Libyan rebels turning on NATO?

[Freiwillige]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110407/ap_on_bi_ge/ml_libya


In this article they mention several times that the pentagon needs to look into putting ground forces into Libya. Gee never saw that coming.

[Gargamel]

I heard reports that rebels were upset at the NATO forces, that they weren't doing enough. One complaint was that it took up to 6 hours for air strikes to hit after being requested. Even though I'm pretty sure there are green berets helping out, 6 hours is still pretty good for a non-integrated system!

NATO doesn't have to be there, they are helping these guys out. This is their fight that they would have been destroyed, and the survivors executed, if NATO hadn't stepped up to start with. NATO (in particular, the US), does not need to be occupying another mid east country. Ground forces are a bad bad idea. They need to win this fight on their own, with as much help as we can offer them, without commit overt ground forces.

With continued training and assistance from the in-country green berets forces, these rebels should turn into a fairly decent fighting force. With the help of the NATO air forces of course.

[the_tyrant]

Who do these guys think they are?:doh:

It seems like they think NATO is their private army!

[MaddogK]

They're just pizzed that NATO keeps dropping bombs on their heads instead of ghadaffi's.

:haha:

[TLAM Strike]

...6 hours is still pretty good for a non-integrated system!
I wonder if maybe they could do it faster by requesting air strikes via Twitter... :haha:

[Castout]

Who do these guys think they are?:doh:

It seems like they think NATO is their private army!

It's not?! :06:

Who these NATO guys think they are? :stare:

If they had had half the morale and courage as the Libyan pro democracy people have they would have taken over Moscow and won over the Warsaw pack in 3 months before the Soviet Union dissolved, ending the cold war much sooner.

[MH]

............Libyan pro democracy people have they would have taken over Moscow and won over the Warsaw pack in 3 months before the Soviet Union dissolved, ending the cold war much sooner.

lol Huston we have a problem........

[UnderseaLcpl]

Who do these guys think they are?:doh:
That questions bears a lot more examination than one :doh: emoticon. They are Islamic rebels rebelling against harsh dictator. While that is very nice, they are also Islamic rebels, which means they may be inclined towards Islamic views, particularly views that are, on occasion, somewhat warlike.

Not that I'm some kind of racist Islam-hating bastard or anything. Far from it. I've put my own life on the line to defend these guys. And women. And children. Even so, it might be wise to consider the fact that these rebel are, in fact, Islamic rebels. Did I mention that?

Being Islamic rebels, their mentality is somewhat necessarily coloured by the whole "Islamic rebel" thing. They do not see the US or NATO as saviours, at least not for long. Remember who they are. Remember how they came to be Islamic rebels in the first place. Being an Islamic rebel implies both Islam and rebelliousness, naturally. While Islam is great and Allah is great and we should accept that fact in the name of social tolerance, the fact remains that Islamic rebels are indeed rebellious, and also Islamic.

Being Islamic and rebellious as they are, they don't think quite the same way we do. Islam, and its constituent believers, live in a world where the US is the great Satan. Granted, the US has made a lot of serious foreign policy mistakes, some of which have hurt the true believers, but we're not exactly the great Satan. Mostly, we try to help people, in our roundabout frakked-up politcal way.

Islamic rebels don't quite see it that way. Remember, they are Islamic, and they are rebels. That kind of implies that they may be Islamic and willing to use force, being rebels and all. Given that, it is not entirely unreasonable to assume that their perception is somewhat Islamic, and therefore given to Islamic beliefs. Islamic beliefs that violent rebels would support:hmmm: That would suggest that there may be an intrinsic desire amongst Islamic rebels to support Islam as they see it, despite the efforts of non-Islamic nations.

Curious. I'll hold my breath while that all plays out. No, really, I will, metaphorically speaking. If these rebellions result in the establishment of Islamic theocracies, all they will accomplish is poverty and human rights violations, and probably genocide as well, thus giving US the justification to intervene and be big goddamn heroes, as we are so fond of doing.

Sadly, the reballs will probably figure that out in short order, assuming they have functional neural connections. Being so aware, they will probably establish some kind of democratic government, which they will then use to spread Islam in a less-bombable manner. Pure speculation, of course. They've never done that before.

