War Crimes?

  • March 3, 2011 11:24 PM GMT
    Another gross example of double standards. the western world has deemed Gadaffi a war criminal and issued a warrant for his arrest, for shooting his own civilian citizens, who were rioting and threatening to kill him, Yes Gaddafi is a homicidal maniac, a complete nutter. Just wondering when we get so fed up of the greed and avarice in this country and riot and threaten the lives of our leading citizens, who incidentaly, have caused the deaths of 1000,'s of civilians all of the world, when the continued supply of oil is under threat, under the pretext of Weapons of mass destruction or human rights issues. What will happen then?

    Why are we not sending troops to the poor countries to fight cruel oppression of the minorities and establish freedom and civil liberties for them, The minority tribes of Zimbabwee being killed in their thousands. the previous Mayor of London, sucking up to Mugabee and inviting him to visit the UK, treating him like some revered and benevolent father of the people. Why do western governments think they are the epitome of justice and fair play, whilst doing the dirty in back alleys and behind locked doors. Some nations can't handle freedom and civil rights, like Zimbabwee, they have taken over everything, now nobody has jobs anymore, they have taken over all the farms laid waste to them and are now starving. Like letting a truck full of monkeys loose in a sweet shop. Think we should look nearer home before we try and impose morals and a sense of fair play on other countries. When we can honestly say we in the West are perfect can we realy take the high ground. All that happens is it costs us billions, hundreds of soldiers die and then our government's renage and abandons the cause when they are frightened of losing an election.

    • 136 posts
    March 4, 2011 6:03 AM GMT

    As I posted in response to another one of your topics, I like the way you think.

    The priorities of people and governments are, unfortunately too closely tied to their fortunes, rather than their conscience.
  • March 4, 2011 10:27 PM GMT
    Just imagine if we lose the "War on Terror". If the US fleet was nuked in the Gulf and we ran away like all cowards do when the school bully is floored. B-liar and Brown Hat and Idiot Bush and Cameroon and Pajamas will be the ones on trial and the monoliths would fall, just like they did in Germany. What stories of evil would come out.
    • 2068 posts
    March 5, 2011 12:01 AM GMT

    Personally, i think we should keep our noses OUT of Libya & let the rebels and Gaddafi's forces fight it out between themselves. It always p*sses me off when certain countries start interfering in the internal affair of others. Could it be that the only reason cameron's cronies are doing just that is because the Libyans have OIL. If we aren't careful this could go the same way as vietnam.

    Anna- Marie xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • March 5, 2011 1:03 AM GMT
    I'm reminded of the police officer who goes to a home to deal with a domestic dispute only to get injured or killed as both parties decide that the officer is now the enemy.

    I'm afraid that we (non north african countries) may be that unlucky police officer and we are stepping into a family fight that has been going on for thousands of years.

    Right now, the sentiment for freedom is high and innocent victims dying is dreadful. Let's hope that as events unfold, we do not end up as the unlucky police officer.
    • 404 posts
    March 5, 2011 2:40 PM GMT

    You want 'Iraq- The Remake'? or 'Son of Afghanistan'?

    What is happening in north Africa and the Middle East is, by and large, the result of fools ('The West') repeatedly rushing in where wise men fear to tread. 'Our' hands are covered in blood in this respect, which is why we should limit our interference to the absolutely humanely necessary minimum.

    Lynn H.
    • 29 posts
    March 6, 2011 7:06 AM GMT
    Personally, I find it interesting when the West even complains about "Human Rights" violations in the 2nd and 3rd World. The Germanic tribes that evolved into many of the Western nations have inflicted every sort of barbarity upon each, which peaked in WW2, then decided that they were done (much of the conflict of both WW1 and II have roots in the breakup of Charlemagne's death). Better said, the West had the Soviet Union to fight so they realized that war amongst themselves would lead to their destruction.

    After these historical conflicts were 'resolved' with Hitler's defeat, only then did the West decide that they were done waring with each other.

    What's interesting and incredibly narcissistic about this is two-fold:

    1) The West refused to allow any colonial region, 2nd world free nation, puppet nation, etc to view much less add/modify the Human Rights treaties yet demanded the same regions to adhere to the treaties absolutely.

