SA calls for immediate ceasefire in Libya.

[Sherbang]

Yet you say qaddafi is bad for killing civilians but not nato. Seems a bit unfair to me that qaddafi can't kill civilians because as you rightly point out civilians die during war but nato can kill civilians.

That is fine right because it's war?

I would imagine if qaddafi was attacking the rebels and 50 civilians got nailed you guys would be up in arms about him killing civilians. Let nato do it and well that is acceptable.

Well you see, it's OK to kill civilians if they are not your own.
That's all there is to it.
If the French government was killing French citizens, in France, or the American government was killing Americans then that would be frowned upon.
But as long as they're killing Libyans, Afghanis, Iraqis, Iranians, Palestinians, etc, it's OK - not ideal, but it is war after all.

 

[boramk]

Wow. It doesn't matter how much of a fool you are made time and time again bringing Vietnam in as an analogy as if it was some glorious polemic; you still get your ass handed back to you by facts. I refuse to even go there again.

 

[killadoob]

Wow. It doesn't matter how much of a fool you are made time and time again bringing Vietnam in as an analogy as if it was some glorious polemic; you still get your ass handed back to you by facts. I refuse to even go there again.

You missed my point and that was in times of war you kill civilians if need be, the difference is how people look at it and what they think. So it is fine for nato or the US to kill 50 people to get an insurgent but qaddafi cannot kill civilians to get insurgents.

Yea joelus haha good point as long as they are not from your country then kill as many as you like haha . Come now boram don't you have a better argument or perhaps you can see the double standard but won't admit it

 

[Elimentals]

Bet you they(NATO) are after the oil, its the only time when the 1st world cares about any other county or its people.

 

[Shibal]

Wow. It doesn't matter how much of a fool you are made time and time again bringing Vietnam in as an analogy as if it was some glorious polemic; you still get your ass handed back to you by facts. I refuse to even go there again.

Don't fall for the killapoop troll bait.

 

[MegasXLR]

You missed my point and that was in times of war you kill civilians if need be, the difference is how people look at it and what they think. So it is fine for nato or the US to kill 50 people to get an insurgent but qaddafi cannot kill civilians to get insurgents.

Yea joelus haha good point as long as they are not from your country then kill as many as you like haha . Come now boram don't you have a better argument or perhaps you can see the double standard but won't admit it

The only double standard I found in this thread is between the left and right lobes of certain MyBB members brains, those that supports Zuma on his out of place call and those that equates NATO with Qaddafi.

 

[VioAdmin]

Bet you they(NATO) are after the oil, its the only time when the 1st world cares about any other county or its people.

+1 NATO, or any government approved mercenary group are all after (+) profit, not to make a difference(-). This is how you stay in power.

 

[boramk]

You missed my point and that was in times of war you kill civilians if need be, the difference is how people look and what they think. So it is fine for nato or the US to kill 50 people to get an insurgent but qaddafi cannot kill civilians to get insurgents.

Yea joelus haha good point as long as they are not from your country then kill as many as you like haha . Come now boram don't you have a better argument or perhaps you can see the double standard but won't admit it

Do you think I'm oblivious to what joelus pointed?
I'm busy arguing about your glaring stupidity - you justify deaths by Gadaffi on his own people, it's only when others come its a problem?

When people held demonstrations he had them killed and created huge turmoil, with all the refugees pouring in, do you think NATO will just sit and wait? They have a stake in this as well considering Libya is just across a narrow sea from them.

Civilians get killed in all wars, unlike you I don't bitch and moan about it. It's called reason before honour

 

[killadoob]

There is no honour in killing civilians.

I am the stupid one for thinking civilian deaths are not good?
You are the intelligent one for thinking civilians death are honourable?

LOL ok then

It is sad when people don't bitch about civilians dying. Guess i am a dying breed.

 

[Sherbang]

The only double standard I found in this thread is between the left and right lobes of certain MyBB members brains, those that supports Zuma on his out of place call and those that equates NATO with Qaddafi.

