LIBYA; A NEW WAR IN THE DESERT

OBAMA IS TREADING ON DANGEROUS WATERS

Libya was  the last major territory to be seized by the Roman empire and the first to escape from its clutches along with Parthia. The Libyans faught long and hard against the Italians when they conquered the desert land in the 1930's. The fact is that Col Qaddaffi who was recently rehabilitated in the affections of Western powers after spending more than 30 years as an international paraiah is not a military and political pushover. In spite of the Lokerbee bombing he was able to get the main conspirator freed from a Scottish prison during the Labour regime because of the vast oil revenues that he holds.

The USA together with France has imposed a no-fly zone over Libya. UInder the pretext of enforcing a no-fly zone NATO jets are bombing Libyan government and civilian positions. A no-fly zone would aanly mean that if case the Libyan airforce attempts to land in rebel held areas, then NATO can enforce compliance of the UN resolution 1973. The Obama Administration and Sarkozy's France have chosen to interpret this resolution as a mandate to intervene and impose regime change in Libya: regime change is not implied in the UN resolution. On the first day of baobing US rained 110 Tomahawk missiles on Libya and UIS B-52 bombers dropped 45 1000 kilo bombs in the first day itself. Was such a massive attack justified? Is this not a savage and brutal act of war against unarmed civilians? Already in Iraq and Afghanistan, US intervention has caused untold suffering and there is no count of the casulities. What makes the matter even worse is that the war heads carried depleted uranium warheads making these attacks a nuclear attack on civilian target violating all lawa of civilised warfare.

The US, UK and France are keen to see the oil rich region around Bengazi is brought undetr direct rebel control. Like Chablis in Iraq, the US has propped up a quisling called Khalifa Heftir,a "CIA asset" of many years. It seems that the USA will not learn a lesson from its own recent history. The town of Sirte, the tribal area from which Col Qaddaffi come has borne the brunt of the bombing and there is just no military or political justification for this. The ragtag rebel troops are being finnced by the Saudis and the brutal Saudi regime is being hailed as an exemplar of democracy. Even the US Admiral James Stavridis has admiotted in Congress that the rebels are being infiltrated by Al Qaeda elements. It appears that the US policy is to strengthen the forces that are bent on destablaising the region. Though the Libyan Government assets of nearly 45 billion US $ have been frozen by the Western Governments, the so-called "interim transitional national council" has been permitted to acess these funds which are being used to fiance the NATO bombing of Libya. So we have Libyan money being used to kill Libyans in their own land.

The po;icy of Obama is bound to fail. USA cannot afford another long tern engagement in the deserts of Libya and the longer the war and rsistance continues the easier it would be for Col Qaddaffi to cling on to power.

20,153 views 45 replies
Reply #1 Top

What makes the matter even worse is that the war heads carried depleted uranium warheads making these attacks a nuclear attack on civilian target violating all lawa of civilised warfare.
End of quote

WRONG.  Depleted Uranium is not nuclear.  it is just a very heavy form of lead.  It is deadly, but only because of the weight of the projectiles.

Your flippant remark about Iran and Afghanistan is stupid.  If I kill a man going on a shooting rampage, I have killed a man.  One for me.  But how many lives did I save by doing so?  You look at the one death as the totality of the situation, ignoring all the other victims and the future potential victims.

As for libya, you are partially right. France and the UK did indeed make it a regime change, and Obama joined in reluctantly (after the amazon trio forced him to).  However it is not a "France and USA" operation.  Perhaps if it was, Ghadhafy would be gone already, but the hesitation of all the allies in the matter ensured it would just be a bloody civil war that Ghadhafy will probably win.  At the very least, many more are going to die because of the lack of leadership.

When it came time to fish or cut bait, Obama went golfing.  Since he missed the window of opportunity, the next best action was no action.

Reply #2 Top

Quoting Dr, reply 1
Depleted Uranium is not nuclear. it is just a very heavy form of lead. It is deadly, but only because of the weight of the projectiles
End of Dr's quote

The European Parliament has called for a moratorium on the use of the weapons containing depelted uranium. We need not take this call seriously, as the very same European Parliament has armies which deploy such weapons. Again we have a radical "humane" posture for public consumption and a different reality.

