Muammar Gaddafi is dead

Stujoe, I don't think it's quite as simple as that. I think that people here want to believe that people "there" want freedom. We tend to equate freedom with democracy, while people who have lived under a totalitarian regime might equate "freedom" with "less oppression." So, while we might be right that other of the world want "freedom," we constantly set ourselves up to be surprised that the people we've been backing "settle" for another dictator who is only slightly 'less bad' than the one they deposed. Yes, people want to be free (if you will "like us"), but we have a poor understanding of what "free" means in some places in the world.

 

I think you're both pretty much in agreement. I don't want to put words in Stujoe's mouth, but I think what he might have been saying is the same thing I've seen both here and abroad. That is t that Americans tend to think that given the choice everyone in the world would become an American. And they seem genuinely puzzled and sometimes angry that others don't necessarily appreciate us as much as we appreciate ourselves and hold our ways in the same high esteem that we do.

 

We tend to think everyone wants to be like us and thinks of freedom and such the same way we do and have the same goals as us. So all we have to do is help them get out from under their dictator and they will be our BFF's forever. But we fail to realize that for a multitude of reasons - which can be cultural, historical, religious, social, etc - they probably have no desire to be like us nor want anything to do with us or our goals and ideals.

 

I'd rather see people ask questions they believe may be unpopular than not. You may not get an answer you like, but I'm glad to see you ask it.

IMO, the Arab Spring is a much better situation than the nation-building America has done in the past. Yes, America is still going to be an influence in these rebelious countries, and yes, some there will not appreciate our involvement... but from what I've seen, it appears that we are making more friends in those countries than enemies, which wasn't the case during the nation-building we've been involved with in the past. These people appear to understand and appreciate our help, which is a pleasant change.

The question of what will become of these countries in the near future is far from certain, there are still negative influences there, but this movement towards more democratic societies, and pro-American sentiment in them, is a powerful thing... in all likelyhood more powerful than the remaining negative influences. I see all that has happened recently in these countries as a very positive thing.

 

I agree. The chances of a bullet, fired straight up, doing anything more than superficial damage is highly unlikely. At an angle though, it becomes deadly, and there are many examples of this in the news.

 

I was thinking the same thing, about Afghanistan in particular. However, I believe the North-African nations will prove to be far more likely to welcome the U.S. and others.

 

Man...Obama just can't do anything, can he?

 

Sorry Tom but what has my post got to do with President Obama? I do not believe that I mentioned him in my post

 

It looks as if the ones who will suffer most now are the women ... The interm government has adopted Sharia or Islamic Law as the law of the land. We do not yet know how it will be applied and whether or not it will be an extreme or moderate form of it but the leader of the interm government has already said that it will mean that polygamy (allowing the husband to marry again without asking permission of the first wife) will be allowed. Talk about a disrespect of woman and of the marriage bond between men and women! http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/26/world/africa/libya-sharia/

 

Thank you. Finally someone who gets it. This entire arab spring in the Sunni world is actually a fundamentalist movement and the nations that have been overthrown have been friends with the west and looked to the west to certain degrees and are now going to be looking at Saudi Arabia. For those of you who may not know it but as the years went on
Muammar Gaddafi was actually friends with Italy and was helping the United States with arab intelligence against the Saudi funded and led al-Qaeda. All this spells doom for womens rights to say the least, so forget about democratic growth and universal understanding with this group which we helped put in place on the orders from the guardians of Mecca.

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8407047/Libyan-rebel-commander-admits-his-fighters-have-al-Qaeda-links.html

 

Sorry Orc, but I'm with Tom on this one... without American Support those people would either be dead or in prison.

 

Sharia law is horrible, and that it is practiced at all by anyone is a bad thing, but I'm less pessimistic about the future of the faith. While I believe it will be practiced for some time, it ultimately will prove to be less desireable than Secularism or other, less tragic, faiths.

 

And again I have to ask what exactly that has to do with my original post? it was a report that he (Gaddafi & his son) was dead, simply that and nothing else
It was not about president Obama nor did I mention the President nor did I make any mention of American or any other nations involvement in the conflict
Sorry but I am at a loss to what Toms comments were about as I am of your supporting comment LOL

 

Like what you originally posted should matter? Does it ever?

I got the BIG email today.

Gaddafi and Bin Ladin are DEAD!

Both registered to vote in Chicago elections after all.

Sorry about that.

 

It would be funny if there just were not some truth to it!

 

I suppose calling you an "ignorant *poof*" would be wrong in many aspects, so I won't.

What Tom & I were saying is that, because of American support, as ordered by Obama, Gaddafi wouldn't be dead. That you didn't mention it is irrelevant (to us), we were merely making the connection between Obama ordering air-strikes and Gaddafi's death. Anyway, it's what we do here!

...Ok, I'll behave... now...

 

I asked a polite question as to what your post and toms had to do with mine as he directly quoted it and you said you had to agree with him! What the hell is ignorant about that? If I have not mentioned something then why did he quote me? and why did you agree with him.
If you want to mention the President then by all means do but dont use a post of mine that has nothing to do with it

 

Sheesh! Calm down, you're gonna boil over! Tom didn't mean to anger you by using your post, and neither did I. Honestly, I really don't see why you're all in a huff about us commenting on your post. Tom made the (IMO, logical) jump to the fact that people say Obama is ineffective as a leader, and your post proves he isn't. Oh, aye... ye wanna get in a row about eet... go visit Ireland and call 'em all wusses!*

*NOTE to the people of Ireland... wasn't me ... now have a bottle of your finest ...on Orc

 

What bothers me is I asked you both politly what my post had to do with your response and neither of you could answer it You then go on to say that you could call me Ignorant (what was the need for that?) and now you tell me to go visit Ireland and call them Wusses!
I have been to Ireland and they are rather nice people even though some of them might well have wanted to kill me at the time
I have no argument with the Irish people

 

Tom is a bit . . . abrasive . . . so it's not difficult to take some offense at his . . . observations. However, to say that Obama is an effective leader just because Gaddafi is dead is not quite logical. We still have an economy at risk of a double-dip recession, record-breaking unemployment, and more division between the parties than I have ever seen in my life (and this under a man who preached unification and the end to old politics). He might have gotten one or two things right; however, as the saying goes, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.