BATMAN
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2007
- Messages
- 29,895
- Reaction score
- -28
- Country
- Location
The only way to justify war, is to dehumanise its victims
It is not normal to look at photographs of explosions and destruction and to celebrate. It is not logical for people to agree with spending hundreds of thousands of pounds to send jets half way around the world to drop bombs on another peoples country, whilst their family members lose their jobs and their local services are cut. These things do not make sense, but they are happening.
The government and the media have a clear plan in the run-up to foreign intervention; firstly, dehumanise the enemy to such an extent that any action is justified by their evil. So, Gaddafi is not a human being, but a mad dog, foaming at the mouth. As for the people in Tripoli and other cities, who support Gaddafi; they simply dont exist.
The fact that the uprisings of Egypt, Yemen and Bahrain began in the capitals of those countries, whereas the Libyan uprising was sparked in Benghazi, a city that has been anti-Gaddafi for many years, is completely irrelevant. They are all Ay-rabs, so they are all the same.
The Libyan rebels in Benghazi are not represented by the demonstrators hanging huge banners saying No to foreign intervention and calling for support from Egypt and Tunisia, they are represented by the National Transitional Council, made up of ex-Gaddafi ministers. We are supposed to believe that the views of people in Benghazi can be conveyed by Chairman of the Council Mustafa Abdul Jalil, who was Muammer Gaddafis Minister of Justice until one month ago, and Interim Prime Minister [of Benghazi?] Mahmoud Jibril, who also worked for Gaddafis government.
Jibril, educated at the University of Pittsburgh, is described as the sole representative of the Libyan people, but the person he used to work for is barking mad. As the January 25 Revolution Youth Coalition, who played a leading role throughout the Egyptian revolution, refused an invitation to meet with US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, and as people in Benghazi sacrificed lives for a cause they believed in, Mahmoud Jibril held meetings with Clinton in luxury Paris hotels. Does this really make Jibril a representative of anyone, or would a more accurate description, as taken from a leaked US diplomatic cable of November 2009 written by the US ambassador to Libya, be a serious interlocutor who gets the US perspective.
The US perspective, and the UK perspective for that matter, is not something that is difficult to get; our interests take precedent over anything, and killing some brown people is fine if it helps us along the way. But of course, that would never be acceptable to the majority of people, so different phrases are invented; we are liberating the people, conducting targeted strikes and so on. And the celebration continues.
It is not normal to look at photographs of explosions and destruction and to celebrate. It is not logical for people to agree with spending hundreds of thousands of pounds to send jets half way around the world to drop bombs on another peoples country, whilst their family members lose their jobs and their local services are cut. These things do not make sense, but they are happening.
The government and the media have a clear plan in the run-up to foreign intervention; firstly, dehumanise the enemy to such an extent that any action is justified by their evil. So, Gaddafi is not a human being, but a mad dog, foaming at the mouth. As for the people in Tripoli and other cities, who support Gaddafi; they simply dont exist.
The fact that the uprisings of Egypt, Yemen and Bahrain began in the capitals of those countries, whereas the Libyan uprising was sparked in Benghazi, a city that has been anti-Gaddafi for many years, is completely irrelevant. They are all Ay-rabs, so they are all the same.
The Libyan rebels in Benghazi are not represented by the demonstrators hanging huge banners saying No to foreign intervention and calling for support from Egypt and Tunisia, they are represented by the National Transitional Council, made up of ex-Gaddafi ministers. We are supposed to believe that the views of people in Benghazi can be conveyed by Chairman of the Council Mustafa Abdul Jalil, who was Muammer Gaddafis Minister of Justice until one month ago, and Interim Prime Minister [of Benghazi?] Mahmoud Jibril, who also worked for Gaddafis government.
Jibril, educated at the University of Pittsburgh, is described as the sole representative of the Libyan people, but the person he used to work for is barking mad. As the January 25 Revolution Youth Coalition, who played a leading role throughout the Egyptian revolution, refused an invitation to meet with US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, and as people in Benghazi sacrificed lives for a cause they believed in, Mahmoud Jibril held meetings with Clinton in luxury Paris hotels. Does this really make Jibril a representative of anyone, or would a more accurate description, as taken from a leaked US diplomatic cable of November 2009 written by the US ambassador to Libya, be a serious interlocutor who gets the US perspective.
The US perspective, and the UK perspective for that matter, is not something that is difficult to get; our interests take precedent over anything, and killing some brown people is fine if it helps us along the way. But of course, that would never be acceptable to the majority of people, so different phrases are invented; we are liberating the people, conducting targeted strikes and so on. And the celebration continues.