Reply #3 Top

Quoting Bahu, reply 2
as the very same European Parliament has armies which deploy such weapons.
End of Bahu's quote

 

The European Parliament has no armies. They can ask their member states for them, but you can be sure they already know the answer to that request before they even make it public. If the member states do not want to do something they just tell the European Parliament to take a hike, in the matter of foreign affairs anyway..

Reply #4 Top

Quoting Bahu, reply 2
The European Parliament has called for a moratorium on the use of the weapons containing depelted uranium.
End of Bahu's quote

They have also called for a moratorium on CO2 which is an essential gas of life to this planet.  Stupid people call for stupid things.  That does not mean we have to be stupid lemmings and follow the idiots over the cliff.

Reply #5 Top

LOL, another great article by the misguided, one-sided defender of the poor innocent Muslims. God forbid he pointed out the atrocities being done by the same people he defends.

Reply #6 Top

To be perfectly honest I don't think we should be in there at all. If these rebels want to fight Libya's leader and they are out-numbered and out-gunned then they are the idiots. Not my problem. I'm tired of wasting out money and resources and sending our brave soldiers to die for a bunch of ingrates and to be criticized by those who do nothing to better this world. I say if people are suffering and want out help then send a legitimate letter asking for our help so that when the rest of the world wants to criticize our involvement we at least have a legit reason for being involved.

Reply #7 Top

LOL, another great article by the misguided, one-sided defender of the poor innocent Muslims. God forbid he pointed out the atrocities being done by the same people he defends.
End of quote

The rebels in fact have been indulging in ethnic cleansing in their territories. In fact they suumarily excecuted 6 policemen whose only fault was that they belonged to arival clan. A tribal war has broken out and a half crazed French "philosopher" levy is selling it a a great democtatic upsurge and his President, knowing that he will be soundly defeated in the first round of presidential election wants to look BRAVE and I suppose killing Arabs is his way of declaring to the world what a man he is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reply #8 Top

Bahu Virupaksha: Good article!

                It is amazing that a no fly zone only applies to the defenders who are trying to defend their homeland … allowing the aggressors free bombing privileges, go figure. I do not understand why it is difficult to understand that OIL is the key … just as it was in Iraq. Amazing how capitalism works in the third world.

Doc is correct about the depleted uranium and the only reason it would be opposed is because it is excellent for penetrating hardened targets ... too efficient, go figure.

Your flippant remark about Iran and Afghanistan is stupid. If I kill a man going on a shooting rampage, I have killed a man. One for me. But how many lives did I save by doing so? You look at the one death as the totality of the situation, ignoring all the other victims and the future potential victims.
End of quote

                Since when does the truth become flippant? No matter what altruistic excuses you believe, the truth of the matter is that with our supper accurate weaponry (to within a few yards) … we have slaughtered over half a million Iraqi citizens … a pretty steep price to pay for the 9/11 atrocities committed by the Saudis and others.  Who do you think inhabit the Middle East … hundreds of million jihadists? Has it ever occurred to you that the vast majority just want a civil existence?

LOL, another great article by the misguided, one-sided defender of the poor innocent Muslims. God forbid he pointed out the atrocities being done by the same people he defends.
End of quote

CharlesCS is prone to think highly of himself as evidenced by this comment. What part of poor innocent Muslim is difficult to understand?  There is more than one way to look at atrocities, but of course only America is innocent and so self-righteous as to dictate to the world at large … this is how it is going to be, period.

Reply #9 Top

we have slaughtered over half a million Iraqi citizens … a pretty steep price to pay for the 9/11 atrocities committed by the Saudis and others. Who do you think inhabit the Middle East … hundreds of million jihadists? Has it ever occurred to you that the vast majority just want a civil existence?
End of quote

Thank you so much for standing up for the truth. So difficult in these trying days of Obama. Now the USA is looking for an exit strategyu in Libya-- a safe haven for Qaddaffi. A country that has not sdigned the International Covention on War Crimes. THE USA is one such country and so can play the perfect host to the likes of Qaddaffi. More than a few hundred men and womwen have been killed in the attacks so far.