    2) the West colonized almost all of the World, which has been proven, doesn't solve any ethnic and/or class conflicts...it just buries them, which makes such conflicts even more deep-seated...and in time such unresolved conflicts explode in epic violence. Not to mention that any Colonial power makes the colony in "its own image", as it destroys the local culture and instills the cultural paradigm of the governing nation

    An example is the Balkans...the Turks govt. was more or less a meritocracy of warlordism, which is still present to this day (any serious study in post-colonialism will prove.

    The 2nd issue, is that when we do step in (if at all) its purely based off our economic interests. For example, in the 50's Iran actually had a democratic revolt and the British, backed by us (US), squashed it and created a dictatorship instead. We know how this story ended...a theocracy. Neo-imperialism has led to far more casualties then the Nazi's death camps...I was deployed in such a region, and I'm more than happy to talk about it if need be.

    3 issue:

    The only region of the World who's collective culture(s) place individuality above collectivism is the West. Who the hell are we to demand any region of the world, culture, nation, or ethnicity to think and act as we do. Functional, effective, and humane governments are those that mirror the social norms of its citizens.

    Basically, we the West are done playing ball so we demand the rest of the world to follow suit even though we'll offer no method for such nations to solve their internal contradictions.

  • March 6, 2011 11:39 AM GMT
    Does our Government, or any western government realy care about the plight of your average Libyan, or any other foreign nationals, We traded arms and tanks etc, for oil, Were our governments so deluded into thinking these arms were to be used to defend the nations against invasion? Of course not! We know it was to keep the people of these countries subjugated and maintain the status quo. better the oil from the devil you know than an unknown factor.

    So aiding and abetting the slaughter of civilians by the Gadaffi regime. albeit they are rioting and attempting to overthrow a despot regime, are we not complicit in said war crimes?

    Now we sit on the sidelines, basically waiting to suck up to the winner. If we do send in the troops, it will not be to defend the human rights of the masses, it will be to ensure stability and the continuing flow of oil. Every countries economy depends on the price of oil. What you see happening in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya has a knock on effect and could cause the downfall of a lot of western economies and governments.

    The tax, duty and VAT on UK oil/petrol regardless of what people think, does affect none taxed essentials like food, it increases production costs, packaging, transport of goods. The basic costs of utilities, water, gas electricity telecoms. getting to and from work. Resulting in a snowballing effect even affecting care costs and hospital treatments.

    Most of these foreign dictators got into power through the ministrations of western governments and were wined and dined at the UK tax payers expense. Erm didn't we supply Saddam Hussein with arms, Did'nt we supply the Taliban with arms, because we preferred to see the Afghan people kept under Taliban rule rather than let the communists take over.. How many times I wonder have our soldiers gone into battle to face British made weapons and tanks.. Its a case of how you sow your seed depends on the crop you get..

    Now we hear our new government is going to maintain financial aid to countries that have links with terrorism, a sorta appeasement and look how friendly we are. (erm like wonder where the money will go,)? probably to buy arms and bombs to attacks us with and train more terrorists. But aid to realy desperate deserving countries will be cut. Now we are cutting billions from our own defense budgets, but they will still expect our brave soldiers to go into battle , like some ill equipped rag tailed band..
    • 29 posts
    March 7, 2011 8:24 AM GMT
    ^ exactly.

    However, and this is THE THOUGHT that the West can't handle, some of these alleged "evil" dictatorships were and are democractically put in power and supported by the local citizens.

    Palestine and Hamas is a perfect example. The Palestinian people democratically elected Hamas in their first free election. We Americans didn't like the idea, so we threw them out. In Afghanistan the Taliban were simply the better choice when compared to the warlords (who made their money from drug sales).

    In the 3rd World its never as simple as we Westerners would like to believe. There isn't a clear "good/bad guy" to support and/or blame. The point being, that these alleged evil rogue nations have nothing to do with morals but have everything to do with our cultural sensibilities and they decide, through social norms, what the definition of good and evil is. Basically even saying that a nation who's government and social paradigms conflict with ours as evil is the purest example of Eurocentric thinking which reiterates neo-imperialism.

    Instead, we should let the will of the people in any country to decide what's right for them even though it may not make sense to us.