Libya is falling/fallen. by JoMo - Page 4 - TribalWar Forums
Click Here to find great hosting deals from Branzone.com


Go Back   TribalWar Forums > TribalWar Community > General Discussion
Reload this Page Libya is falling/fallen.
Page 4 of 23
Thread Tools
caelum
VeteranXX
Old
61 - 02-20-2011, 20:24
Reply With Quote
yea alot of mofos saying hundreds are being killed
 
caelum is offline
 
Sponsored Links
DrMeithos
VeteranX
Old
62 - 02-20-2011, 20:34
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoMo View Post
Libyan Kid (Libyayalibya) on Twitter

Deadly shootings in #Tripoli. #Gaddafi’s mercenaries against unarmed civilians. Dozens are being killed. God be with them.
2 minutes ago via web
Interesting... I also see that a top trending topic is #BIEBER ALERT. According to SexyDrRockzo @RockThatBieber, Bieber Fever is uncurable.
 
DrMeithos is offline
 
Kizzak
VeteranXV
Old
63 - 02-20-2011, 20:37
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrMeithos View Post
Didn't GWB predict that democracy would spread throughout the middle east after Muslims saw Iraq manage it successfully? And didn't the left say he's the biggest idiot of all time for think that that could ever happen? That doesn't justify going into Iraq, but I seem to remember that happening.
Hint: it isn't spreading through the middle east due to Iraq


Post hoc ergo propter hoc is a logical fallacy

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrMeithos View Post
I haven't had time to read a lot in the news b/c of midterms, so you probably know more than I do about what's going on. However, I do know that GWB said 7 years ago that we'll see democratic revolts in the rest of the middle east, everyone else said it'd never happen, and now it's happening. Whether the new governments are friendly or not is another discussion.
You do realize that Egypt, Tunisia, and Libya don't count as the middle east and there were already democracies in the middle east (lebanon and the PA)

If you count them as the middle east, then you have to count Turkey as the middle east and Turkey as a democracy still kicks the **** out of Iraq


Quote:
edit: in Libya they're revolting against Muammar Gaddafi. Haven't we been trying to get rid of him for like 40 years now because he's an anti-US terrorist/terrorist supporter?
We changed our minds once he got rid of some of his wmds and started helping us torture terrorists
 
Kizzak is offline
 
Last edited by Kizzak; 02-20-2011 at 20:44..
Stealth
VeteranXV
Old
64 - 02-20-2011, 20:39
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by HaPpY View Post
who cares what these ragheads do... theyll have the same corrupt government replace the current one anyway.

This has been my point all along. I don't understand why they're protesting, because it's going to be the same thing all over again. Nothing is going to change for them in the long term because of their culture and beliefs.

Any "democracy" achieved will be a complete fraud that will be utilized as a front for another dictatorship. Oh well, just let them kill each other and think that they're somehow making a difference.
 
Stealth is offline
 
JoMo
VeteranXV
Immigrant
Old
65 - 02-20-2011, 20:48
Reply With Quote
40+ now reported dead in Tripoli over the last couple hours. (Twitter reports)
 
JoMo is offline
 
Last edited by JoMo; 02-20-2011 at 20:52..
DrMeithos
VeteranX
Old
66 - 02-20-2011, 20:50
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kizzak View Post
Hint: it isn't spreading through the middle east due to Iraq
It's interesting tho that the left said the same thing when democracy spread through the Communist states in the 80s and 90s. "It'll never ever happen you ****ing moron Reagan!" (after it happens) "It wasn't because of Reagan. It's from some internal thing that had nothing to do with our foreign policy. He got lucky."

If not for Iraq's liberation, why is it happening all of a sudden? I don't know. Like I said, I'm working on my midterms and haven't been reading much about it. But, GWB predicted it and everybody else said it'd never happen. If GWB was right about the effect (democratic revolts against dictators), he's probably right about the cause (Iraq's liberation). I'm not saying that that's 100% what happened, but that's a pretty logical conclusion.
 
