Aug 2011

ah right. so peeple on this forum are suggesting that thatcher only went to rescue the falklands because she was doing badly in the polls?
we all know that mid way through a governments term they usually do badly. very often though the same party end up winning another election.
i beleeve that thatcher or indeed cameron given the same set of circumstances would do exactly the same again, and it has nothing to to with minerals but every thing to do with the fact that the falklands are as british as northamptonshire, from a legal standing!
i do not expect any maggie thatcher haters on here ( and my god there are a few ) to say anything positive about the woman. hatred of her is deep seeted by many and unfortunatly it can cloud peeples reality's!
she went into the falklands to liberate something that was OURs while that war mongerer blair went into iraq, afghanistan to satisfy his lust for wanting to fuck president bush up his big hairy arse. :twisted:
thatchers reesons for me are very simple. blairs was nothing more than to suck cock.

26 Aug 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
she went into the falklands to liberate something that was OURs

Just as much the same reasons why NI hasn't been handed over to the south. They are British subjects and wish to remain so. Falklanders are protected by the Crown and unless and until they decide on an alternative, long may it remain so. The military junta in Argentina which Galtieri led had a number of human rights issues outstanding against them. They were, not unlike Iraq, Syria and Libya (and others at the time), effectively a tyrannical dictatorship and there was no way in the cause of democracy that Britain could ever countenance such an affront to its sovereignty.
Thank goodness it was MT at the helm and not JM. I doubt he would have had the stomach or political stability at the time to launch such a daring recovery. As for TB, no-one can say with any certainty what his reaction might have been but, later when PM, he did seem keen to just hand them back to Argentina without so much as a by-your-leave to the Falklanders or any regard for their sovereignty or safety until the British Popular Press took issue with it.

26 Aug 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
i beleeve that thatcher or indeed cameron given the same set of circumstances would do exactly the same again, and it has nothing to to with minerals but every thing to do with the fact that the falklands are as british as northamptonshire, from a legal standing!.

Star,
Are you quite sure on that ?
The Falkland Isles (an archipelago consisting of East Falkland, West Falkland and 776 lesser islands) is an internally self-governing British Overseas Territory, with the United Kingdom responsible for defence and foreign affairs. Indeed the Islands are currently on the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories.
Also quick visit to your local Bank or Bank of England (if you doubt your local bank) will soon reveal that HM Government differeniate between £ Sterling here in Britain and local currency which is the Falkland Island £, with Britain treating the Falkland Island £ as a 'foreign currency' like we do the Gibralta £, St Helenia £, Euro, US Dollar, etc.
Justice is administered by a resident senior magistrate and a non-resident Chief Justice of the Islands who visits the islands at least once a year. The senior magistrate handles petty criminal cases, civil, commercial, admiralty and family cases and is also the island's coroner. The chief justice handles serious criminal cases and hears appeals.
They also have their own health service, education system, can issue their own stamps, bank notes, and are even in a separate 'time zone' to Britain. As for radio they use the 'Americas' standard for medium wave, different to Britain
Whilst I'm not too sure about Northamptonshire but I'm pretty sure it has many differences to the Falkland Islands, being as it is is a landlocked county in the English East Midlands. As for having it's own currency, stamps, time zone, education, health, justice, etc. may we humbly suggest you pay a visit, but I'm pretty sure the county is British.
Interesting fact - The word pound is the English translation of the Latin word libra, which was the unit of account of the Roman Empire. The English pound derived from the Roman libra, which is why the pound (mass) is often initialised to 'lbs'; along with the French livre and the Italian lira, when, during Middle Ages the European countries adopted the LSD system. The currency's symbol is £. Historically, £1 worth of silver coins were a troy pound in weight; as of April 2011 this amount of silver is worth approximately £300. Today, the term may refer to a number of current (primarily British and related) currencies, and a variety of now-obsolete currencies. Some of them, those official in former Italian states and in countries formerly belonging to the Ottoman Empire, are called pound in English, while in the local languages their official name is lira.
So more 'european' than some people realise or care to admit
lol

26 Aug 2011

a very interesting point of view and a point of view that i happen to think is correct.
for anyone here who is still awake lol

this article is so well written.
" But the revival of Britain’s status as a major world major power can be traced back directly to that bleak morning on March 19, 1982 when a group of Argentine scrap metal merchants hoisted their national flag on the remote British colonial outpost of South Georgia in the Falkland Islands ".
:thumbup:

also this comment many beleeve also.
" Not only did victory give her the courage and self-confidence to tackle pressing domestic issues such as the challenge posed to the government’s authority posed by militant trades unions, it restored Britain’s post-war status as a major world power ".
am i going off topic a bit here? :notes::lol2:

26 Aug 2011

Quote by HnS

i beleeve that thatcher or indeed cameron given the same set of circumstances would do exactly the same again, and it has nothing to to with minerals but every thing to do with the fact that the falklands are as british as northamptonshire, from a legal standing!.

