Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Mr.Canada

Lybia on Al-jezera

Recommended Posts

'Cause there was no written blueprint layin' around that might point to Herr Shickelgrubers little plan for the Jews in Germany (and a whole host of other ethnic groups)???...

A blueprint translated into several languages by 1930???

Wait a minute..

It says here there was...

It was called...

Mine Camping??

Mina Campos??

Meiner Dumkepfen???

Oh,that's it!!!

Mein Kampf!!!

Intentionalists vs. functionalists

Mein Kampf has assumed a key place in the functionalism versus intentionalism debate. Intentionalists insist that the passage stating that if 12,000–15,000 Jews were gassed, then "the sacrifice of millions of soldiers would not have been in vain," proves quite clearly that Hitler had a master plan for the genocide of the Jewish people all along. Functionalists deny this assertion, noting that the passage does not call for the destruction of the entire Jewish people and note that although Mein Kampf is suffused with an extreme anti-Semitism, it is the only time in the entire book that Hitler ever explicitly refers to the murder of Jews. Given that Mein Kampf is 694 pages long, Functionalist historians have accused the Intentionalists of making too much out of one sentence.

Functionalist historians have argued that the memorandum written by Heinrich Himmler to Hitler on May 25, 1940, regarding the "Final Solution to the Jewish Question", whose proposals Hitler accepted, proves that there was no master plan for genocide which stemmed back to the 1920s. In the memorandum, Himmler rejects genocide under the grounds that one must reject "...the Bolshevik method of physical extermination of a people out of inner conviction as un-German and impossible." He goes on to argue that something similar to the "Madagascar Plan" be the preferred "territorial solution" to the "Jewish Question".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think we can include the NAZI's genocide in the reasons why the world went to war with the Nazi's. we did not confirm that the genocide was happening until the end of the war when some of the death camps were liberated....Yes the Allieds had reports and suspected it, but never took them seriuos until well into the war....

History has shown us very clear....that you can kill anything or anyone within your borders, and we write it off as their problem....but step one foot outside your borders and we scream expansionism and round up the troops and attack....the one exception was mother Russia who did both during WWII, perhaps we should have payed more attention to patton, and drove them out as well....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think we can include the NAZI's genocide in the reasons why the world went to war with the Nazi's. we did not confirm that the genocide was happening until the end of the war when some of the death camps were liberated....Yes the Allieds had reports and suspected it, but never took them seriuos until well into the war....

History has shown us very clear....that you can kill anything or anyone within your borders, and we write it off as their problem....but step one foot outside your borders and we scream expansionism and round up the troops and attack....the one exception was mother Russia who did both during WWII, perhaps we should have payed more attention to patton, and drove them out as well....

Babi what??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babi_Yar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anybody know if Lybia still holds its seat on the UN human rights council?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anybody know if Lybia still holds its seat on the UN human rights council?

I believe they do,however,on the positive side I watched Libya's UN rep essentially throw Khaddaffi under the bus today during a meeting of the General Assembly...

The rats are going overboard to get away from this guy!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The west needs to stay out of it. The current problems are in fact due to a lot of how the west has been meddling in these countries where you currently see the citizens uprising and taking things back for themselves.

If we want lasting peace and real security, we need to stay the hell out of this and let them figure it out for themselves.

I understand the sentiment, and it comes from a good place inside you. (This sounds condescending, but honestly it isn't; it's agreement with your sentiment.) But I think Libya is different from Bahrain and Egypt in this regard. Yes, in Egypt and elsewhere, a rising number of citizens have very publically said that they don't want the US, or the UK, etc to offer their little remarks about "freedom"...because the people feel that it's meaningless, and the West has been an integral part of the problem in the first place. They don't think we're serious about "democracy," or at any rate don't use the word in its proper sense.

An understandable response.

In Libya, things are somewhat different. At any rate, what matters is what the Libyan people would have to say about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand the sentiment, and it comes from a good place inside you. (This sounds condescending, but honestly it isn't; it's agreement with your sentiment.) But I think Libya is different from Bahrain and Egypt in this regard. Yes, in Egypt and elsewhere, a rising number of citizens have very publically said that they don't want the US, or the UK, etc to offer their little remarks about "freedom"...because the people feel that it's meaningless, and the West has been an integral part of the problem in the first place. They don't think we're serious about "democracy," or at any rate don't use the word in its proper sense.

An understandable response.

In Libya, things are somewhat different. At any rate, what matters is what the Libyan people would have to say about it.