DrMeithos is offline
 
Grief
VeteranX
Old
67 - 02-20-2011, 20:55
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrMeithos View Post
If not for Iraq's liberation, why is it happening all of a sudden? I don't know. Like I said, I'm working on my midterms and haven't been reading much about it. But, GWB predicted it and everybody else said it'd never happen. If GWB was right about the effect (democratic revolts against dictators), he's probably right about the cause (Iraq's liberation). I'm not saying that that's 100% what happened, but that's a pretty logical conclusion.
NONE of these nations want to be what either Iraq or Afghanistan is. They're "democracries" held up by America, just the same way that Egypt was a "democracy" held up by America.
 
Grief is offline
 
JoMo
VeteranXV
Immigrant
Old
68 - 02-20-2011, 21:00
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grief View Post
NONE of these nations want to be what either Iraq or Afghanistan is. They're "democracries" held up by America, just the same way that Egypt was a "democracy" held up by America.
So if any of these countries become Islamic ****holes, it's Obama's fault?
 
JoMo is offline
 
Piata
VeteranXX
Old
69 - 02-20-2011, 21:00
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by SPNirology View Post
remember when we invaded the middle east to light the fire for democracy in the middle east and then it started to happen and all the liberals are trying to take credit for it now when they wanted us out in 2005? SPNirology remembers.
SPNirology is delusional. Claiming that America's invasion of Iraq some 8 years ago is causing revolts now is retarded.

You'd have a better chance of crediting wikileaks as the mass revolts started in Tunisia and it started shortly after a wikileak cable detailed the levels of corruption in Tunisia.
 
Piata is offline
 
Kizzak
VeteranXV
Old
70 - 02-20-2011, 21:03
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrMeithos View Post
It's interesting tho that the left said the same thing when democracy spread through the Communist states in the 80s and 90s. "It'll never ever happen you ****ing moron Reagan!" (after it happens) "It wasn't because of Reagan. It's from some internal thing that had nothing to do with our foreign policy. He got lucky."
Again, you seem to have a hard time understanding the difference between "after it, therefore because of it" and cause and effect.

You also seem to be having an issue with attributing straw-man statements to broad groups of people. People never disputed that democracy was possible, people disputed that the way Reagan was attempting to encourage it was appropriate.

Quote:
If not for Iraq's liberation, why is it happening all of a sudden?
The liberation happened how many years ago, the democracy movement is happening 'suddenly' is occurring how many years after that?

Quote:
I don't know. Like I said, I'm working on my midterms and haven't been reading much about it.
So basically you are regurgitating talking points because you have nothing better to do with your time?

Quote:
But, GWB predicted it and everybody else said it'd never happen.
Not exactly, he predicted it 'accurately' just about as much as Nostradamus or the Old Testament.

I would also point two things out:
1. People never said popular revolts would 'never' happened, they disputed that Iraq would lead to the appearance of other revolts
2. Iraq was military invasion first - how could that possibly inspire other countries to endure a popular revolt when previous attempts to revolt against Saddam had failed in utter collapse? Wouldn't that point to the REVERSE happening, regimes becoming more secure because the people assume the only way they can get their dictators out is for the US to invade them?


Quote:
If GWB was right about the effect (democratic revolts against dictators), he's probably right about the cause (Iraq's liberation). I'm not saying that that's 100% what happened, but that's a pretty logical conclusion.
Only if it had occurred sometime near the establishment of democracy in iraq

Do you notice how there is a spill-over effect occurring right now from one country to another? If it had been because of Iraq, then the revolts would have occurred shortly after that rather than many years afterwards.




I'll give you another great example of the post hoc fallacy that some people use to lionize reagan

Reagan supposedly quieted down Qadafi and got him to drop his support for terrorism by bombing Libya (1986) in the same way that reagan won the cold war and brought democracy to the soviet union because it happened after his term.

The mistake there is that as it turns out, the Lockerbie bombing he funded occurred in 1988 - two years after Reagan should have shut him up by bombing him.

In the same way, Qadafi suddenly became more co-operative with us on terrorism post-9/11 because he was being targeted by a faction associated with Al Qaeda and the economic sanctions that the UN and US had imposed in the 90s had been utterly devastating.
 
