All Gadhafi is saying is give Peace with Bin Laden a chance

Politics International Politics
1

Check all that you agree with

  • Bin Laden is ready to sing Kumbaya with the USA
  • The USA is ready to sing Kumbaya with Bin Laden
  • Obama, Bin Laden, and Gadhafi will soon join forcers to star in a musical rendition of Jesus Christ Superstar
  • Gadhafi is misunderstood. Like Castro and Che Guevera, he is really a hero. Like Bin Laden.
  • Bin Laden Bad! I drank the Kool-Aid!
  • If Bin laden wanted to give Peace a Chance he would have flown doves into the twin towers
  • I want some of what Ghadafi is smoking
  • If everyone was like Ghadhafi the world would live as one.
  • Give me cookie.
  • It could happen.

0 voters

Gadhafi: U.S. should seek peace with bin Laden

By The Associated Press

Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi has a seemingly unthinkable suggestion for new U.S. President Barack Obama: give Osama bin Laden a chance to make peace.

Gadhafi, who is known for outspoken comments, told an audience of Georgetown University students by videoconference Wednesday that bin Laden has shown signs that he is open to dialogue. He recommended that Obama seek an opening with the terrorist leader who is considered enemy number one in the United States for ordering the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

“I think Osama bin Laden is a person who can be given a chance,” he said in Arabic through an interpreter. “Maybe he wants peace.”

Relations between Libya and the United States have warmed since Gadhafi renounced terrorism in 2003 and gave up efforts to develop nuclear weapons. The move ended years of international isolation, though Gadhafi denied in his rambling address Wednesday that his country had ever been isolated.

The talk with students was organized by the university’s contemporary Arab studies center and two student groups. It focused on Gadhafi’s proposal that Israelis and Palestinians should join in a single democratic state that he has called Isratine.
haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1057754.html

2

Well, according to the righties, the mere sight of Bush waving his mighty stick in Iraq caused Ghaddafi to fall prostrate, trembling in fear, and become one of the genuwine fully tamed good Ayrabs, with recognition and trade goodies galore, so why not?

Though I think Palsrael has a nicer friendlier ring to it…

3

Long live Isratine!

4

Side note: Given that every news outlet spells his name differently, I propose the following all-inclusive spelling system:

[Q(u),K(h),G(h)]ad(h)af(i,y)

5

[quote=“Chris”]Side note: Given that every news outlet spells his name differently, I propose the following all-inclusive spelling system:

[Q(u),K(h),G(h)]ad(h)af(i,y)[/quote]

books.google.com/books?id=IwFjQz … &ct=result

I voted, “Give me cookie,” and I meant every word of it :cookie: . Or at least, I would like a cookie voucher, which I would use to stimulate the economy.

6

[quote=“trebuchet”]Gadhafi: U.S. should seek peace with bin Laden
[/quote]

Osama bin Laden didn’t start Al Qaeda until after the US put troops into Saudi Arabia, which is considered “heresy” by muslims…sorta along the lines of how christians viewed Saladin controlling jerusalem.

It’s all well and good to talk about what OBL, the Bali bombers, Hamas, Hezbollah and other looney tunes have done, but until you address the reason WHY these people feel they have a grievance, you’re never going to placate them. Both sides have to make amends, not just one.

For the US, UK and Israel to tell others to stop their violence without stopping their own is as unreasonable and hypocritical as a thief or murderer telling a victim’s family to shut up, or complaining when the victim’s family seeks revenge. In most conflicts, both sides share the blame and guilt equally.

7

[quote=“Sleepyhead”]
Osama bin Laden didn’t start Al Qaeda until after the US put troops into Saudi Arabia, which is considered “heresy” by muslims…sorta along the lines of how christians viewed Saladin controlling jerusalem.

It’s all well and good to talk about what OBL, the Bali bombers, Hamas, Hezbollah and other looney tunes have done, but until you address the reason WHY these people feel they have a grievance, you’re never going to placate them. Both sides have to make amends, not just one.

For the US, UK and Israel to tell others to stop their violence without stopping their own is as unreasonable and hypocritical as a thief or murderer telling a victim’s family to shut up, or complaining when the victim’s family seeks revenge. In most conflicts, both sides share the blame and guilt equally.[/quote]

Wow, that’s a load of drivel. Al Qaeda was started in 1988. The US didn’t have any troops in Saudi Arabia until Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990. Then, at the request of the Saudi royal family, US troops were stationed there as part of Operation Desert Shield.