Maybe Canada should sell arms to both sides. It would give a much needed boost to our economy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand the sentiment, and it comes from a good place inside you. (This sounds condescending, but honestly it isn't; it's agreement with your sentiment.) But I think Libya is different from Bahrain and Egypt in this regard. Yes, in Egypt and elsewhere, a rising number of citizens have very publically said that they don't want the US, or the UK, etc to offer their little remarks about "freedom"...because the people feel that it's meaningless, and the West has been an integral part of the problem in the first place. They don't think we're serious about "democracy," or at any rate don't use the word in its proper sense.

An understandable response.

In Libya, things are somewhat different. At any rate, what matters is what the Libyan people would have to say about it.

so far the common response from libya has been "stay out of it we can do it ourselves"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Place yer bets. And the bet is WHEN Lybia will be invaded, not if.

What if Libya's opposition forces were in agreement to ask for foreign intervention to dislodge Gaddafi and his henchmen?

BENGHAZI, LIBYA - Rebel leaders in eastern Libya called Tuesday for international military intervention to help topple Moammar Gaddafi, as the realization dawned that people power alone may not be enough to dislodge their nation's autocratic leader from his last remaining strongholds.

The rebels said they do not want ground forces, but they are increasingly coming around to the view that help in the form of a no-fly zone, as well as airstrikes and supplies of weaponry, will be necessary to ensure Gaddafi's fall.

U.S. military officials said the rebels have not yet asked them for help, and on Tuesday they played down the likelihood of the United States setting up a no-fly zone.

But in the eastern city of Benghazi, the center of the resistance, some members of the committee formed to run the city said they expected to issue a formal request to the international community Wednesday for military assistance.

And in Misurata, a town about 120 miles east of Tripoli that is besieged by Gaddafi's militias, a spokesman for the newly formed committees set up to run that town said residents also want foreign help against Gaddafi.

"A no-fly zone would limit his movements, his ability to move mercenaries from south to north and to recruit mercenaries from sub-Saharan Africa," said a member of the media committee, Saadoun, who requested that he be identified only by a nom de guerre because Misurata remains hotly contested.

"Providing military equipment and arms to our free army in the east will help the free army march to Tripoli," said Saadoun in a telephone interview. "And we want surgical military strikes to target his militia and make this end swiftly and quickly and not to shed any more innocent Libyan blood."

The state of play in Misurata illustrates the risk of a protracted standoff, or even that Gaddafi loyalists may be able to reassert themselves.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/01/AR2011030106071.html

I'm still hopeful enterprising Libyans will deal the fateful blow. But as time goes on, more civilians are being killed by a ruthless regime and their supporters. It's such a volatile situation, who knows what will come next. I don't even think high ranking officials/politicians on the ready to help neutralize Gaddafi know themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does it really have to be either of "stay out" or "invade and rebuild"?

Cannot we help without imposing? Has there always be a hook in our assistence?

E.g. by suppressing brutal military power of dictator and let people figure it out from their on their own? Maybe this kind of intervention would be really appreaciated when the contry is finally free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does it really have to be either of "stay out" or "invade and rebuild"?

Cannot we help without imposing? Has there always be a hook in our assistence?

E.g. by suppressing brutal military power of dictator and let people figure it out from their on their own? Maybe this kind of intervention would be really appreaciated when the contry is finally free.

The problem in Libya is that how exactly to suppress Gaddafi, beyond sanctions and maybe enforcing a no-fly zone isn't exactly clear. This is a guy who appears to have hunkered down in Tripoli, so there are a helluva lot of civilians there that would make a bombing campaign or an out and out invasion far too bloody for anyone's taste. As well, Italy, which would be an important base of operations for any action against Libya, still seems to be dithering.

My feeling is the best strategy right now is to enforce a no-fly zone so Gaddafi's ability to use his air assets to terrorize Libyan revolutionaries is limited, and as dangerous as it might be in the mid-term, start arming the revolutionaries, providing they can demonstrate some cohesion, so that we're not basically giving a thousand groups of brigands weapons that they might end up using against each other once Gaddafi is gone. As well, protecting Libya's oil wells from some desperate act of sabotage by Gaddafi seems important to, again this can be done by arming the Libyan people and by making sure that Gaddafi's air assets cannot be used.

I'm still afraid at the end of the day that this is going to end up as a Hitler-in-the-bunker scenario. Gaddafi is reported to have a good cache of gold and American currency to pay mercenaries, so even once he's cornered in Tripoli, he can still do a lot of harm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Suppressing" would mean:

- "no flying" zone

- no heavy weapons or armed vehicles in the cities

- no bands of mercenaries entering country

Any and all of the above destroyed on the spot, without warning.

Everything else is between the tyrant and his people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Suppressing" would mean:

- "no flying" zone

- no heavy weapons or armed vehicles in the cities

- no bands of mercenaries entering country

Any and all of the above destroyed on the spot, without warning.

Everything else is between the tyrant and his people.

