UN and NATO to Gaddafi: Operation Odyssey Dawn |OT|

Status
Not open for further replies.
RustyNails said:
Do you know what a state run TV even is? You get "news" every couple of hours which is nothing but propaganda machine. There are not even reporters anywhere "reporting". It's just straight BS feed. After the news, it's time for Children Singing Songs About Great Leader again.
Click to expand...


We have one of those channels here. The bolded part stopped a couple of years ago though.
 
Tabris said:
This is such a joke. Not because of them wanting to defend a move towards democracy against a dictatorship (I am in full support of this), but because they are only doing it for Libya and ignoring Yemen and Bahrain.

It should be changed from "We'll defend the middle east's movement for freedom" to "We'll defend the middle east's movement for freedom as long as Saudi Arabia says it's A-OK"
Click to expand...


You understand that at this time, no one else supports strikes against those nations? Where is the outcry? The supposed Arab League support? Y and B won't happen until A) Libya is done, and B) these things appear.

Sheesh.
 
N-Bomb said:
You understand that at this time, no one else supports strikes against those nations? Where is the outcry? The supposed Arab League support? Y and B won't happen until A) Libya is done, and B) these things appear.

Sheesh.
Click to expand...
Not only that but people must understand escalation in international relations. UN and external powers' interest in the conflict is piqued as soon as the state decides to use Military on its own civilians. It's declaring war against your own citizens, which can only lead to ugly, ugly things down the road. If the state uses paid thugs or even police against its own citizens, it's still seen as a "civilian issue", which so far has been the case in Bahrain and Yemen. If the leaders of those two decide to drop bombs from F-15s on their peaceful demonstrators, you bet your ass UN will jump in.
 
24ni9o4.jpg
 
Meus Renaissance said:
What? Is it wrong for me to be sceptical and wary of how the media portray and convey the reporting of this conflict?
Click to expand...

It's fine to be skeptical. As one of the basics of critical listening or thinking skills, it helps to be able to sort credible evidence from less credible evidence or disinformation.

In this case independent journalist are going to be much more credible than state run reporting. You act like journalists are trying to cover numbers by saying that it hasn't been verified. This is just the nature of the beast, as they can't for sure say if it is true or not, as it hasn't been verified by a source that is considered independent.

I'm sure you understand this, but what is the motive to distort coverage? What does Al Jazeera gain distorting figures? Likewise what does Gaddafi gain from distorting figures? Almost anyone here would say that Al Jazeera has very little to gain, and in fact they could ruin their credibility. Gaddafi has no real credibility (as far as state television is concerned), and has more to gain (sympathy, outrage, etc), so in essence has nothing to lose by distorting figures.
 
LOVE & TRUTH said:
I'm not convincing anyone and I've made my mind long ago. America and the "free world" are the enemies of humanity, run by evil dictators, hungry for money. The USA is the epithome of evil.
Click to expand...

Well goddam. If the United States is COBRA, where's my nifty blue uniform?
 
RustyNails said:
Do you know what a state run TV even is? You get "news" every couple of hours which is nothing but propaganda machine. There are not even reporters anywhere "reporting". It's just straight BS feed. After the news, it's time for Children Singing Songs About Great Leader again.
Click to expand...

Do YOU know what the reporting of Afghanistan and the Iraq War was like in the beginning? And Vietnam before that?

Seriously, they fucking just repeated whatever the government reported, and accepted everything without question. They never said 'wait, but what if this happens' or 'how much will it cost' or 'how long will it last' or 'how will this be perceived by muslims' or 'who has the legitimacy to replace saddam' or 'what about the shia/sunni situation' or 'how many of our soldiers will perish' or 'how many civilians will die in the fighting' or 'iraq had nothing to do with 9/11' or 'where is the evidence of weapons of mass destruction'. It was all just straight from the governments mouth.

Anyone remember that constant waving american flag they put in the corner of the screen when the war first started? It was symbolic of the nationalism that grabbed the media in those days - and this is all CNN we're talking about.