Kizzak is offline
 
Last edited by Kizzak; 02-20-2011 at 21:05..
Data
VeteranXX
Contributor
Old
71 - 02-20-2011, 21:08
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiloh View Post
I remember people saying that it is impossible for an armed populace to rise up because of things like tanks.
Armchair Generals are ****ing stupid.
 
Data is offline
 
Data
VeteranXX
Contributor
Old
72 - 02-20-2011, 21:19
Reply With Quote
It could, if they weren't backwards savages.
 
Data is offline
 
HumDumpin
ReeeingRainbowXV
Old
73 - 02-20-2011, 21:25
Reply With Quote
@ the neo-tards
 
HumDumpin is offline
 
{FSC}Godfather
VeteranXV
Contributor
Old
74 - 02-20-2011, 21:40
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kizzak View Post
Hint: it isn't spreading through the middle east due to Iraq


Post hoc ergo propter hoc is a logical fallacy


You do realize that Egypt, Tunisia, and Libya don't count as the middle east and there were already democracies in the middle east (lebanon and the PA)

If you count them as the middle east, then you have to count Turkey as the middle east and Turkey as a democracy still kicks the **** out of Iraq




We changed our minds once he got rid of some of his wmds and started helping us torture terrorists
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL_vHDjG5Wk
 
{FSC}Godfather is offline
 
ZOD
VeteranX
Old
75 - 02-20-2011, 21:52
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kizzak View Post
Again, you seem to have a hard time understanding the difference between "after it, therefore because of it" and cause and effect.

You also seem to be having an issue with attributing straw-man statements to broad groups of people. People never disputed that democracy was possible, people disputed that the way Reagan was attempting to encourage it was appropriate.


The liberation happened how many years ago, the democracy movement is happening 'suddenly' is occurring how many years after that?



So basically you are regurgitating talking points because you have nothing better to do with your time?


Not exactly, he predicted it 'accurately' just about as much as Nostradamus or the Old Testament.

I would also point two things out:
1. People never said popular revolts would 'never' happened, they disputed that Iraq would lead to the appearance of other revolts
2. Iraq was military invasion first - how could that possibly inspire other countries to endure a popular revolt when previous attempts to revolt against Saddam had failed in utter collapse? Wouldn't that point to the REVERSE happening, regimes becoming more secure because the people assume the only way they can get their dictators out is for the US to invade them?




Only if it had occurred sometime near the establishment of democracy in iraq

Do you notice how there is a spill-over effect occurring right now from one country to another? If it had been because of Iraq, then the revolts would have occurred shortly after that rather than many years afterwards.




I'll give you another great example of the post hoc fallacy that some people use to lionize reagan

Reagan supposedly quieted down Qadafi and got him to drop his support for terrorism by bombing Libya (1986) in the same way that reagan won the cold war and brought democracy to the soviet union because it happened after his term.

The mistake there is that as it turns out, the Lockerbie bombing he funded occurred in 1988 - two years after Reagan should have shut him up by bombing him.

In the same way, Qadafi suddenly became more co-operative with us on terrorism post-9/11 because he was being targeted by a faction associated with Al Qaeda and the economic sanctions that the UN and US had imposed in the 90s had been utterly devastating.
Lets not forget that prior to us "freeing" Iraq, the Shi'a and Kurds were told we would help them get rid of Saddam and then we reneged and let them get their asses handed to them. Yeah, we are real big supporters of Democracy we are

Oh we also helped Russia back on the path of Tyranny.
 
ZOD is offline
 
DrMeithos
VeteranX
Old
76 - 02-20-2011, 21:53
Reply With Quote
Geez kizzak. You accuse me of having nothing better to do w/ my time, then post a gigantic wall of miscellaneous text. Normally your posts are pretty good. Not this one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kizzak View Post
The liberation happened how many years ago, the democracy movement is happening 'suddenly' is occurring how many years after that?

2. Iraq was military invasion first - how could that possibly inspire other countries to endure a popular revolt when previous attempts to revolt against Saddam had failed in utter collapse? Wouldn't that point to the REVERSE happening, regimes becoming more secure because the people assume the only way they can get their dictators out is for the US to invade them?
I think this is your key point. You thought that by bringing democracy to Iraq via invasion, it would draw political blowback against democracy. That was the common left-wing talking point against Bush's Freedom Agenda for the past 8 years.
You were wrong. This is just like 85-92 when all the communist nations were revolting. After Reagan predicted it, took steps to make it happen, and the left blasted him for being a senile-old man, it happened. Then the same guys who said it'd never happen come out and say, "It's not because of Reagan. It's from other internal things. He just got lucky."