Reply #10 Top

Quoting BoobzTwo, reply 8
we have slaughtered over half a million Iraqi citizens
End of BoobzTwo's quote

Citations please?  You do understand you just accused the US of killing 2% of the Iraqi population - a contention not made by any reputable person or organization on this planet.  The truth is a harsh mistress, and you have failed her.

There is no truth in his statement as I made no judgement call whether it was justified or not.  I merely stated factually that saying I killed one person as the totality of the calamity is a lie.  The person I killed had already killed others.  Those deaths were ignored.  Also ignored was the possibility of more deaths given past proven behavior.  Speculative, yes.  but on a much sounder footing than your bizarre claim.

Quoting BoobzTwo, reply 8
Who do you think inhabit the Middle East … hundreds of million jihadists? Has it ever occurred to you that the vast majority just want a civil existence?
End of BoobzTwo's quote

Apparently you think they are just a bunch of doves cooing at the pretty colors when IEDs meet flesh.

Reply #11 Top

Quoting Bahu, reply 9
Thank you so much for standing up for the truth.
End of Bahu's quote

Unfortunately there is no truth in either your statement or her lame rebuttal.  If you want to debate truth, then state it.  Do not put up the latest propaganda by Iran and Jihadists and claim that is truth.  500,000 bodies are hard to hide even in a country the size of Iraq (as evidence, you have but to look at the bodies of Saddam's victims already uncovered).

If you want to be taken seriously, stop writing like a fool.

Reply #12 Top

If you want to be taken seriously, stop writing like a fool.
End of quote

I have not claimed the figure of 500,000 killed. Now in Iraq, the number killed after the US led invasion is close to 200,000 anf the reputed journal Lancet has pegged the figure even higher. We may never know the true figure just as we may not know the quantum of human beings killed by the Germans during World War II. Dark deeds have a habit of staying hidden.

In any even what did USA gain from its ill begotten invasion: just body bags, international condemnation, an economy in deep recession and a finacial meltdown.

In Libya, the USA claimed to ber protecting civilain ;ives when in reality it is only uising its superior air force to intevene and separate the oil rich parts of Pibya just as the West did in Soutnern Sudan.

 

Reply #13 Top

Just as I predicted, the Western Democracies led by USA, UK and France are now contemplating sending military advisors. This is the first sure sign that the merciless air raids have not succeeded and there is now quiet talk in the corridors of power of further "escalation". I think the Roman generals who faught in the desert sands wille amused by all this.

Reply #14 Top

Quoting Bahu, reply 12
I have not claimed the figure of 500,000 killed.
End of Bahu's quote

Quoting BoobzTwo, reply 8
we have slaughtered over half a million Iraqi citizens
End of BoobzTwo's quote

Quoting Bahu, reply 9
Thank you so much for standing up for the truth.
End of Bahu's quote

Um....yes you did.  You congratulated her for "standing up for the truth" AFTER she said we slaughtered over half a million iraqi citizens.  Now half a million may not be 500,000 in India (what numbering system do you use?), but it does in America.

Quoting Bahu, reply 12
anf the reputed journal Lancet
End of Bahu's quote

Lancet is not a reputable journal.  Even your claim that 500,000 is not half a million is more accurate and truthful than that rag.

Quoting Bahu, reply 12
Dark deeds have a habit of staying hidden.
End of Bahu's quote

Yes, perfectly understandable since we all know that Saddam killed no one before the invasion.  You are pathetic in your spin attempts.

Quoting Bahu, reply 12
In any even what did USA gain from its ill begotten
End of Bahu's quote

And about 25 million Iraqis that are alive today and not in fear of Saddam.  Oops!  Sorry, did not mean to burst your delusion bubble with facts.  ASK THEM - then get back to us.

