Libya Ignorance Update 3

It's a shame the US and everyone else has to put their nose in everybody's business. Yesterday Obama stated the only reason the US stepped in was to keep Gaddafi from slaughtering his own people.

Sure that makes since, in a humanitarian way, but that's none of the US's concern. That's what the people chose to do when they decided to launch a rebellion.

Take for instance the American Revolution, yes you can say the Americans were doing what they saw was right, and that's fine and dandy I'm not against the Libyan rebels causes, let the do what they want. My point comes in when you calculate the British. The British were running an empire does that make them cruel? One could say they were ran by a madman, anyone who uses a Monarchy is freaking idiot...

Also lets take this a little deeper. Has anyone actually checked the price tag that all of this conflict is adding up? Ask Gaddafi, do you want to feed the hungry? HELLO this is in AFRICA strickened with hunger and disease. I'm sure instead of focusing on governmental and political issues for "humanitarian reasons" ie- killing rebels who are (in a sense) hiding amongst innocent civis.

This reminds me of Mutual Assured Destruction, which is stupid! If I attack you with nuclear weapons. You can still retaliate and destroy your attacker.

Hey how come a bunch of countries, that are across the world, are meeting in London to talk about Libya's future? We, as in EVERYBODY are individual, sovereign nation-states we are NOT in any case a united world.

Let these people fight it out on their own terms and we'll see who wins.

Libya Update

Gadhafi forces battle rebels on two fronts
TOBRUK, Libya (AP) -- Moammar Gadhafi's forces are attacking Libyan rebels on two fronts today.

Poor Mr. Gadhafi. I'm still sticking with my opinion on how the rebels in Libya are doing it wrong. Gadhafi's a great leader, at least in my mind. I don't see why they want him gone so badly.

At least wait to have a rebellion on yourselves once this guy creates better relations with the world then dies of old age...

Okay lets see... less than a week ago Libya's rebels rejected negotiations with Gaddafi. Come on now... you're just wanting to fight. There isn't a William Wallace on the the rebels side that's actually speaking out enough to get on the news, which isn't surprising since may broadcasting channels are corrupt like EVERYTHING ELSE.

Public Opinion (if you don't know the real political definition look it up) is being swayed against Gadhafi and his rightful place as leader in Libya. Lets keep in mind, rest of the world, that Libya isn't a Democratic Republic or anything of that nature, at least from what I'm aware of.

Let me use an example. If you watch Star Wars, and actually pay attention, you can get a basic concept out of it. The main characters are members of the "Good" REBEL alliance. Which is fighting against the "Evil" Galatic Empire. Sure they aren't pretty to look at but look at what they were doing. Creating a equal opprotunity by making everything one. If we're ever going to get a united Earth we're going to all have to stand under one banner.

What I was getting it is that the more people want to break stuff apart the harder it is, in the end, to fix it.

Lets get real though. Since apparently everyone, but me, is against Gadhafi. I, yes, I can solve your problem. If you reallllly don't want him in command, control, in office or any other station of high authority and he fights back... what do? That's right... Everyone's thinking it. I'm just saying it.

Need a hint? Julius Caesar, Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, John Lennon, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King Jr.?

Assassinate the poor guy and move on. So you can have his Generals take over and then I'll be on your side since they'll just end up like that one dude in Egypt. It's such a vicious cycle, but it's whatever. Haters gonna hate.

Don't forget to check out my new gaming site at: www.abigbluebox.com

OH! did you guys hear about Japan? Yea that sucks. You know what's worse? Stupid Americans saying they deserve it because of Pearl Harbor. Hello! Didn't the US drop two Nuclear bombs on innocent cities? I think that's Karma, not having a earthquake almost a hundred years later... Dumbasses.

Libyan ignorance

People may have said that Egypt had it bad, in which I think a money laundering; back stabbing regime is pretty bad. But the Libyan Government is not even close to how bad Egypt was. Thanks to Egypt, the people of Libya think they should have a new leader to get things spinning. In which I do not agree with in any way.

Muammar Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi became the leader of Libya after a coup in 1969. Yea that's a little more than 30 years... Egypt... He has been shown to be quite controversial, but overall he's a peace maker trying to make a better world for Africa, which desperately needs help. He became the leader after a bloodless take over from a Monarchy to a Socialist society (sounds like a great trade indeed).


This dude is extremely open as well:


Gaddafi also appeared to be attempting to improve his image in the West. Two years prior to the September 11th attacks Libya pledged its commitment to fighting al-Qa'ida and offered to open up its weapons programme to international inspection. The Bush administration did not pursue the offer at the time since Libya's weapons program was not then regarded as a threat, and the matter of handing over the Lockerbie bombing suspects took priority. Following the attacks of 11 September, Gaddafi made one of the first, and firmest, denunciations of the Al-Qaeda bombers by any Muslim leader. Gaddafi also appeared on ABC for an open interview with George Stephanopoulos, a move that would have seemed unthinkable less than a decade earlier.

Following the overthrow of Saddam Hussein by US forces in 2003, Gaddafi announced that his nation had an active weapons of mass destruction program, but was willing to allow international inspectors into his country to observe and dismantle them.


As one of the continent's longest-serving post-colonial heads of state, the Libyan leader enjoys a reputation among many Africans as a maverick statesman. In February 2009, upon being elected chairman of the African Union in Ethiopia, Gaddafi told the assembled African leaders: "I shall continue to insist that our sovereign countries work to achieve the United States of Africa."


He also has poured time and money into sub-sahara states to help them with their problems. 


1. He's pushing towards a United Africa 
2. He's extremley peaceful with the west and fellow Arab-nation states.
3. Gives charity to struggling countries
4. Gaddafi has vowed to "fight to the death" in defense of his leadership of the country.


All of these should show that he is a much more valuable leader than Libya deserves. I just hope that Western propaganda doesn't show it otherwise.

The citizens of Libya are blinded by the Egyptian revolution that they want one. You're not fighting for "freedom" you're fighting for ignorance, you're just joining on the "freedom" Bandwagon thinking it's headed towards a better life, when it's actually headed to the edge of a cliff.