Are the Libyans going to Ceausescu Gaddafi?

Urban Hat€monger ? · 03-20-2011, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buzzov*en

Actually it is not, but you continue to think it is.

Maybe you should explain yourself better then.
All I've seen you do in this thread is say 'it's about oil' and then go on to personally attack people or ignore any questions put to you by whoever disagrees with you.

Buzzov*en · 03-20-2011, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger

Maybe you should explain yourself better then.
All I've seen you do in this thread is say 'it's about oil' and then go on to personally attack people or ignore any questions put to you by whoever disagrees with you.

OR maybe it is a lack of reading comprehension skills.

Guess you skimmed through because I brought up Darfur as well.

If this was not about oil, but about being humanitarians the US would intervene in Darfur which the government does not do since it does not benefit them. Clearly the US government does not care about people other than its own unless it financially benefits us over time.

~~someonecompletelyrandom~~ · 03-20-2011, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buzzov*en

OR maybe it is a lack of reading comprehension skills.

Guess you skimmed through because I brought up Darfur as well.

If this was not about oil, but about being humanitarians the US would intervene in Darfur which the government does not do since it does not benefit them. Clearly the US government does not care about people other than its own unless it financially benefits us over time.

It irks me that people refer to countries as if they're people. Of course "The U.S." isn't going to play hero just for the sake of being noble. The country is run by hundreds of people, each with their own motives and desires yet sharing one common interest, "What's good for us?" How could it be any other way?

Buzzov*en · 03-20-2011, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Conan

It irks me that people refer to countries as if they're people. Of course "The U.S." isn't going to play hero just for the sake of being noble. The country is run by hundreds of people, each with their own motives and desires yet sharing one common interest, "What's good for us?" How could it be any other way?

One motive for one desire. Money. The root of most problems.

The Monkey · 03-21-2011, 05:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buzzov*en

Please never talk about intellect and spell incorrectly because it just makes you look like an ass.
They put someone in power who they can trust they will benefit.

They could trust Gaddafi, he always sold oil to the west. So why would they destroy that reliable source of oil if their motives are, as you say, "oil"? If that was the case they should've helped Gaddafi destroy the rebels. I'm not suggesting that the West has purely humanitarian goals with all this, I think it's also very much a deal of improving one's status. Sarkozy in particular seems very eager to make France a big player in international relations.

TockTockTock · 03-21-2011, 05:40 AM

Just read through the whole bloody thing. It seems to me that every time Buzzov*en joins a debate the level of civility drops dramatically.

~~The Virgin~~ · 03-21-2011, 07:06 AM

i'm sorry i don't understand the ceausescu word. i thought he's a person who'll replace Gaddafi.

The Batlord · 03-21-2011, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Monkey

They could trust Gaddafi, he always sold oil to the west. So why would they destroy that reliable source of oil if their motives are, as you say, "oil"? If that was the case they should've helped Gaddafi destroy the rebels. I'm not suggesting that the West has purely humanitarian goals with all this, I think it's also very much a deal of improving one's status. Sarkozy in particular seems very eager to make France a big player in international relations.

My guess would be that siding with a murdering thug like Gaddafi would be political suicide, while siding with the rebels at least might give the US, France, Britain, etc some influence in who eventually prevails.

**Janszoon** · 03-21-2011, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Virgin

i'm sorry i don't understand the ceausescu word. i thought he's a person who'll replace Gaddafi.

It's a reference to Nicolae Ceaușescu, the brutal ruler of Romania who was publicly executed in 1989. The title of this thread is basically asking if the Libyan people are going to capture and execute Gaddafi or not.

Buzzov*en · 03-22-2011, 03:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Pat

Just read through the whole bloody thing. It seems to me that every time Buzzov*en joins a debate the level of civility drops dramatically.

You think this will help it remain civil if you think I am the cause of it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

My guess would be that siding with a murdering thug like Gaddafi would be political suicide, while siding with the rebels at least might give the US, France, Britain, etc some influence in who eventually prevails.

Pretty much.

View Poll Results: Are the Libyans going to Ceausescu Gaddafi?
Yes	11	64.71%
No	6	35.29%
Voters: 17. You may not vote on this poll

03-21-2011, 05:40 AM	#56 (permalink)
TockTockTock They/Them Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 1,914	Just read through the whole bloody thing. It seems to me that every time Buzzov*en joins a debate the level of civility drops dramatically.

03-21-2011, 07:06 AM	#57 (permalink)
~~The Virgin~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Cebu, Philippines Posts: 677	i'm sorry i don't understand the ceausescu word. i thought he's a person who'll replace Gaddafi.