[trettegeani]

But the only advantage to having Quaddafi in power is that he was all talk and no action.

That was for sure, he was our buddy but it seems he has truly gone south. After the asset freezes of him, friends, and
family I wonder how much they put aside for a rainy day like this.
I remember France wouldn't let our jets overfly their country on the way to retaliate for the Lockerbie disaster so I'm
not sure why they would have deserved any $ concessions, but it's not a surprise they chose money over justice.

[yasalaioqe]

“We’re seeing a repeat of 1979 where a weak Jimmy Carter gave up the shah to the evil Iatola Komani who lead his barbaric reign of terror,” said David Kupelian.

Tuesday, February 22, 2011 - Shows - The Sean Hannity Show

It’s hard to say where Ann Coulter stands on revolutions in the Middle East.

Ann Coulter: Democrats: emboldening America's enemies and terrifying her allies since 1976 | StAugustine.com

I guess she wants to see one in Iran, but what if Muslims run the new revolution in Iran? Wait, Muslims make up a majority of the population. Ooo, that could be a problem. OK, Gaddafi is our enemy, but Muslims are our enemy, so my enemy’s enemy is my friend… Gaddafi is our friend. So when Pres. Reagan tried to kill him that was bad and now we should apologize. Let’s send in Sarah Palin, she’s been looking for some foreign policy experience. It might go something like this:
Sarah: Well, gee, ya know we really regret that bombing and where you lost that daughter. It’s a shame and you know Muslims do crazy things and we have to make sure that doesn’t happen again. We want to do what ever it takes to make sure that Muslims don’t control your country and endanger the your people.

Gaddafi: Ah, yes, my people are like my children. Sometimes I must correct them. For their own good.

Sarah: Oh, I hear ya. I’ve been there. You can tell them that guy’s a loser from day one and try to make sure they know nothing about havin babies but do they listen…?

Gaddafi: Indeed, the children must be taught the importance of respect and ignorance.

Sarah: Anyway, I hope you’ll come and see Alaska or just watch my DVD. If I friend you on Facebook will you friend me?

Gaddafi: Of course I have many infidel friends on Facebook.

Sarah: Hey, that’s great, but I live in Alaska not in-filadelphia

[ELURNSERB]

This is more interesting:

Prominent Neocon Gave Qaddafi a Makeover


Politico's Laura Rozen found some dirt on Richard Perle who, it turns out, is part of Muammar Qaddafi's image makeover team.

Perle is a resident fellow at the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute and was one of the main architects of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. You can always count on Perle to be right at the nexus of business and human catastrophe. In the years after he served as chairman of the Defense Policy Board under George W. Bush, it seems Perle did some traveling overseas:

Perle traveled to Libya as a paid adviser to the Monitor Group, a prestigious Boston-based consulting firm with close ties to leading professors at the Harvard Business School. The firm named Perle a senior adviser in 2006.

Perle was visiting Libya as part of a team called "the Project to Enhance the Profile of Libya and Muammar Qadhafi," which also featured the world's preeminent racist Middle East scholar, Bernard Lewis. They'd visit Libya and then come home to tell everyone how wonderful and business-friendly the North African nation had become and that really, Brother Leader isn't such a bad guy after all!

[Weislenalkata]

Of course the repubs like him. He's like the ultimate republican! If he were ultra Christian they probably would have invited him into the tea party.

[yasalaioqe]

As raideradam has pointed out Sarah Palin does not support Gaddafi.

[Figelac]

This is more interesting:

Prominent Neocon Gave Qaddafi a Makeover

This is because Libya was pulled off the terrorist supporter list when GWB was president and GWB openly praised Libya for the monetary concessions sent to France which prompted the removal from the list. Since Libya has oil, that paved the way for Bush-supporting companies like Halliburton, Koch, Tyco, etc. and the high level executives that used to bounce between the boards of those corporations and the WH to work on fluffing up Libya.

Young people don't know (until now) how much of a lunatic Quaddafi is, but in the 1980s it was crystal clear. But the only advantage to having Quaddafi in power is that he was all talk and no action. When Reagon bombed the sh** out of him he didn't get any support from his arab neighbors and he quit being a thorn in the USA's ass.

[M4tHkBw2]

What's the point of this thread? To bash Republicans? If you say conservatives support Qaddafi, then that is terrible because he is a ruthless dictator. If you say conservatives want to overthrow Qaddafi...well we saw what liberals said when Bush wanted to topple Hussein (who is definitely worse to his own people than Qaddafi). Isn't there another thread here "accusing" Palin of wanting to overthrow Qaddafi? Instead of twisting facts to suit their point of view, I'd like to know how liberals view the crisis in Libya.

[yasalaioqe]

What's the point of this thread? To bash Republicans? If you say conservatives support Qaddafi, then that is terrible because he is a ruthless dictator. If you say conservatives want to overthrow Qaddafi...well we saw what liberals said when Bush wanted to topple Hussein (who is definitely worse to his own people than Qaddafi). Isn't there another thread here "accusing" Palin of wanting to overthrow Qaddafi? Instead of twisting facts to suit their point of view, I'd like to know how liberals view the crisis in Libya.

I started this thread to point out what "some" Conservatives were saying and the points they were making. Personally and as Kupelian and Coulter have suggested we need to consider who will take over. They might be worse.

As to Sarah Palin, she hadn't at the time of the original post made her statement on Libya but she had made the reverse statement on Egypt and that is what prompted the little parody.

My view on Libya is that it seems that US involvement (No Fly Zone, and possibly more) might not help the rebels (whoever they are). Also. with the US as Gaddafi's enemy this might help Gaddafi rally anti-US feelings in the Arab world especially now that Arab governments are "listening" to their people, and it will certainly drain our treasury and military which might lead to trouble for the US elsewhere. Also, as Sarah Palin has said we need to know the character who the US is supporting.

[M4tHkBw2]

Full disclosure to my post above: I think Palin is an idiot.

[bxxasxxa]

This is because Libya was pulled off the terrorist supporter list when GWB was president and GWB openly praised Libya for the monetary concessions sent to France which prompted the removal from the list. Since Libya has oil, that paved the way for Bush-supporting companies like Halliburton, Koch, Tyco, etc. and the high level executives that used to bounce between the boards of those corporations and the WH to work on fluffing up Libya.

Young people don't know (until now) how much of a lunatic Quaddafi is, but in the 1980s it was crystal clear. But the only advantage to having Quaddafi in power is that he was all talk and no action. When Reagon bombed the sh** out of him he didn't get any support from his arab neighbors and he quit being a thorn in the USA's ass.

Reagan put a laser guided bomb right through the window of Quaddafi's son's bedroom. We didn't hear from Quaddafi for a long time after that. I remember it very well.

[yasalaioqe]

Reagan put a laser guided bomb right through the window of Quaddafi's son's bedroom. We didn't hear from Quaddafi for a long time after that. I remember it very well.

One thing we should remember is that Pres. Reagan didn't leave the WH for a few months because of Libyan assassins possibly armed with missiles to shoot down AF1 or his helicopter. While on one hand the personal approach could be a solution one assassination could lead to another.

[yasalaioqe]

... If you say conservatives want to overthrow Qaddafi...well we saw what liberals said when Bush wanted to topple Hussein (who is definitely worse to his own people than Qaddafi)...

I wasn't sure which Bush you were reffering to Pres. Bush XLI seemed to have two points of view regarding Hussein. Sec. of Defense Cheney said on national television that Saddam Hussein was the Adolf Hitler of our time, but since Pres. Bush signed a ceasefire agreement with Hussein. Did that make him a Liberal or the Neville Chamberlain of our time?