Star,
Are you quite sure on that ?
The Falkland Isles (an archipelago consisting of East Falkland, West Falkland and 776 lesser islands) is an internally self-governing British Overseas Territory, with the United Kingdom responsible for defence and foreign affairs. Indeed the Islands are currently on the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories.
Also quick visit to your local Bank or Bank of England (if you doubt your local bank) will soon reveal that HM Government differeniate between £ Sterling here in Britain and local currency which is the Falkland Island £, with Britain treating the Falkland Island £ as a 'foreign currency' like we do the Gibralta £, St Helenia £, Euro, US Dollar, etc.
Justice is administered by a resident senior magistrate and a non-resident Chief Justice of the Islands who visits the islands at least once a year. The senior magistrate handles petty criminal cases, civil, commercial, admiralty and family cases and is also the island's coroner. The chief justice handles serious criminal cases and hears appeals.
They also have their own health service, education system, can issue their own stamps, bank notes, and are even in a separate 'time zone' to Britain. As for radio they use the 'Americas' standard for medium wave, different to Britain
Whilst I'm not too sure about Northamptonshire but I'm pretty sure it has many differences to the Falkland Islands, being as it is is a landlocked county in the English East Midlands. As for having it's own currency, stamps, time zone, education, health, justice, etc. may we humbly suggest you pay a visit, but I'm pretty sure the county is British.
Interesting fact - The word pound is the English translation of the Latin word libra, which was the unit of account of the Roman Empire. The English pound derived from the Roman libra, which is why the pound (mass) is often initialised to 'lbs'; along with the French livre and the Italian lira, when, during Middle Ages the European countries adopted the LSD system. The currency's symbol is £. Historically, £1 worth of silver coins were a troy pound in weight; as of April 2011 this amount of silver is worth approximately £300. Today, the term may refer to a number of current (primarily British and related) currencies, and a variety of now-obsolete currencies. Some of them, those official in former Italian states and in countries formerly belonging to the Ottoman Empire, are called pound in English, while in the local languages their official name is lira.
So more 'european' than some people realise or care to admit
lol

you do not watch trains as well in your spare time do you? :grin::grin:

26 Aug 2011

Quote by starlightcouple

i beleeve that thatcher or indeed cameron given the same set of circumstances would do exactly the same again, and it has nothing to to with minerals but every thing to do with the fact that the falklands are as british as northamptonshire, from a legal standing!.

Star,
Are you quite sure on that ?
The Falkland Isles (an archipelago consisting of East Falkland, West Falkland and 776 lesser islands) is an internally self-governing British Overseas Territory, with the United Kingdom responsible for defence and foreign affairs. Indeed the Islands are currently on the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories.
Also quick visit to your local Bank or Bank of England (if you doubt your local bank) will soon reveal that HM Government differeniate between £ Sterling here in Britain and local currency which is the Falkland Island £, with Britain treating the Falkland Island £ as a 'foreign currency' like we do the Gibralta £, St Helenia £, Euro, US Dollar, etc.
Justice is administered by a resident senior magistrate and a non-resident Chief Justice of the Islands who visits the islands at least once a year. The senior magistrate handles petty criminal cases, civil, commercial, admiralty and family cases and is also the island's coroner. The chief justice handles serious criminal cases and hears appeals.
They also have their own health service, education system, can issue their own stamps, bank notes, and are even in a separate 'time zone' to Britain. As for radio they use the 'Americas' standard for medium wave, different to Britain
Whilst I'm not too sure about Northamptonshire but I'm pretty sure it has many differences to the Falkland Islands, being as it is is a landlocked county in the English East Midlands. As for having it's own currency, stamps, time zone, education, health, justice, etc. may we humbly suggest you pay a visit, but I'm pretty sure the county is British.
Interesting fact - The word pound is the English translation of the Latin word libra, which was the unit of account of the Roman Empire. The English pound derived from the Roman libra, which is why the pound (mass) is often initialised to 'lbs'; along with the French livre and the Italian lira, when, during Middle Ages the European countries adopted the LSD system. The currency's symbol is £. Historically, £1 worth of silver coins were a troy pound in weight; as of April 2011 this amount of silver is worth approximately £300. Today, the term may refer to a number of current (primarily British and related) currencies, and a variety of now-obsolete currencies. Some of them, those official in former Italian states and in countries formerly belonging to the Ottoman Empire, are called pound in English, while in the local languages their official name is lira.
So more 'european' than some people realise or care to admit
lol

you do not watch trains as well in your spare time do you? :grin::grin:
:boxing:
Nope just benefited from a pre-Thatcher market economy British education system
:jagsatwork:

29 Aug 2011

Quote by flower411
Now comes the looting, followed by civil war.