Al Qaeda doesn’t just want the US out of the Middle East, it is their express purpose to destroy Israel and enslave the Middle East in a Sunni caliphate that follows the strictest version of the Quran. They want to control Jerusalem, they hate non-Sunni Muslims including the Shia, they hate the Jews, they hate the Pagans, and they hate the Christians. I don’t see what amends can be made here. What validity do their grievances have? The Bali bombers wanted to kill as many civilians as possible. OBL did with 9/11, 7/7 and the other attacks on civilian targets. Hamas and Hezbollah are a different category because they both want their own sovereign territory; their goal is not to destroy everyone else who is not Muslim.

[quote=“Bin Laden’s Second Fatwa, 1998”]
The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies – civilians and military – is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty God, “and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together,” and “fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God.” [/quote]

As far as you’re quote about the violence, the US and UK don’t specifically target civilians. Israel has a 3 part, 60 page long thread on whether they do or not, but the US, UK and other developed countries specifically don’t. Al Qaeda on the other hand, flew a fucking two airplanes INTO THE TWIN TOWERS. Their point was to kill as many civilians as they COULD. That’s not the same as a fuck-up where you kill civilians. The developed countries of the world do their best to minimize the number of civilians killed. Unfortunately civilians die sometimes when military force is used. Now we try and minimize the number killed. Al Qaeda still tries to maximize the number of civilians killed, as if this is still the Middle Ages. That is deliberate barbarism whereby you show the world you truly do not belong among the living.

Where as in a conflict there is a guilt to be apportioned to both sides, I would find those 3000 dead people in 9/11 guilty of nothing. They were innocent of any wrong doing other than being Americans and working in the Towers. I don’t frankly give a damn why Al Qaeda did what they did, I just want every one of their members dead. They want their 72 virgins and I want to see them meet them as early as possible. As for Osama Bin Laden, he will have a special place in hell to burn. There will be no forgiveness for what he has done. The only conclusions are: he dies hiding in a cave in fear , he is killed while trying to be apprehended or we successfully capture, try and execute him. Then we scatter his ashes in the 7 seas so he can’t be memorialized.

I find that the argument you presented to be fundamentally flawed in premise, implementation and conclusion. Try harder next time.

8

But what does the US get in return in this hypothetical peace arrangement?
OBL is not the head of a State, nor is he accountable to anyone…

9

[quote=“lbksig”][quote=“Sleepyhead”] . . . It’s all well and good to talk about what OBL, the Bali bombers, Hamas, Hezbollah and other looney tunes have done, but until you address the reason WHY these people feel they have a grievance, you’re never going to placate them. Both sides have to make amends, not just one.

For the US, UK and Israel to tell others to stop their violence without stopping their own is as unreasonable and hypocritical as a thief or murderer telling a victim’s family to shut up, or complaining when the victim’s family seeks revenge. In most conflicts, both sides share the blame and guilt equally.[/quote]

Wow, that’s a load of drivel. . . .

As far as you’re quote about the violence, the US and UK don’t specifically target civilians. Israel has a 3 part, 60 page long thread on whether they do or not, but the US, UK and other developed countries specifically don’t. Al Qaeda on the other hand, flew a fucking two airplanes INTO THE TWIN TOWERS. Their point was to kill as many civilians as they COULD. That’s not the same as a fuck-up where you kill civilians. The developed countries of the world do their best to minimize the number of civilians killed. Unfortunately civilians die sometimes when military force is used. Now we try and minimize the number killed. Al Qaeda still tries to maximize the number of civilians killed, as if this is still the Middle Ages. That is deliberate barbarism whereby you show the world you truly do not belong among the living. . . .

I find that the argument you presented to be fundamentally flawed in premise, implementation and conclusion. Try harder next time.[/quote]

What do you imagine that Shiite Muslim’s argument was for throwing his shoes at George Bush, knowing that he would most likely go to prison for doing so?

And as far as the numbers argument goes, which side in the war of terror do you think has killed or caused the deaths of more civilians? Let’s start with the most recent tally. 1,200 versus 3. How many civilians have died in Afghanistan and Iraq to avenge the deaths of 3,000 Americans? I’d say by, anyone’s reckoning, a far sight greater than 3,000. What’s the total number of American, British and Israeli civilians who have been killed by Muslim terrorists in the last ten years, 5,000? How many civilians, on the other hand, have died in Gaza and the West Bank, Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan in the same period as a result of wars started by the West and its allies?

