Libya: should anything be done?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I was just trying my Gawd impersonation. Guess it still needs some work.

You have to substantiate your arguments with well written articles by Jewish authors from Haaretz.

And some joos, too!

[Warren Dew]

However, the oil argument for Libya is still rather weak, since I cannot see that a regime change will mobilise more oil for the west, or at a cheaper price...

"The West" is not some monolithic power.

Honestly without a "communism versus democracy" religious war to split the industrialized countries, I'm wondering if we're seeing the start of a return to competition between those countries through genuine imperialism.

[klr]

Today is also the anniversary of the start of the Iraq War. Coincidence? I think not.

...and three days after St. Patrick's day, when the resolution was passed. Exactly the same as in 2003. Meaning what exactly? The wearing 'o the green is just the occasion for passing those interventionist resolutions ...

[sandinista]

I was just trying my Gawd impersonation. Guess it still needs some work.

Sandy takes himself so seriously. That's one.

oh, so you were just trolling...figures.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I was just trying my Gawd impersonation. Guess it still needs some work.

Sandy takes himself so seriously. That's one.

oh, so you were just trolling...figures.

When you earn better, you get better.

[sandinista]

I was just trying my Gawd impersonation. Guess it still needs some work.

Sandy takes himself so seriously. That's one.

oh, so you were just trolling...figures.

When you earn better, you get better.

whatever troll.

[.Morticia.]

However, the oil argument for Libya is still rather weak, since I cannot see that a regime change will mobilise more oil for the west, or at a cheaper price...

"The West" is not some monolithic power.

Honestly without a "communism versus democracy" religious war to split the industrialized countries, I'm wondering if we're seeing the start of a return to competition between those countries through genuine imperialism.

You mean another world war?

[Warren Dew]

You mean another world war?

More like a race to grab territories, like those between Spain, Great Britain, and Holland way back when.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I could possibly support "democracy" if I ever experienced it. Not sure what "democracy" entails so I am hesitant to "support" it.

A good working definition for me is, "The ability of a citizen to speak up against, and if necessary turn out, his or her government without fear of government reprisals." Hopefully that helps.

Speak up in what sense? Overthrow the government without fear of reprisals? That doesn't exist anywhere. Any government will fight back if they feel the risk of being overthrown. I know this is a little off topic, and I do apologize, but this terminology interests me. Seems very vague.

Forgive, then, my pursuing this course. How can you not understand what it means to speak up against something? Surely you're familiar with critique; you're obviously adept at questioning a line of thought. Speaking up against a government would entail critiquing its policies and/or procedures. Is that clear enough for you, or do you need further help? If you're wishing to be deliberately obtuse, do it on someone else's leg. Otherwise, you may safely assign the colloquial meaning to my words and quit with this semantic nonsense. If you wish to pretend not to understand, very well.

Also, I said "turn out", not "overthrow", the government. The terms have vastly different meanings. "Turning out" is generally peaceful and legal, while "overthrowing" is illegal and often not peaceful. The fact that you made this change in wording isn't really accidental, is it now? Pardon me, but your rhetoric is showing.

[sandinista]

I could possibly support "democracy" if I ever experienced it. Not sure what "democracy" entails so I am hesitant to "support" it.

A good working definition for me is, "The ability of a citizen to speak up against, and if necessary turn out, his or her government without fear of government reprisals." Hopefully that helps.

Speak up in what sense? Overthrow the government without fear of reprisals? That doesn't exist anywhere. Any government will fight back if they feel the risk of being overthrown. I know this is a little off topic, and I do apologize, but this terminology interests me. Seems very vague.

Forgive, then, my pursuing this course. How can you not understand what it means to speak up against something? Surely you're familiar with critique; you're obviously adept at questioning a line of thought. Speaking up against a government would entail critiquing its policies and/or procedures. Is that clear enough for you, or do you need further help? If you're wishing to be deliberately obtuse, do it on someone else's leg. Otherwise, you may safely assign the colloquial meaning to my words and quit with this semantic nonsense. If you wish to pretend not to understand, very well.

Also, I said "turn out", not "overthrow", the government. The terms have vastly different meanings. "Turning out" is generally peaceful and legal, while "overthrowing" is illegal and often not peaceful. The fact that you made this change in wording isn't really accidental, is it now? Pardon me, but your rhetoric is showing.

Well, pretty much anywhere people can "speak up against anything"...it's a matter of context and coverage. Anyone anywhere can sit in their home and "speak up" against policies and procedures. Not sure how that is in any sense democratic. If you mean "protesting", if you take canaduh for an example (where I am from) most people would probably say it is a democratic country, but protesting (ie. speaking up in public) is virtually illegal. As for "turning out" one government for another with the same policies, not sure how that is democratic either. Turn out one capitalist liberal democratic government for another? What "rhetoric" would that be? Your "rhetoric" is showing as well by stating you support "democracy"...whatever that is.