It already was a civil war - tribes supporting Gaddafi vs the tribes opposed to Gaddafi making up the "rebels", with the UN deciding to "step in to assist" in order to reduce the number of casualties!!
Blimey ...You think ?
Yes I have been know to on occasions, just I tend to keep my thought (ramblings!) to myself as this is a site I visit for fun times not to ponder on the doom and gloom of world events.
There was an uprising that would have been put down ......not a civil war ....surely that`s the point !
Who knows what would have happened if the 2 factions in Libya had just been left to it? Gaddifi himself seized control through a military coup and dealt with any of the more powerful tribes that could have disrupted his control. Historically Libya has always been a tribal nation, more so that it's neighbour Egypt and Tunisia which is why any "revolution" was always likely to be a bloody one.
The UN stepped in to "assist" to secure the oil.
The irony (no pun intended) of my comments were that they were the official UN reason, Libya only produces 2% of global oil production, although most of it does head to southern Europe, so it could well be a valid reason for the assistance and would potentially fit in with the aims of the UN "we are the world's vanguard for collective security --- security in all its aspects: military; political; economic; social; environmental."
If reducing casualties was the motive the UN would be intervening all over the shop but they don`t give a damn where there isn`t any oil !
Totally agree Flower - I have already said this in other threads but here it is again and updated ....
Tunisia - no oil (apart from olive oil 3rd biggest producer in the world btw!) revolution left to its own accord and therefore over relatively quick (roughly 10 weeks!). Elections on 23rd Oct 2011
Egypt - no oil but it does have the Suez Canal so slight concern from the west/UN words spoken, fingers wagged etc you could argue that the revolution is still going on since there are still protests etc but Mubarak did leave again relatively quickly which was the revolutions original purpose. Elections due in November 2011.
Libya - Oil! UN assist rebels to lessen potential civilian casualties as seen in previous revolution nearby?! lol

Not oil surely nor an excuse to deal with Gaddifi who hasn't exactly seen eye to eye with the west over the last 40 odd years. OK since around 2003 he's been more "friendly" but that's nothing to do with the USA's more pressing issues with certain terrorists! 6 months on since the UN started assisting it's still going on ....
Right, that's enough waffle for now, getting closer to the time for me to pack my bags and head back to Tunisia ....

30 Aug 2011

Quote by starlightcouple
blair went into iraq, afghanistan to satisfy his lust for wanting to fuck president bush up his big hairy arse. :twisted:
blairs was nothing more than to suck cock.

In one sentence you said he did it for anal sex. In the next you said he did it for oral sex. dunno

Make your mind up!

30 Aug 2011

Quote by spideyuk
blair went into iraq, afghanistan to satisfy his lust for wanting to fuck president bush up his big hairy arse. :twisted:
blairs was nothing more than to suck cock.

In one sentence you said he did it for anal sex. In the next you said he did it for oral sex. dunno

Make your mind up!
its hard to know which is which as both blair and bush spoke out their arses spidey

:rotflmao:

30 Aug 2011

:laughabove::laughabove::thumbup:

31 Aug 2011

I think it was like this actually...

5 Sep 2011

whats taking place in libya is the looting of its wealth and genocide of the inhabitants by cia qaeder and it's airfoce nato. every line of news in the mainstream media is lies, propaganda and psyops that himmler and goring could only dream of. next is probably syria but dont be suprised if another african country is bombarded into the stone age to frighten the african union into recognising al qaeder as the sole legitimate government of libya while the n.t.c. carries out mass murder of black migrant workers trapped in libya. described by nato as mercenaries to justify no action to protect civilians.
the excuse to murder tens of thousands of libyan civilians was to protect civilians through sanctions and a no fly zone. what a load of bollox.
now we hear in the press that megravi (lockerbie bomber) should come back and be tried again. for what ? he did'nt fucking do it. evon fletchers murder ? for fucks sake, has everyone forgoten the despatches programme that proved beyond all reasonable doubt that the bullet that killed her DID NOT COME FROM THE LIBYAN EMBASSY.
further, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that the gaddaffi regime used its airforce against peaceful demonstrators. there is absolutely no evidence that gaddaffi was buying viagra to give to his troops to carry out gang as a punishment to women. it is all crap, lies and bullshit to confuse the libyans and carry outside world opinion along with the recolonisation of an independent free state that used its wealth to improve the living standards of its people. the overwhelming majority of libyans will never accept the proxy rule of the u.s. and nato alliance countries through the self appointed rebel national transitional council who's leaders will assist in the of libya for their own personal gain and carry out mass murder to achieve it.
world war 111 is underway.