Quoting Bahu, reply 12
In Libya, the USA claimed to ber protecting civilain ;ives when in reality it is only uising its superior air force to intevene and separate the oil rich parts of Pibya just as the West did in Soutnern Sudan.
End of Bahu's quote

As much as I would like to agree with you, I have to go with the reality and truth - France has been the ring leader of this debacle from the get go.  The US did nothing except stumble around and kill civilians AND soldiers.  It was not a no fly zone.  It was a no Ghadhafy zone.

Quoting Bahu, reply 13
Just as I predicted, the Western Democracies led by USA, UK and France
End of Bahu's quote

While that is a popular myth coming from Iran and the Arab world, having at least one citation from a source with no pony in the show would be helpful.  Just because you say it does not make it true no matter how much you want to believe it to be so.

Personally, I would not be surprised.  But again, it is not the US leading this fight.  It is the French and British and for the very lie that you push on why we got into Iraq (although to your credit, you did acknowledge):

Quoting Bahu, reply 12
In any even what did USA gain
End of Bahu's quote

That nothing was taken after all the lies.

Reply #15 Top

As much as I would like to agree with you, I have to go with the reality and truth - France has been the ring leader of this debacle from the get go. The US did nothing except stumble around and kill civilians AND soldiers. It was not a no fly zone. It was a no Ghadhafy zone
End of quote
And about 25 million Iraqis that are alive today and not in fear of Saddam. Oops! Sorry, did not mean to burst your delusion bubble with facts. ASK THEM - then get back to us.
End of quote
Yes, perfectly understandable since we all know that Saddam killed no one before the invasion. You are pathetic in your spin attempts.
End of quote
Lancet is not a reputable journal.
End of quote

Lancet and Nature are generally regarded with great respect.

There are nemerous instances--mahamoudiya and again the case of the helicopter firing in Baghdad--both seem to me to be dark deeds. And Abu Gharaib need not be brought out as even the US acknowledges that the whole thing wasd a mess. In war dark deeds are done and like the Ahtenians whose historian Thucydides acknowleded the "dark deeds" let us admit that crime and war go hand in hand.

In Iraq the USA is seem as a hated occupying armey as in Afghanistan. There is not getting around that.

Why not say bluntly that the two unpopular presidents are using Libya to boost their electoral chjamces. It is early days as far as Obama is concerned, but that Sarkozy fellow will lose and he will  be soundly defeated.

Reply #16 Top

Quoting Bahu, reply 15
Lancet and Nature are generally regarded with great respect.
End of Bahu's quote

No they are not.  You need to get out and read more.  Nature has been proven to be nothing but a PR rag, and lancet is about as accurate as a broken clock.

Quoting Bahu, reply 15
There are nemerous instances--mahamoudiya and again the case of the helicopter firing in Baghdad--both seem to me to be dark deeds.
End of Bahu's quote

I take it you mean "numerous", and I know you can find some.  Now find the other hundred grand you allege.

Quoting Bahu, reply 15
And Abu Gharaib need not be brought out as even the US acknowledges that the whole thing wasd a mess.
End of Bahu's quote

Good - because that was not about death - but humiliation.  BIG difference.  Or is it ever time you are humiliated you die?  You are a whacked one.

Quoting Bahu, reply 15
In Iraq the USA is seem as a hated occupying armey as in Afghanistan.
End of Bahu's quote

Citations (again).  And please form accurate sources, not PR rags and broken clock journals!  But save yourself the time.  Your statement is patently false.  I have no doubt that some do hate us (Saddams cronies are still there as well as Al Qaeda), but your blanket statement is not only wrong, but stupid.