Trust me, you don't even want to GET into this debate with regards to Fox. You will lose.
 
kemalettin said:
so which country gonna get the petrol?
Click to expand...
Biggest cuts:
Russia (PM)
China (PM)
Germany
Brazil
India

Smaller cuts:
United States (PM)
Britain (PM)
France (PM)
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Colombia
Gabon
Lebanon
Nigeria
Portugal
South Africa

;-)
 
Dreams-Visions said:
Biggest cuts:
Russia (PM)
China (PM)
Germany
Brazil
India

Smaller cuts:
United States (PM)
Britain (PM)
France (PM)
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Colombia
Gabon
Lebanon
Nigeria
Portugal
South Africa

;-)
Click to expand...
Damn where is my country on this list? (Turkey=most expensive gas prices in the world)
 
Your Excellency said:
Do YOU know what the reporting of Afghanistan and the Iraq War was like in the beginning? And Vietnam before that?

Seriously, they fucking just repeated whatever the government reported, and accepted everything without question. They never said 'wait, but what if this happens' or 'how much will it cost' or 'how long will it last' or 'how will this be perceived by muslims' or 'who has the legitimacy to replace saddam' or 'what about the shia/sunni situation' or 'how many of our soldiers will perish' or 'how many civilians will die in the fighting' or 'iraq had nothing to do with 9/11' or 'where is the evidence of weapons of mass destruction'. It was all just straight from the governments mouth.

Anyone remember that constant waving american flag they put in the corner of the screen when the war first started? It was symbolic of the nationalism that grabbed the media in those days - and this is all CNN we're talking about.

Trust me, you don't even want to GET into this debate with regards to Fox. You will lose.
Click to expand...
You are pointing out instances of our media's coverage of certain events in history order to portray it as a state run TV. If I recall, there was lots of talk about Hans Blix and lack of evidence from the UN Weapons Inspectors. Yes, people rah-rah'd about it. Some of those media outlets apologized for their one-sided coverage. But then again, this is nothing like state run TV. We do not have 45 minute montages (without any ads too) of the our army carrying out exercises overlaid with grating, patriotic songs. Fox News is just a lost cause and is nothing more than a corporate wing of the Republican party. It is on its way to become the state run media if left unchecked, but the chasm between the two is still pretty wide.
 
RustyNails said:
Do you know what a state run TV even is? You get "news" every couple of hours which is nothing but propaganda machine. There are not even reporters anywhere "reporting". It's just straight BS feed. After the news, it's time for Children Singing Songs About Great Leader again.
Click to expand...
Fuck the BBC.
 
preposterous statement from Amr Moussa. Does he think a no fly zone can be implemented without air attacks? "We supported a no fly zone, not air attacks"....the only air attacks unrelated to the fly zone were the French air strikes on the military convoy attacking Benghazi.
 
Roude Leiw said:
Secretary of the Arab league is already criticizing the air strikes. he says that they only wanted a no fly zone but no air strikes.
Click to expand...
Which is silly, because you need to take out the air defenses in order to establish a no-fly zone. An NFZ necessitates an act of war. They knew exactly what they wanted when they called for it.
 
j_k_redtail said:
Which is silly, because you need to take out the air defenses in order to establish a no-fly zone. An NFZ necessitates an act of war. They knew exactly what they wanted when they called for it.
Click to expand...
the AL is full of shit and covering their asses right now.
There is no way they did not know this was coming when an NFZ was enforced.
 
rSpooky said:
the AL is full of shit and covering their asses right now.
There is no way they did not know this was coming when an NFZ was enforced.
Click to expand...
i think they are covering their asses now and wanna be friends with everyone.
 
avaya said:
surely a joke poster. surely.
Click to expand...

Nope. I remember another Gaffer who denied the Berlin Airlift (and situation leading up to it) ever existed and said it was traitorous western propaganda used against the USSR.
 
adversesolutions said:
A seriously disgusting image.
Click to expand...


There are many layers to that image. 9/11 conspiracy nuts, the Libya protestor, the perfectly legitimate healthcare and Iraq/Afghanistan protestors. But most importantly of all, Richard Pryor is ALIVE.
 