10

No fair. Stop using logic. Terror is not logical. :wink:

11

[quote=“spook”]

What do you imagine that Shiite Muslim’s argument was for throwing his shoes at George Bush, knowing that he would most likely go to prison for doing so?

And as far as the numbers argument goes, which side in the war of terror do you think has killed or caused the deaths of more civilians? Let’s start with the most recent tally. 1,200 versus 3. How many civilians have died in Afghanistan and Iraq to avenge the deaths of 3,000 Americans? I’d say by, anyone’s reckoning, a far sight greater than 3,000. What’s the total number of American, British and Israeli civilians who have been killed by Muslim terrorists in the last ten years, 5,000? How many civilians, on the other hand, have died in Gaza and the West Bank, Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan in the same period as a result of wars started by the West and its allies?[/quote]

I’d bet it was because we gave him, his family, and his countrymen of the Shiite religion hope for a chance at a decent life then fucked that dream by appointing L Paul Bremer; an idiot who put idiots in important places making idiotic decisions. Rajiv Chandrasekaran’s Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Iraq’s Green Zone does a good job of covering what the major mistakes were, the thinking behind them and why they happened anyways. It’s a very well written book if you get a chance to read it.

As far as the War on Terror goes, I think you need to split the Israel-Palestine issue into its own category. It has been going on much longer than the War on Terror, it has nothing to do with the decision to go into Afghanistan or Iraq, and as I stated before, Hamas and Hezbollah have different aims than Al Qaeda. Hamas and Hezbollah are fundamentally different than Al Qaeda.

Hezbollah’s goals can be found here, in a pdf. I’ll copy the major goals below from Wikipedia:

Now here is the Hamas charter. It also talks about liberating all of Palestine for the Palestinians, sending all the Jews who arrived after 1948 home, etc etc. It doesn’t say “lets go try and destroy America”. In fact, Hezbollah criticized Al Qaeda for the Towers attack. Their goals, as I have pointed out, are different than Al Qaeda because they are a different type of organization. So for the reasons I listed, I would argue that the deaths from the Israel-Palestine conflict shouldn’t be lumped in with the deaths from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Now, yes more people have died on the other side of the War on Terror than the 3000 Americans in 9/11. Every Afghan civilian that has died as a result of bad intelligence on the location of terrorists would have otherwise lived much longer. You also have to balance that out with the improvement of the standard of life for the rest of the people. The fact that women aren’t stoned to death for not wearing the burqa anymore.

Your argument has more validity with Iraq, where more grievous mistakes were made. In Iraq, all the Sunnis who died as a result of sectarian violence wouldn’t have under Saddam, since he was also Sunni. The Shia’s who died would have still been alive, but still persecuted, imprisoned, tortured and on occasion, murdered. Do you also count the tens of thousands of Iraqis who were killed in 1991 when the Shia revolted and were crushed? The estimated 2 million who fled in fear? How about all the ones who died as a result of the economic sanctions between 1991 and 2003? The reason I ask is because Al Qaeda’s first attack on US soil was 1993. Does that make the US culpable for everyone who Saddam killed or are you only focusing on Iraq post 2003?

I was responding to Sleepyhead’s assertion that OBL started Al Qaeda because of the US being in Saudi Arabia (false), the grievances for 9/11 were valid (also false) and that it was the US, UK and Israel who started it (triple false).

12

[quote=“lbksig”][quote=“spook”]

What do you imagine that Shiite Muslim’s argument was for throwing his shoes at George Bush, knowing that he would most likely go to prison for doing so?
[/quote]

I’d bet it was because we gave him, his family, and his countrymen of the Shiite religion hope for a chance at a decent life then fucked that dream by appointing L Paul Bremer; an idiot who put idiots in important places making idiotic decisions. . . .[/quote]
“This is a farewell kiss from the Iraqi people, you dog. This is for the widows and orphans and all those killed in Iraq.”
– Muntadhar al-Zaidi

13

“War on Terror” indeed. Don’t make me laugh. “War for Oil” more likely.
Oh, and I despise Muslims, Christians and Jews equally. Any peope who define themselves in terms of religion or nationalism are indefensible. Enough war in this world. Enough pain and suffering. Time to grow up.