Quoting Bahu, reply 15
Why not say bluntly that the two unpopular presidents are using Libya to boost their electoral chjamces. It is early days as far as Obama is concerned, but that Sarkozy fellow will lose and he will be soundly defeated.
End of Bahu's quote

Why not?  Why?  You are wrong again.  Obama is a blundering fool in this one, and it is not "2 presidents", but a president and PM.  Had Bush made the decision to go in, we would be in, and there would only be guerrilla fighting left.  But of course all of the deaths then would be our fault, but there would be a lot fewer of them.  Had Bush decided on a no fly, there would be a no fly, but not a "no veiled" alliance with the rebels (who will spit on Sarkozy, Brown and Obama when it is done anyway).

instead, we have a pussy whipped president (by 3 of them no less) who did not know what to decide, when to decide it, and when it was decided, what to do.  So no one knows what the mission is, what the goal is, or what the exit strategy could possibly be.  France and GB intend staying as long as they are needed to pump the oil out.  The US cannot even claim that much vision.

Reply #17 Top

Had Bush made the decision to go in, we would be in, and there would only be guerrilla fighting left. But of course all of the deaths then would be our fault, but there would be a lot fewer of them. Had Bush decided on a no fly, there would be a no fly, but not a "no veiled" alliance with the rebels (who will spit on Sarkozy, Brown and Obama when it is done anyway).
End of quote
I have no doubt that some do hate us (Saddams cronies are still there as well as Al Qaeda), but your blanket statement is not only wrong, but stupid.
End of quote
Now find the other hundred grand you allege.
End of quote
No they are not. You need to get out and read more. Nature has been proven to be nothing but a PR rag, and lancet is about as accurate as a broken clock.
End of quote

Just rhetoric.

The US occupation and actions in Iraq go against the very grain of peaceful international behavior.  Now thwe same thing in Libya. The USA decides along with Western countries that the Col has to go and starts bombing. The thin legitimacy provided by the Arab League has worn thin.

You maust be Neverland to think that USA is respected and popular anywhere in the Asian world.

Are you saying that Bush would have done things differently.

Reply #18 Top

Quoting Bahu, reply 17
Just rhetoric.
End of Bahu's quote

Yes yours are.

Quoting Bahu, reply 17
The US occupation and actions in Iraq go against the very grain of peaceful international behavior
End of Bahu's quote

No, that is what nations do when provoked.  2004 was not a new war, it was just a continuation of the 91 war that was never declared over.  If you remember (you probably do not), Iraq invaded Kuwait and that went against the grain as you call it.  That is history not your empty rhetoric.

Quoting Bahu, reply 17
Now thwe same thing in Libya.
End of Bahu's quote

not even close.  I am sure the USA is responsible for the 2004 Tsunami in Indonesia, the Earthquake in Japan this year, and the crucifixion of Christ in your mind.  But that is a sad mind indeed since reality has no place in your world.

Quoting Bahu, reply 17
The thin legitimacy provided by the Arab League has worn thin.
End of Bahu's quote

Tell that to Brown and Sarkozy.

Quoting Bahu, reply 17
You maust be Neverland to think that USA is respected and popular anywhere in the Asian world.
End of Bahu's quote

Show me where I ever said they were?  Again your delusional self is trying to attribute statements to me that I have not made in order to bolster your illusions of self importance.  But I will caution you about your use of Absolutes.  You wil always be wrong when you use them (even if your idea may have merit - which is irrelevant).

 

And yes. I am saying that Bush would have done things differently.  Love him or hate him, one thing Bush was not was indecisive.  The opposite is true of Obama.

Reply #20 Top

Nitro ... is it really possible that you can be this naive? I cannot remember the last time our Government came a calling and asked me what I thought of foreign policy. And since we live in the freest most righteous nation this earth has ever produced(?), I do not think many Iraqis were quarried for their opinions either… nuff said my arse.

Reply #21 Top

Doc, why all the names? I am sure in your state controlled mindset, you must find it difficult to believe the Government or the MSM would lie and misrepresent things ... but it is a real fact, sorry. From past reading, you are want to use derogative terms like "delusional self” among many others, whenever you are incapable of sustaining your arguments, a shame that.

JU for some reason seems to attract people who are incapable of actually rebutting anything, without picking articles apart … key-word by key-word and phrase by phrase.  My recent past ‘religious experiences’ has taught me that there are many people whose main requirement for solidarity is that you agree with them. Democracy at its best I assume?