Other than the no-fly zone, how do you propose to accomplish the rest of it? Keeping armed vehicles out of the cities means having an army on the ground that can enforce checkpoints. Blocking mercenaries from entering the country means securing the borders, which means an even larger armed force. What you've just committed, and someone like Army Guy can correct me if I'm wrong, is at least 25,000 to 50,000 troops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other than the no-fly zone, how do you propose to accomplish the rest of it? Keeping armed vehicles out of the cities means having an army on the ground that can enforce checkpoints. Blocking mercenaries from entering the country means securing the borders, which means an even larger armed force. What you've just committed, and someone like Army Guy can correct me if I'm wrong, is at least 25,000 to 50,000 troops.

You don't have to wait for Army Guy..

Libya has an armed forces of over 100K personal....with over 2000 tanks...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A no fly zone means the ability to engage in air to air combat as well as air to ground strikes.

Sound a bit extreme when it is not wanted or even needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't have to wait for Army Guy..

Libya has an armed forces of over 100K personal....with over 2000 tanks...

And if they were all pointing in the same direction, that might mean something. But the army's loyalties seem very divided at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if they were all pointing in the same direction, that might mean something. But the army's loyalties seem very divided at this point.

Which would make the placing of an armed force doubly precarious. Do we really want to intervene on one side, not knowing where that side stands?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other than the no-fly zone, how do you propose to accomplish the rest of it? Keeping armed vehicles out of the cities means having an army on the ground that can enforce checkpoints. Blocking mercenaries from entering the country means securing the borders, which means an even larger armed force. What you've just committed, and someone like Army Guy can correct me if I'm wrong, is at least 25,000 to 50,000 troops.

The only thing required is air superiority (and a lot of ammo). Those mercenaries must be already quite jittery the way things stand now. Annihilating a company or two could just make the others think very hard whether the pay is worth the trouble. Same applies to heavy artillery tanks and such.

If Gaddafi's thugs really have fight in mind they are welcome to do it with light arms only. Or drop them off completely and just go ... except their leaders of course, that option should always be available or maybe even rewarded with a hundred buck each, courtesy of free democracies of the world.

Edited by myata

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously. This is something that's useful and doable right now, without excessive cost or risk, and would actually have infinitely more value to the people who are trying to liberate themselves than useless and oftentimes hypocritical lectures or backfiring invasions.

Unless of course, as per Dancers, our help cannot come other than with a guarantee of decent return on investment, on our terms.

Edited by myata

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heavy fighting is reported in a number of cities in Libya, including the capital. The forces for freedom show outstanding courage and determination even facing superiour brutal power of the remnants of the regime.

And they shall prevail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the invasion seems to have already started.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2011/03/201136132645240822.html

A UK diplomat and a special forces team accompanying him are said to have been taken captive by Libyan rebels in the town of Benghazi, Libya's second city.

Sources in Benghazi confirmed that they were holding members of a British special forces team, saying that they were treating them well.

"They [the fighters] did capture some British special forces. They could not ascertain if they were friends or foes," the Reuters news agency reported a source in rebel-held Benghazi as saying.

"For our safety we are holding them and we expect this situation to be resolved soon."

The Geneva-based Human Rights Solidarity group, which employs a number of Libyan exiles, also said that an eight-person special forces team had been captured.

The UK's Sunday Times newspaper earlier reported that Libyan rebels had captured members of Britain's elite special forces, the Special Air Service (SAS), in the east after a secret diplomatic mission to make contact with Libyan opposition leaders backfired.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1363187/Libya-unrest-UK-spies-SAS-troops-poised-help-Libyan-rebels.html

Britain is to send teams of spies and diplomats into Libya to help oust Colonel Gaddafi, it emerged last night.

MI6 operatives backed by the SAS are to land in the east around the key rebel stronghold of Benghazi 'within days'.

In addition, 600 soldiers of the Black Watch are on 24-hour standby to fly in and avert a humanitarian catastrophe as Libya erupted into a new wave of bloodshed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12658054

Details of a UK operation to rebel-held Benghazi in Libya in which eight men - six reportedly SAS - were detained, have been disclosed to the BBC.

Defence Secretary Liam Fox said a small diplomatic team was in Benghazi and "they were in touch with them".

The BBC's Jon Leyne said witnesses saw six men in black overalls land in a helicopter near the city early on Friday and they were met by two others.

They were later seized when it was discovered they were carrying weapons.

The BBC's security correspondent Gordon Correra says the SAS was believed to have been in Libya protecting diplomats rather than on a military mission.

No reports of US special forces in Libya, but I know they are queued up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to "Rwanda" mode... hapless pendulum swings from stu..d and bloody proactivity of Iraq/Afghanistan. Oh well.....

Edited by myata

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...