5 Sep 2011

Quote by gulsonroad30664
the excuse to murder tens of thousands of libyan civilians was to protect civilians through sanctions and a no fly zone. what a load of bollox.

Has NATO bombings killed tens of thousands in Libya? Is there a link to any credible source to back this claim?
Or have you ended the statement with what you think of your statement?

Quote by gulsonroad30664
world war 111 is underway.

This made me laugh. Since we have had WWI and WWII then it is an obvious statement that next would be WWIII...............since we couldn't skip it and go to WWIV
Now I would be impressed if you gave a year that this is will happen, as none of your predictions have come to fruition yet.
Dave_Notts

5 Sep 2011

dave notts
lead em n get em lost...

6 Sep 2011

Quote by Dave__Notts
the excuse to murder tens of thousands of libyan civilians was to protect civilians through sanctions and a no fly zone. what a load of bollox.

Has NATO bombings killed tens of thousands in Libya? Is there a link to any credible source to back this claim?
Or have you ended the statement with what you think of your statement?

Quote by gulsonroad30664
world war 111 is underway.

This made me laugh. Since we have had WWI and WWII then it is an obvious statement that next would be WWIII...............since we couldn't skip it and go to WWIV
Now I would be impressed if you gave a year that this is will happen, as none of your predictions have come to fruition yet.
Dave_Notts
55,000 dead civilians in tripoli from nato bombing...associated press, reuters, press tv, rt.
northern pakistan being bombed by drones, somalia, afghanistan, iraq, libya being bombed. algeria being threatened by the al qaeder nato backed ntc rebels and syria being destabilised by western special forces and western created psyops. yemen being bombed by us drones and iran being constantly demonised in the western media and threatened by america and israel. what is not underway ?

6 Sep 2011

Quote by gulsonroad30664
55,000 dead civilians in tripoli from nato bombing...associated press, reuters, press tv, rt.

Any link to these sources stating 55,000 died in the bombings, as I done a quick search and found nothing of the sort.

Quote by gulsonroad30664
northern pakistan being bombed by drones, somalia, afghanistan, iraq, libya being bombed. algeria being threatened by the al qaeder nato backed ntc rebels and syria being destabilised by western special forces and western created psyops. yemen being bombed by us drones and iran being constantly demonised in the western media and threatened by america and israel. what is not underway ?

Is this Libya?
Dave_Notts

11 Sep 2011

Quote by Dave__Notts

55,000 dead civilians in tripoli from nato bombing...associated press, reuters, press tv, rt.

Any link to these sources stating 55,000 died in the bombings, as I done a quick search and found nothing of the sort.

Quote by gulsonroad30664
northern pakistan being bombed by drones, somalia, afghanistan, iraq, libya being bombed. algeria being threatened by the al qaeder nato backed ntc rebels and syria being destabilised by western special forces and western created psyops. yemen being bombed by us drones and iran being constantly demonised in the western media and threatened by america and israel. what is not underway ?

Is this Libya?
Dave_Nottsdo a long search dave. all that we were told by the mainstream media demonising the gaddafi regime and praise for the rebels was lies to justify regime change and theft.

11 Sep 2011

So what you state is the truth? If so it would be very easy to prove...........or are you saying everyone and everything lies except you dunno

You state it, you prove it. It ain't me who has to prove your claims
Dave_Notts

11 Sep 2011

Quote by Dave__Notts
So what you state is the truth? If so it would be very easy to prove...........or are you saying everyone and everything lies except you
You state it, you prove it. It ain't me who has to prove your claims
Dave_Notts

listen and hear it straight from the horses mouth of a 4 star u.s. general on youtube :- 4 star general talks the truth major general wesley clark. it has all been planned well in advance. meanwhile i will do your research work for you and find something on libyan civilian casualties