Numbers can actually be discussed civilly, but slanders and libels cannot. But the problem with numbers is a loss of context for which the numbers stand. You make some meaningful distinction between 500,000 civilian casualties and 200,000 because you have already accepted and then disregarded the fact that there were 100’s of thousands of needless killings … just so you can argue numbers and demand ‘citations’.  

One last thing here Doc. How favorably do you think Americans would respond when queried on their own Governments stupendous work over the last 10 years or so, domestically or internationally? You need to learn to make a distinction between the people and the government of a country … just as you have to here.

Bahu Virupaksha, my advice is to go on to another article as nothing reasonable can be expected here now. You will just continue to argue about anything and probably everything except … AMERICAN IMPERIALISM.

Reply #22 Top

Bahu Virupaksha, my advice is to go on to another article as nothing reasonable can be expected here now. You will just continue to argue about anything and probably everything except … AMERICAN IMPERIALISM.
End of quote

I received the same response when I carried out a wide ranging discussion on the iRaq war and if you go back to my posts you will see that I was right each and every instance. Once again I beleive that USA will regrest its decision to wage war in Libya. Only oil makes the Americans interested and by propping quislings USA is not helping its own interests. Anyway there are still reasonable and courageous people like you and that is certainly encouraging.

Reply #23 Top

Bahu Virupaksha - I could not agree more. I was not questioning your facts ... I was just saying that this forum is not likely to visit you with much reason or logic ... you are wasting your time with most of these folks. The prevailing winds at JU seem to be a deep rooted desire to shred anyone they perceive as supercilious. In this case, that includes anyone with an opposing point of view. The difference between the
truth and the capacity for humans to allow themselves to become the brainwashed pawns in a game they will not even acknowledge exists, is unbelievable to say the least.

I am interested in fighting the injustice visited first of all on the American people (MY AMERICA) and not very secondly, the peoples of the world who have died in the millions just because they were statistics, pawns in the bigger scheme of things. The buzz word for the past 75 years has been ‘the communists’ are coming to take you away, haha. But the usefulness of that ploy was extinguished with the end to the cold war (nothing but an economic battle I assure you) … and now, they are our ‘best friends’. Isn’t it amazing how the loyalties of the U.S. Government shift like the sands in the wind?

A new buzzword was necessary … so low and behold … TERRORISM came into the picture to promote more fear for continued exploitation of the World … and I am talking about people here. Doc seems to be under the impression that the war in Iraq was nothing more than a continuation of Bush’s Pappy’s failure, poppycock. I have asked many times how we got from 9/11 to Iraq in less than a year and a half … but have had no serious takers. There will never be.

Now, we have another word and it supersedes all the rest of them … NATIONAL SECURITY! If there is a war on terror … where is it? Surely the most hated Nation on this planet … you know the one with open borders … yea, that one, should be facing the wrath of Allah by now …
somewhere? Where is it? I remember reading of several groups of want-a-bees who were all supplied by our own government (remember-no one was actually in danger). We are still talking about a Mosque, how silly is that?

Due to the nature of sheeple, we have given our ‘benign’ USA Government the power to take anyone anywhere in the world for whatever reasons they deems necessary, rightly or wrongly … which side of the equation do you think our government is on?  Here and around the world, all human rights are forfeit at some bureaucrat’s whim … as long as the term “NATIONAL SECURITY” is used. As altruistic as many are want to be, we have done absolutely nothing, since 9/11 to fight this fictitious foreign threat besides hamstring the American people.

Reply #24 Top

Quoting BoobzTwo, reply 21
Doc, why all the names? I am sure in your state controlled mindset, you must find it difficult to believe the Government or the MSM would lie and misrepresent things ... but it is a real fact, sorry. From past reading, you are want to use derogative terms like "delusional self” among many others, whenever you are incapable of sustaining your arguments, a shame that.
End of BoobzTwo's quote

I love how you read my mind.  Tell me - what am I thinking now?  If the answer is not correct, then stop putting words into my mouth or attributing ideas to me.  Neither are correct.  My arguments are sustained, but I suffer fools badly.  To merely revert to "I said so" in a debate gets me to start trying to figure out the defect that caused the other to forgo intelligent discourse and resort to the "oh yea? sos yours" mentality that bahu has done.