[Oberon]

IIRC we're giving them some decent comms equipment to stop accidents like these happening. Dunno how wide spread the use will be though.

[Gargamel]

So now NATO bombed some Rebel tanks. NATO has been bombing ALL tanks. The rebels knew this. Yet they still failed to inform NATO they had procured some tanks.

And they're mad?

The article even states the rebels think of NATO as their de facto air force.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_NATO_LIBYA?SITE=AZTUS&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[Freiwillige]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/ap_on_re_eu/eu_nato_libya

And then there is this. Do our leaders think we are stupid? Wait don't answer that!

They make the statement that the Rebels have tanks then say sorry for bombing civilians! :timeout:Tanks and civilians don't mix, In fact I would wager that if your driving a T-72 into battle you are a combatant!

[NeonSamurai]

That questions bears a lot more examination than one :doh: emoticon. They are Islamic rebels rebelling against harsh dictator. While that is very nice, they are also Islamic rebels, which means they may be inclined towards Islamic views, particularly views that are, on occasion, somewhat warlike.

Not that I'm some kind of racist Islam-hating bastard or anything. Far from it. I've put my own life on the line to defend these guys. And women. And children. Even so, it might be wise to consider the fact that these rebel are, in fact, Islamic rebels. Did I mention that?

Being Islamic rebels, their mentality is somewhat necessarily coloured by the whole "Islamic rebel" thing. They do not see the US or NATO as saviours, at least not for long. Remember who they are. Remember how they came to be Islamic rebels in the first place. Being an Islamic rebel implies both Islam and rebelliousness, naturally. While Islam is great and Allah is great and we should accept that fact in the name of social tolerance, the fact remains that Islamic rebels are indeed rebellious, and also Islamic.

Being Islamic and rebellious as they are, they don't think quite the same way we do. Islam, and its constituent believers, live in a world where the US is the great Satan. Granted, the US has made a lot of serious foreign policy mistakes, some of which have hurt the true believers, but we're not exactly the great Satan. Mostly, we try to help people, in our roundabout frakked-up politcal way.

Islamic rebels don't quite see it that way. Remember, they are Islamic, and they are rebels. That kind of implies that they may be Islamic and willing to use force, being rebels and all. Given that, it is not entirely unreasonable to assume that their perception is somewhat Islamic, and therefore given to Islamic beliefs. Islamic beliefs that violent rebels would support:hmmm: That would suggest that there may be an intrinsic desire amongst Islamic rebels to support Islam as they see it, despite the efforts of non-Islamic nations.

Curious. I'll hold my breath while that all plays out. No, really, I will, metaphorically speaking. If these rebellions result in the establishment of Islamic theocracies, all they will accomplish is poverty and human rights violations, and probably genocide as well, thus giving US the justification to intervene and be big goddamn heroes, as we are so fond of doing.

Sadly, the reballs will probably figure that out in short order, assuming they have functional neural connections. Being so aware, they will probably establish some kind of democratic government, which they will then use to spread Islam in a less-bombable manner. Pure speculation, of course. They've never done that before.

Sure you used the words Islamic and rebel enough in that? I think there were a few sentences where you could have used those words more. :woot:

I hope you don't write papers like that (meant in a playful teasing way :D).

[Castout]

lol Huston we have a problem........

:haha:

[UnderseaLcpl]

Sure you used the words Islamic and rebel enough in that? I think there were a few sentences where you could have used those words more. :woot:
Caught that, did you? I agree, I overused the terms, but I only did so because the English language is so devoid of synonyms for Islamic rebelliousness. I could call them extremists or militants, but those terms are so frequently used as to be nearly meaningless.

Alright, no more wordplay from me. In short, I am trying to point out the elephant in the room. The Islamic Libyan rebels are exactly that, and we'd do well to remember it. Despite our best efforts to be tolerant and understanding of other cultures, we can't forget that Islam, and especially militant Islam, is a particularly and consistently violent religion, more so when it creates rebels.