11 Sep 2011

Quote by gulsonroad30664
So what you state is the truth? If so it would be very easy to prove...........or are you saying everyone and everything lies except you
You state it, you prove it. It ain't me who has to prove your claims
Dave_Notts

listen and hear it straight from the horses mouth of a 4 star u.s. general on youtube :- 4 star general talks the truth major general wesley clark. it has all been planned well in advance. meanwhile i will do your research work for you and find something on libyan civilian casualtiesyoutube...BBC Bombshell: Cameron, Sarkozy & Obama Train, Fund, Arm, Join..... 50 FKIN THOUSAND LIBYANS KILLED BY NATO BOMBING IN THE NAME OF PROTECTING CIVILIANS ! when did our governments give a fuck about civilians ? regards, the tin hat

11 Sep 2011

Quote by gulsonroad30664
So what you state is the truth? If so it would be very easy to prove...........or are you saying everyone and everything lies except you
You state it, you prove it. It ain't me who has to prove your claims
Dave_Notts

listen and hear it straight from the horses mouth of a 4 star u.s. general on youtube :- 4 star general talks the truth major general wesley clark. it has all been planned well in advance. meanwhile i will do your research work for you and find something on libyan civilian casualties
Can't you supply a link? If you wish me to see something then link it.
By the way...........he is a politician. He is a retired 4 star general and has not held a command since 2000.
Once again, supply the evidence of your outlandish claim. I never claimed anything about how many casualties have been caused in Libya, except to see that the casualty reports have not been that high. You have, so it is your own reasearch.......not mine
Dave_Notts

11 Sep 2011

Quote by Dave__Notts
So what you state is the truth? If so it would be very easy to prove...........or are you saying everyone and everything lies except you
You state it, you prove it. It ain't me who has to prove your claims
Dave_Notts

listen and hear it straight from the horses mouth of a 4 star u.s. general on youtube :- 4 star general talks the truth major general wesley clark. it has all been planned well in advance. meanwhile i will do your research work for you and find something on libyan civilian casualties
Can't you supply a link? If you wish me to see something then link it.
By the way...........he is a politician. He is a retired 4 star general and has not held a command since 2000.
Once again, supply the evidence of your outlandish claim. I never claimed anything about how many casualties have been caused in Libya, except to see that the casualty reports have not been that high. You have, so it is your own reasearch.......not mine
Dave_Nottsdave, there are thousands of reports in a multitude of foreign press reports from the middle east, china, russia, australia, canada, africa, india and indonesia. i am not puter friendly enough to be able to get a link up on this site. if i could, i would. there is nothing outlandish in my claims and in the course of time it will become apparent to you. the hyped, totally biased media reporting must be obvious to many. even the bbc ran an article one morning showing libyans celebrating in green square in support of the rebels but the crowed shown were flying the flag of india with the wheel in the middle. ABSOLUTE FACT. no reference to it since and no apology for misrepresentation. fact and available from beginning to end on the net.
you have been hoodwinked. wesley clark is an opportunist as is petreaus but sometimes they blow the gaff (cat out of the bag) out of ego and arrogance.
with an open mind, go research for yourself and you will find absolute hardcore material evidence that will prove to you that what has been sold to us as a humanitarian exercise is nothing of the sort and many tens of thousands of libyan civilians have been killed. regards

11 Sep 2011

Gulson, if you're computer savvy enough to be on here, you can manage to copy and paste a link from an address bar (the http bit)

11 Sep 2011

Quote by gulsonroad30664
dave, there are thousands of reports in a multitude of foreign press reports from the middle east, china, russia, australia, canada, africa, india and indonesia.

Copy and paste the browser.
Highlight the top bar, press the right mouse button, click on copy, put the cursor in the reply box of this thread, press the right mouse button, click on paste, press send.
I await one of your thousands of reports that show that 55,000 Libyans have been killed by Nato bombing since March 2011
Dave_Notts

12 Sep 2011

Don't hold your breath Dave, you're too valuable!

12 Sep 2011

"On September 8, Naji Barakat, the Health Minister of the National Transitional Council, stated that about 30,000 people were killed during the war. At least 50,000 war wounded, about 20,000 with serious injuries, were currently estimated, but this estimate was expected to rise."
Source Karin Laub (8 September 2011). "Libyan estimate: At least 30,000 died in the war". Associated Press (San Francisco Chronicle). Retrieved 9 September 2011
Just in case anyone couldn't use google.
Guls you argument would make a lot more sense and would be easier to respond to if;
A) You used correct term usage in talking about ethnic groups instead of some made up nomenclature you have for them.
B) Paragraphs are your friend! makes it so much easier to put across a salient point.
C) When you write, don't rant! it loses you argument immediately.
Hope this helps you win your conspiracy war!

Do you support military intervention in Libya?