So if you want to create a strawman of government and MSM beliefs, you are free to do so, but unless you are jeanne Dixon, do not associate them to me.

Quoting BoobzTwo, reply 21
JU for some reason seems to attract people who are incapable of actually rebutting anything, without picking articles apart … key-word by key-word and phrase by phrase. My recent past ‘religious experiences’ has taught me that there are many people whose main requirement for solidarity is that you agree with them. Democracy at its best I assume?
End of BoobzTwo's quote

If you want to write a self portrait, fine.  But if you read the comments, while I do not have to "pick apart" the article point by point (since I do agree with some), I have chosen the points to pick apart.  Care to rebut them?  or make more outrageous claims about psychic powers or casualties?

Quoting BoobzTwo, reply 21
Numbers can actually be discussed civilly, but slanders and libels cannot. But the problem with numbers is a loss of context for which the numbers stand. You make some meaningful distinction between 500,000 civilian casualties and 200,000 because you have already accepted and then disregarded the fact that there were 100’s of thousands of needless killings … just so you can argue numbers and demand ‘citations’.
End of BoobzTwo's quote

Words mean things.  Your claims are akin are worthless without proper citations and are meant to only incite and shock when there is nothing left of your arguments.  If you want to discuss rationally, do not start throwing nonsensical numbers around as it does not leave a basis for a rational discussion.  When pointed out that your numbers are inflammatory, you then revert to chastisement?  And that is rational how?  Back up your numbers and stop lecturing of your own sins.

Quoting BoobzTwo, reply 21
One last thing here Doc. How favorably do you think Americans would respond when queried on their own Governments stupendous work over the last 10 years or so, domestically or internationally? You need to learn to make a distinction between the people and the government of a country … just as you have to here.
End of BoobzTwo's quote

Changing the subject also does not behoove an intelligent discourse.  As I made no statements (other than rebuttals) concerning the who or what.

Quoting BoobzTwo, reply 21
AMERICAN IMPERIALISM.
End of BoobzTwo's quote

And so again you cast aspersion without facts, basis in facts, or merit.  And then simply change the subject to play the victim.  Sorry, I asked you long ago to back up this claim.  You never did.  Even when given an out by Leauki, you failed to grasp it, and instead reverted to victimhood.

Reply #25 Top

Quoting Bahu, reply 22
I received the same response when I carried out a wide ranging discussion on the iRaq war and if you go back to my posts you will see that I was right each and every instance.
End of Bahu's quote

And Boobz chastised me for delusions?  Well at least I got a good laugh for a Monday morning.  bahu, some of what you write has basis in facts, and some is pure fantasy.  That which is based in reality may or may not come true (you re no Nostradamus), but you are hardly infallible, and therefore even getting some right does not make you right in "each and every instance".

Quoting BoobzTwo, reply 23
Bahu Virupaksha - I could not agree more. I was not questioning your facts ..
End of BoobzTwo's quote

I would.  I question all claims of outlandish numbers.  Yours and Bahu's seem to be purely mythical as you have made sure the US - or someone - has killed the population of the civilized world many times over.  To accept blindly the "facts" of another is not critical thinking - it is a religion.  And here I thought you were atheistic.  Perhaps you just traded in The God for another.

You come here infrequently and have yet to respond to even a significant body of political postings, yet you sit there and again make claims with no basis in facts or reality.  I am glad you picked up on my term (not slander or name calling - a descriptive term recognized by even the AMA) of delusional.  For you seem to now have elevated yourself above mortal man, not needing to read the body of evidence before passing judgement. In other words, you are delusional to think you know it all.

And guess what?  As this is blogdom, you are free to do so.  But do not expect to be taken seriously.