And once Qaddafi is dead and gone, then what? You think all will be well in Libya, just like everything is just fine and dandy in Iraq?
Do you even know anything about the people who head up the rebels and what sort of leaders they would make?
I agree with the SA government on this one - the only lasting solution will be a negotiated diplomatic one, otherwise it will be war in Libya for a long long time to come

 

[killadoob]

And once Qaddafi is dead and gone, then what? You think all will be well in Libya, just like everything is just fine and dandy in Iraq?
Do you even know anything about the people who head up the rebels and what sort of leaders they would make?
I agree with the SA government on this one - the only lasting solution will be a negotiated diplomatic one, otherwise it will be war in Libya for a long long time to come

They think it will be fine, they think nato has an amazing plan like the US had for iraq. Go in bomb and win!!!!!!!!

Yeeeeeeeeeeeehaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, o shyte wait now we have started a civil war!!!!!!! Wow we never thought about this.

 

[MegasXLR]

There is no honour in killing civilians.

I am the stupid one for thinking civilian deaths are not good?
You are the intelligent one for thinking civilians death are honourable?

LOL ok then

How many more civilians including woman and children would have been killed if the International governments and then later NATO did not intervene in the Qaddafi parade? Is that concept acceptable in your mindset.

 

[TheHiveMind]

Bet you they(NATO) are after the oil, its the only time when the 1st world cares about any other county or its people.

Yeah, as opposed to the non first world, where they apparently give a fk about strangers all of the time.

 

[killadoob]

How many more civilians including woman and children would have been killed if the International governments and then later NATO did not intervene in the Qaddafi parade? Is that concept acceptable in your mindset.

Nope it is shocking that civilians need to be killed in any war, it is even more shocking when the people who supposedly came in to protect the civilians are now killing them. It is shocking that countries are turned into nothing but a civil war by the people who claimed they were there to save the day, instead the country is worse off than before the war started.

Sick and sad in my opinion. If you think it is fine that nato take over from qaddafi's civilian killing spree then it's all good.

 

[boramk]

There is no honour in killing civilians.

I am the stupid one for thinking civilian deaths are not good?
You are the intelligent one for thinking civilians death are honourable?

LOL ok then

It is sad when people don't bitch about civilians dying. Guess i am a dying breed.

No, just a stupid breed.

Of course I believe that civilian killings are fine, of course! killa, stop pointing out the obvious!

 

[MegasXLR]

And once Qaddafi is dead and gone, then what? You think all will be well in Libya, just like everything is just fine and dandy in Iraq?
Do you even know anything about the people who head up the rebels and what sort of leaders they would make?
I agree with the SA government on this one - the only lasting solution will be a negotiated diplomatic one, otherwise it will be war in Libya for a long long time to come

Then simple, it could be managed, Qaddafi could not. Only a Zuma ANC fan can reason and have logic like you. The only lasting solution may be a diplomatic one, without a tyrant like Qaddafi. But I presume that Zuma are favoring all the tyrants in the world for a sinister reason.

 

[Alan]

Bet you they(NATO) are after the oil, its the only time when the 1st world cares about any other county or its people.

where is the oil in Bosnia?

 

[MegasXLR]

Nope it is shocking that civilians need to be killed in any war, it is even more shocking when the people who supposedly came in to protect the civilians are now killing them. It is shocking that countries are turned into nothing but a civil war by the people who claimed they were there to save the day, instead the country is worse off than before the war started.

Sick and sad in my opinion. If you think it is fine that nato take over from qaddafi's civilian killing spree then it's all good.

Again your simplistic mind in action, there is no hope. Rather stick with Windows debates, you gain more respect there.

 

[upup]

Did any one think Zuma will walk out of Libya with the plan we wanted.
when the communist help Zuma to get South Africa, Qaddafi help him well. So, like Zim they will never stop Qaddafi.

 

[Sherbang]

Then simple, it could be managed, Qaddafi could not. Only a Zuma ANC fan can reason and have logic like you. The only lasting solution may be a diplomatic one, without a tyrant like Qaddafi. But I presume that Zuma are favoring all the tyrants in the world for a sinister reason.

um yeah, like they are managing Iraq and Afghanistan...

So tell me, if a group of Americans decided to rebel against the American government and started a violent attack against the current regime do you think the American government would hesitate to retaliate with violence, even if civilians were caught in the crossfire? Do you think NATO would rush in and systematically bomb America until the current government stepped down? I doubt it...