As far as I remember most of us on here have always said Gaddafi seems to have many very bad points as well as several good ones. Many of us have said we'd prefer a more liberal regime - apart from anything else, we might then have a chance of entering and seeing the country and meeting the people. But we've abhored the actions of NATO and our own government, using our tax monies to kill innocent Libyans. We've said we should not be taking sides. We've admired Gaddafi for resisting the pressure of bombs and warfare for so long. We have loathed the way the media has simply taken one side. We have suggested that many Libyans appear to want Gaddafi's regime to remain in power. And we've worried about the weak and unorganised rebel campaign which, without NATO support, would have been defeated long ago. Can they run a country? Will they be fair and decent to those who were on the other side?

Personally I despise the way we have behaved. Far worse than Gaddafi. The entire fiasco has been misguided and badly handled. And its supporters have themselves rewritten their predictions and opinions, thinking we don't notice.

A very ugly aspect of our society; the kind that inspires riots and looting itself. Bullying. Broken thinking from a broken civilisation.

Just wait and see.

Yes JK,I doubt the Libyan people will be any happier than their counterparts in Iraq/Afghan etc.

JK2006 wrote:
As far as I remember most of us on here have always said Gaddafi seems to have many very bad points as well as several good ones.
Not quite my own position... I've always believed that Gadaffi was more than a little deranged. But no more so than many other "leaders" we appear to regard with equanimity. I have also always believed that dictators - of whatever political shade - are not really a good thing for any country or its people and that the logical conclusion of that belief is that he should go.

JK2006 wrote:
Many of us have said we'd prefer a more liberal regime - apart from anything else, we might then have a chance of entering and seeing the country and meeting the people.

Now you're beginning to talk my language. The more liberal the better. The alternatives are usually a precursor to someone getting oppressed. Especially in a continent as much in need of just about everything as Africa.

JK2006 wrote:
But we've abhored the actions of NATO and our own government, using our tax monies to kill innocent Libyans.

I can go with that 100 percent.

JK2006 wrote:
We've said we should not be taking sides.

We certainly have.

JK2006 wrote:
We've admired Gaddafi for resisting the pressure of bombs and warfare for so long.

Actually I haven't... I find little to be "admired" in a blind refusal to admit defeat and face the truth. Just as I have always failed to "admire" the way Hitler fired his Generals and directed non-existent divisions against the advancing Russians in the latter days of WWII. Or failed to admire the "courage" of those who have killed thousands of perfectly innocent Libyans in order to loosen one man's grip on the levers of power.

JK2006 wrote:
We have loathed the way the media has simply taken one side.

That's certainly true. That the media -especially the print media - in this country {I think the problem is more with TV news in, say, The USA} is much less interested in reporting the truth than in reporting what they think will sell the most papers or garner the highest viewing figures for, in most cases, their advertisers, is rapidly becoming a matter of public record. That's why they put the slant on things the way they do... it's not about whether "our boys" are doing the right thing, it's about whether or not "our boys" are doing what they are doing for us. Which in Libya, as in so many other places around the world, they are not- no matter what the government of the day says.

JK2006 wrote:
We have suggested that many Libyans appear to want Gaddafi's regime to remain in power.

I haven't. I don't know any Libyans and would never claim to know what they themselves want. This much, at least, I have in common with NATO and the Government of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland. But I'd agree that, in purely statistical terms, he must enjoy at least some popular support. The newsreels appear to support this, even if such support is usually only depicted in what can only be described as a grudging way.

JK2006 wrote:
And we've worried about the weak and unorganised rebel campaign which, without NATO support, would have been defeated long ago.


Agreed. Surely so much goes without saying.

JK2006 wrote:
Can they run a country?

Sure. They'll be held up by lots of strings which people who DO know how to run a country {although seemingly that country is not their own} will be pulling. We seem to be keen on establishing client states in this part of the world. Meanwhile these same people are still "bringing all possible diplomatic pressures to bear" on Zimbabwe, which has no oil.

JK2006 wrote:
Will they be fair and decent to those who were on the other side?

More to the point, will they be fair on anyone other than themselves? Once they have their Rolls Royces, their own security services and their own protection squads they'll be snuffing out whoever they feel like snuffing out with the best of 'em...

JK2006 wrote:
Personally I despise the way we have behaved.

Me too. It was never our argument.

JK2006 wrote:
Far worse than Gaddafi. The entire fiasco has been misguided and badly handled.

But, Jonathan... how could you say such a thing? We're British... fair play and all that. Sorry, I'm having a seriousness failure. I'll just take a deep breath.


JK2006 wrote:
And its supporters have themselves rewritten their predictions and opinions, thinking we don't notice.

But one of them has been right all along. In fact so many 5 month old threads have been resurrected today that you can virtually feel the self righteousness gripping you by the throat and screaming at you, "See... I told you so, didn't I? I did... I did!"... The only trouble is that all those threads - and everyone else's predictions - were wildly optimistic {in other words "hopelessly previous"} in their estimates of the costs in terms of money and human lives. And let them hear this. We did notice, which is why there are so many sardonic comments being posted up not only here but, I'm sure, all over the net.

JK2006 wrote:
A very ugly aspect of our society; the kind that inspires riots and looting itself. Bullying. Broken thinking from a broken civilisation.

Just wait and see.

I don't think I want to see. But I suspect I'm going to anyway.

All good points LO - all we can do now is keep our fingers crossed and hope we are not witnessing a repeat of the toppling of the Shah of Iran. And pray that Satan's Spring (wrongly nicknamed Arab Spring) will now stop.