[DoterForeva]

Bullshit. Alma laid out facts, you didn't refute a single one but simply twisted them to support what we're doing now. Your third para, in fact, could easily describe what we're doing now.

Bullshit...she didn't read a thing honestly in that link and its links therein from which to get more links in research to get a grasp on it...she just took things to fit her intended attack out of context with no investigation at all. She never intended to discuss the issue honestly at all.

Which surprises me by your comment given you have the intelligence to know better so don't shortchange it. Do some homework yourself on it before talking this smack. That especially so given you're American. If your country is in the wrong say so. "America Right or Wrong" is not the right way to do things. But don't let someone else wrong the US and assume they're telling it right just because they say so. There's enough anti-US smearmongers out there--like her--without having US lapdogs to it.

Do some investigation into the whole Iraq arms issue in depth. It was widely discussed here in major depth back then. I'm not going to go through it again in detail because her intents are not sincere and you are taking her side without doing your own homework.

I never said the US was a saint in it...it's not. But this bullshit that the US was his armer is complete horseshit. That's not polishing a sin of the US...it's simply not assuming more sins than it didn't do, and letting those who did sins to get away with it by pinning their sins on the US is rightly called out.

The main fact is that once again we are attacking an oil rich country because its own government dared to put down a rebellion in its own sovereign territory. We didn't have the campaign of lies leading up to it like in Iraq because this was just an opportunity Obama seized instead of an idee fixe that had been laid out way back in the 90's. (Though it's beginning to look more and more like a part of that doctrine every day). That can come later, I suppose

Oh really? "[I]t's own government dared to put down a rebellion in its own sovereign territory"...? Since when is a vicious dictator like him supposedly a legitimate leader of those people according to what I assume you consider your rights? Since when is threatening mass abuse and slaughter of civilians by such dictators in recent times not an international crime? I guess that talk about in the US Constitution and rights, consent of the governed, etc, is just applicable to yourself or other cafe crowds in already safe and secure democracies, is that it?

If we wanted the oil, we would have backed Ghaddafi and let him crush them quick. The oil would have flowed just like their blood and he would have appreciated the US support as it would have been in his interest. He's certainly said so saying any oil deals are off except for those who didn't back those people he was targeting, e.g. Russia--you know, Alma's 'higher values', etc.

But then again, I guess the US is a bad guy for backing these dictators 'for oil,' but remove them and try to help the people under them get a democracy, they're bad guys 'for oil' once again, eh? It's a bad guy if the US does it alone and it's a bad guy if the UN requests it, etc. It seems clear to me that you hold the US out to be a bad guy either and any way it goes.