[Hermit]

I could possibly support "democracy" if I ever experienced it. Not sure what "democracy" entails so I am hesitant to "support" it.

A good working definition for me is, "The ability of a citizen to speak up against, and if necessary turn out, his or her government without fear of government reprisals." Hopefully that helps.

Speak up in what sense? Overthrow the government without fear of reprisals? That doesn't exist anywhere. Any government will fight back if they feel the risk of being overthrown. I know this is a little off topic, and I do apologize, but this terminology interests me. Seems very vague.

OK. Time for a concrete example: The Australian Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam, visited The People's Republic of China. (His visit caused outrage in the "free world" until President Nixon followed suit shortly after.) Whitlam said to Mao Zedong: "Australia is a great democracy! Anyone can shout out loud: "The Prime Minister, Mr. Whitlam, is a fink!" without any fear of punishment!" Mao replied: "China also is a great democracy! Here too, anyone can shout out loud: "The Prime Minister, Mr. Whitlam, is a fink!" without any fear of punishment!"

[sandinista]

I could possibly support "democracy" if I ever experienced it. Not sure what "democracy" entails so I am hesitant to "support" it.

A good working definition for me is, "The ability of a citizen to speak up against, and if necessary turn out, his or her government without fear of government reprisals." Hopefully that helps.

Speak up in what sense? Overthrow the government without fear of reprisals? That doesn't exist anywhere. Any government will fight back if they feel the risk of being overthrown. I know this is a little off topic, and I do apologize, but this terminology interests me. Seems very vague.

OK. Time for a concrete example: The Australian Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam, visited The People's Republic of China. (His visit caused outrage in the "free world" until President Nixon followed suit shortly after.) Whitlam said to Mao Zedong: "Australia is a great democracy! Anyone can shout out loud: "The Prime Minister, Mr. Whitlam, is a fink!" without any fear of punishment!" Mao replied: "China also is a great democracy! Here too, anyone can shout out loud: "The Prime Minister, Mr. Whitlam, is a fink!" without any fear of punishment!"

You can't compare the ability to speak to power between two governments. To speak out against, say the PM of Canada, is not a problem...but...speaking out against the true leaders and true power, the corporate elite will put you in jail and give you a criminal record. The political leader in a "democracy" is of little matter when it comes to true policy changes, speak out against him all you want, its a great distraction. Not to mention the electoral cycle is in itself a way to maintain the status quo and corporate power. There is no real long term planning.

[JimC]

I could possibly support "democracy" if I ever experienced it. Not sure what "democracy" entails so I am hesitant to "support" it.

A good working definition for me is, "The ability of a citizen to speak up against, and if necessary turn out, his or her government without fear of government reprisals." Hopefully that helps.

Speak up in what sense? Overthrow the government without fear of reprisals? That doesn't exist anywhere. Any government will fight back if they feel the risk of being overthrown. I know this is a little off topic, and I do apologize, but this terminology interests me. Seems very vague.

OK. Time for a concrete example: The Australian Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam, visited The People's Republic of China. (His visit caused outrage in the "free world" until President Nixon followed suit shortly after.) Whitlam said to Mao Zedong: "Australia is a great democracy! Anyone can shout out loud: "The Prime Minister, Mr. Whitlam, is a fink!" without any fear of punishment!" Mao replied: "China also is a great democracy! Here too, anyone can shout out loud: "The Prime Minister, Mr. Whitlam, is a fink!" without any fear of punishment!"

You can't compare the ability to speak to power between two governments. To speak out against, say the PM of Canada, is not a problem...but...speaking out against the true leaders and true power, the corporate elite will put you in jail and give you a criminal record. The political leader in a "democracy" is of little matter when it comes to true policy changes, speak out against him all you want, its a great distraction. Not to mention the electoral cycle is in itself a way to maintain the status quo and corporate power. There is no real long term planning.

What absolute and utter nonsense! Unless you mean criminal libel or assault, a rigorous leftist critique of the current economic structure in a country like Canada will result in yawns at the worst. Give me chapter and verse how anything that could truly be regarded as "speaking out against the true leaders and true power" has earned anybody in Canada a jail sentence, unless that "speaking out" also involved other, clearly criminal activities!

[sandinista]

What absolute and utter nonsense! Unless you mean criminal libel or assault, a rigorous leftist critique of the current economic structure in a country like Canada will result in yawns at the worst. Give me chapter and verse how anything that could truly be regarded as "speaking out against the true leaders and true power" has earned anybody in Canada a jail sentence, unless that "speaking out" also involved other, clearly criminal activities!

well, the latest example would be the G20 in Toronto... Montreal. I've been arrested at protests for doing nothing illegal...except, of course, protesting. Your well versed in speaking out your ass aren't you.

[Atheist-Lite]