OuterWorldVoice said:
There are many layers to that image. 9/11 conspiracy nuts, the Libya protestor, the perfectly legitimate healthcare and Iraq/Afghanistan protestors. But most importantly of all, Richard Pryor is ALIVE.
Click to expand...

That's what's most outrageous to me.

That legitimate causes like healthcare and opposition to war get caught up in 9/11 conspiracy theories.

"One big tent" -> burn it down...
 
Manos: The Hans of Fate said:
Maybe he is with these protestors in LA...talk about a bunch of goofs.

http://blogs.aljazeera.net/sites/default/files/imagecache/FeaturedImagePost/images/anti-war%20protest%20LA.jpg[/img[/QUOTE]
"9/11 was an inside job." Idiots.

Medicare for all? Yes please.

That crowd seems like a conglomeration of many different folks.
Click to expand...
 
Anyone see the BBC reporter in London interrupted by some asshole? The guy - middle class and English - actually says something to the effect of "victory for Libya, death to British imperialists". They cut him off pretty quickly, but "victory for Libya"?? The regime of Gadaffi?

I consider myself pretty firmly a Liberal, but it pisses me off to see some people just fall into the usual stereotypes; opposing something justified thoughtlessly.
 
Sir Fragula said:
Anyone see the BBC reporter in London interrupted by some asshole? The guy - middle class and English - actually says something to the effect of "victory for Libya, death to British imperialists". They cut him off pretty quickly, but "victory for Libya"?? The regime of Gadaffi?

I consider myself pretty firmly a Liberal, but it pisses me off to see some people just fall into the usual stereotypes; opposing something justified thoughtlessly.
Click to expand...
Yeah, its sad how people can let ideology put on the blinders.
 
Sir Fragula said:
Anyone see the BBC reporter in London interrupted by some asshole? The guy - middle class and English - actually says something to the effect of "victory for Libya, death to British imperialists". They cut him off pretty quickly, but "victory for Libya"?? The regime of Gadaffi?

I consider myself pretty firmly a Liberal, but it pisses me off to see some people just fall into the usual stereotypes; opposing something justified thoughtlessly.
Click to expand...

Yes, man was a complete penis.
 
ThoseDeafMutes said:
So you support letting dictators do whatever they want with countries (ethnic cleansing, extermination etc) because they are "sovereign"? If not, then you admit that there are circumstances in which intervening is morally acceptable, and "help a country rebel against its oppressive dictatorship by denying them the ability to airstrike their own population" is assuredly one of them.
Click to expand...


This attack is not about morality. Libya is not ruled by the worse Regime on earth. I'm sure you'd have to agree that there are far worse. If it's simply about morality, then why aren't the global forces liberating countries that are on the worse side of the dictatorship continuum.

It's not about morality or helping people in need. There have been plenty of recent bloody uprisings and rebellions in South East Asia, South Asia, Africa, Central Asia and South America, and not single country in the UN did anything to physically intervene. There was a 14 year Civil war in Liberia where 10 years old were being used as bullet shields. Chinese were being massacred in Indonesia. Burmese rebels were being hacked to death by machetes. Where was the world forces in these horrific atrocities? No where to be found.


So please don't come at me with some Kantian argument because there is no morally good Kantian intention in this attack. This attack is about Black Gold and nothing else, and everyone should be ashamed of supporting such blood soaked materialism.
 
Dax01 said:
"9/11 was an inside job." Idiots.

Medicare for all? Yes please.

That crowd seems like a conglomeration of many different folks.
Click to expand...
That's every protest. No matter how much you want to keep it to a single credible idea you'll always get lots of 9/11 nuts and (surprised they aren't in that shot) plenty of PETA people and vegetarians demanding the downfall of the meat industry.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey - July 2026
6 7 8 9 10
458
23K
thefool replied
Apple to rename all of its operating systems
23
610
Drew1440 replied
Christopher Nolan’s ‘The Odyssey’ will be the first blockbuster shot ENTIRELY on IMAX cameras
25
660
jason10mm replied
Andor S2 |OT| Remember Star Wars?
2 3 4
197
4K
JusticeForAll replied
Oscars 2025 |OT|
2
75
4K
Zathalus replied
Top Bottom