you'd think there was nobody in the country who wants Gaddafi (or Gadaffi) to stay in power. Can this be the fact or are we witnessing the incredible sight of the media deciding which side to support and spinning the coverage that way?

God forbid.

At least we can be sure that the international political structure won't be swayed by media coverage but will support the vast majority of fine, decent freedom fighters against this mad dictator who has no public support.

And, if they gain power with assistance from abroad (in return for oil concessions) we can be certain they will treat the few Gaddafi (or Gadaffi) supporters with decency and kindness.

Oh yeah?

The media thinks we are all morons.
And perhaps they are right.

well I'm certainly confused.

it was much more cut and dried in Egypt.

veritas wrote:
well I'm certainly confused.

it was much more cut and dried in Egypt.

Because the leader had no/little support - especially from the armed forces. Gaddaffi has rather a lot of support (perhaps even more than 50%?) and an army!

dixie wrote:
Gaddaffi has rather a lot of support (perhaps even more than 50%?) and an army!

Says who? (apart from Gaddafi?)

He's lost the majority of his country. Army units (apart from in Tripoli) appear to have deserted. If it were not for him bombing his own defenceless people this would have ended already?