Subject: »NEWS AROUND THE WORLD

You do realise there is a crapload of military hardware in the region? Not that it wouldn't surprise me if someone - not necessarily the USA! - was sponsoring the rebel factions. It's just not by any means anywhere this simple as you seem to think.

..
(edited)

I get the feeling you didn't quite understand my previous post. With a crapload I mean an awful lot, a large amount.

yes, you had true :-)

so the fact that somebody had to import that guns before rebellions start can be explain like what ?

If it is like it seems, that some foreigners were helping to start that "civil" rebellions, can we call it civil rebellions anymore ? I have said few day ago that I dont think that this is like Egypt, but that I have feeling that this is like US/CIA action.

What do you think ?

I know the rebels captured weapons. That's a very obvious first. I also know that rebellions like this cannot be sponsored easily from the outside. They can be helped, but there are very few - if any! - examples of succesful interference like that. In most cases, the rebels are either 'outrebelled' or they have there own agenda which usually doesn't care for the one time sponsor.

Once there is a rebellion, arms will come to whomever wants them. Rival countries will usually be quick to supply either money or arms or both. Furthermore, there are also a lot of arms dealers out there who are very happy to supply arms for the right price.

To cut a long story short, from the mere fact that there are - actually outdated - weapons there, you cannot conclude there was outside interference which sparked the revolt. I'm not saying there wasn't, just that your reasoning doesn't add up.

ok, but who was supplying by weapons people in Eqypt ? nobody :-(

and if that civil rebellions are willing to use imported weapons (the reason you mention I understand) why people called it still civil rebellions. This is just internal war and that is big difference, or dont ?


I get right now this article.. but it is too long to read it tonight... so maybe tomorrow,but I will share link with you.. :-)

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27760.htm

ok, but who was supplying by weapons people in Eqypt ? nobody :-(

People don't like to use guns if they don't have to. If the army had come down on the Egyptian people on the street, I think we would have seen something similar to Libya. Violence usually escalates, that means it starts on a very low level and goes up from there. It doesn't start on a lethal level right away. (There are as always exceptions.)

rebels had weapons and start war sooner than Kaddafi has send state army, so this argument I dont like.....

Simply not true. Libya had civil unrest to start with, just like the other Arab countries. That or all the major newspapers lied about it. :P

Anyway, the general rule is like I said. Furthermore, even if the rebels started the fight, the way they get their hands on guns, especially the bigger ones, doesn't change. There is no source more readily available than the opposing state itself.

enlightened dictator, who will do the best for his people...

Oh yeh right ... 'Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely'! But not in your Utopia :P
(edited)

Simply not true. Libya had civil unrest to start with, just like the other Arab countries. That or all the major newspapers lied about it. :P

Do you want to say, that Kaddafi used army and started war immediately after unarmed protests started ? I think no. So this is same answer on your answer. If you tell Kaddafi used army I will answer he used army after civil people with foreigners obtained weapons.

Stop thinking, start looking for unbiased, proper information. The facts, as far as I can tell, are that the Libyan situation started much like it started in other countries. There is footage - which you can find in this topic! - of how armed forces shoot at unrarmed protestors, so I'd say there is at least some indication of violent action against unarmed rebels.

Don´t get me wrong, I'm not one of those people who believe 'the people' are going to make it a brilliant state with no trouble whatsoever. I fully expect to see new regimes all over the region with the same old tactics, torture, murder etc., to replace the old ones.
(edited)

OK, I hope I will find time to check the reasons of starting rebellions there and how it was developing/escalating to current conflict. Than I will give you more responsible answer/post.

please don´t

:-DD OK, I will consider this advice too, seriously :-d