You say that the idea of democracy isn't spreading from Iraq because it didn't happen overnight. That doesn't make sense. Why would the people of Egypt, Libya, and everywhere else risk revolt to emulate 2006 Iraq? Now that it's 2011 and Iraq is safe and free (relatively), isn't that when people would actually start to look to it as an example of what's possible for themselves?
 
DrMeithos is offline
 
Stilgar
VeteranXX
Old
77 - 02-20-2011, 22:01
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by HaPpY View Post
who cares what these ragheads do... theyll have the same corrupt government replace the current one anyway. it has happened in every muslim revolution, itll happen with egypt, itll happen with libya...

why? because islam ****in sucks thats why


of course foxnews will credit these revolutions to bush... and their failure to obama
Close.
It's not Islams fault.
It's third world, ill educated finger like masses of people. They pollute the earth.
 
Stilgar is offline
 
JoMo
VeteranXV
Immigrant
Old
78 - 02-20-2011, 22:04
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stilgar View Post
Close.
It's not Islams fault.
It's third world, ill educated finger like masses of people. They pollute the earth.
So it is Islam's fault?
 
JoMo is offline
 
Kizzak
VeteranXV
Old
79 - 02-20-2011, 22:18
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrMeithos View Post
Geez kizzak. You accuse me of having nothing better to do w/ my time, then post a gigantic wall of miscellaneous text.
You are saying you haven't had time to read up on anything because you are too busy 'working on your midterms'- but not too busy to read up on talking points and then post them over and over again in a thread.


Quote:
Normally your posts are pretty good. Not this one.
Your lack of affirmation for my posts wounds me greatly



Quote:
I think this is your key point. You thought that by bringing democracy to Iraq via invasion, it would draw political blowback against democracy. That was the common left-wing talking point against Bush's Freedom Agenda for the past 8 years.
Uhh, do you have evidence for any of those claims at all?

1. That anyone argued there would be political blowback 'against democracy'
2. That it was the common left-wing talking point
3. That Bush ever had anything resembling a 'Freedom Agenda'


Quote:
You were wrong. This is just like 85-92 when all the communist nations were revolting. After Reagan predicted it, took steps to make it happen, and the left blasted him for being a senile-old man, it happened. Then the same guys who said it'd never happen come out and say, "It's not because of Reagan. It's from other internal things. He just got lucky."




Quote:
You say that the idea of democracy isn't spreading from Iraq because it didn't happen overnight. That doesn't make sense. Why would the people of Egypt, Libya, and everywhere else risk revolt to emulate 2006 Iraq?
Why is Iraq the only possible explanatory variable in your model?


Quote:
Now that it's 2011 and Iraq is safe and free (relatively), isn't that when people would actually start to look to it as an example of what's possible for themselves?
Try to find one Egyptian, Tunisian, Libyan, etc that credits Iraq as a 'stable democracy' as the reason they are pushing for democracy. You won't


Let me repeat, Turkey has been a stable democracy for longer than Iraq and if you are stretching the definition of the middle east to include North Africa (aka Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia) - then Turkey also would easily fall into the middle east as well and therefore has been a beacon for longer.

Why would they be any more inclined to look at 2011 Iraq than Turkey any time since WW2?
 
Kizzak is offline
 
HaPpY
VeteranXX
Old
80 - 02-20-2011, 22:22
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stilgar View Post
Close.
It's not Islams fault.
It's third world, ill educated finger like masses of people. They pollute the earth.
if someone lives by a backward philosophy, it sure doesnt help in improving their education. true of any religion of course.
 
HaPpY is offline
 
Page 4 of 23
Reply


Go Back   TribalWar Forums > TribalWar Community > General Discussion
Reload this Page Libya is falling/fallen.

Social Website Bullshit

Tags
a thread goshin posted in , but goshin didnt start , by the way goshin is gay


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


AGENT: claudebot / Y
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:58.