Islamic and rebels are the only words I need. They've established enough context all by themselves in the past that no real explanation is needed. I do not fear them and I do not hate them, but I know them for what they are. IMO, it's about time that Islam started reaching out to us if it wants cultural harmony and understanding. And I don't mean by explaining their culture and asking, or even demanding us to respect it. I mean by doing the same crap the western world has been doing for the entire modern era.

An example: If I started stoning black people or calling them ******s or doing any of that other hateful crap, my society would not tolerate it. I'd be in jail for hate crimes. But when Islamic cultures demean women and stone them to death for infidelity and label unveiled women as "whores", that's somehow acceptable? It's state policy in countries like Oman? WTF? Even with my considerable vernacular, WTF is the only suitable expression I can find.

I hope you don't write papers like that (meant in a playful teasing way :D).
1) If you're going to be playful and teasing, you could at least do me the the common courtesy of being a woman. Preferably an attractive one, brown hair, brown eyes, 36-34-36, or somewhere thereabouts. Otherwise, it just comes off as gay.:O:

2) I actually have written papers like that, as I'm sure you'll recall. They are almost always accompanied by failing grades. Professors don't usually appreciate my brand of humor, especially when I use it to question them. I can understand that. It appears condescending and, well, for lack of a better word, or even a word, "prick-ish". I don't intend it to be that way. I intend it to be funny and also illustrative. That's just how I write, how I think.

[Jimbuna]

Who do these guys think they are?:doh:

It seems like they think NATO is their private army!

Well it aint.....but if NATO aren't careful they'll soon become it.

[NeonSamurai]

Caught that, did you? I agree, I overused the terms, but I only did so because the English language is so devoid of synonyms for Islamic rebelliousness. I could call them extremists or militants, but those terms are so frequently used as to be nearly meaningless.

Alright, no more wordplay from me. In short, I am trying to point out the elephant in the room. The Islamic Libyan rebels are exactly that, and we'd do well to remember it. Despite our best efforts to be tolerant and understanding of other cultures, we can't forget that Islam, and especially militant Islam, is a particularly and consistently violent religion, more so when it creates rebels.

Islamic and rebels are the only words I need. They've established enough context all by themselves in the past that no real explanation is needed. I do not fear them and I do not hate them, but I know them for what they are. IMO, it's about time that Islam started reaching out to us if it wants cultural harmony and understanding. And I don't mean by explaining their culture and asking, or even demanding us to respect it. I mean by doing the same crap the western world has been doing for the entire modern era.

An example: If I started stoning black people or calling them ******s or doing any of that other hateful crap, my society would not tolerate it. I'd be in jail for hate crimes. But when Islamic cultures demean women and stone them to death for infidelity and label unveiled women as "whores", that's somehow acceptable? It's state policy in countries like Oman? WTF? Even with my considerable vernacular, WTF is the only suitable expression I can find.

I don't disagree with you. I have many issues with their culture stemming around the treatment of women and other groups. I also am very leery about these rebels, and as I believe I stated in another thread, I fully expect these rebellions to further radicalize the area.


1) If you're going to be playful and teasing, you could at least do me the the common courtesy of being a woman. Preferably an attractive one, brown hair, brown eyes, 36-34-36, or somewhere thereabouts. Otherwise, it just comes off as gay.:O:

Ha ha funny :P I meant that more as in I am yanking your chain a little, and not trying to insult you

2) I actually have written papers like that, as I'm sure you'll recall. They are almost always accompanied by failing grades. Professors don't usually appreciate my brand of humor, especially when I use it to question them. I can understand that. It appears condescending and, well, for lack of a better word, or even a word, "prick-ish". I don't intend it to be that way. I intend it to be funny and also illustrative. That's just how I write, how I think.

Well honestly I do think your writing needs some work, and it's not because of the humor. Good writing is clean and succinct, delivering maximum information with a minimum amount of words, and what you had written above was neither. Stylistically it reminded me more of a jackhammer trying to hammer a point home by saying basically the same point over and over and over.

As for humor, its generally best avoided when writing (unless you are a really good writer). People are forever misunderstanding what an author meant and will frequently miss the humor. This is because there are so many ways one can read a passage of text, each with a completely different interpretation. That is also why I said what I did in the previous post, just in case you took it the wrong way.