Gaddafi dead

BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5852
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Gaddafi dead

Finally.

But when I heard the 'rebels' thank Allah for finally freeing them from his tyranny, I wanted to grab them ask WTF did Allah allow him to stay on in power for 40+ years???

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Okay, you've back pedaled,

Okay, you've back pedaled, moved the goal posts, and now you're constructing a strawman.

Look, it was a war.  Wars involve blowing stuff up.  But claiming, as you've repeatedly claimed that "the entire country's infrastructure" was destroyed is just plain false.

Nor -- even for the parts of the country that have been damage -- was it all done by NATO.

Finally, there is more to "standard of living" than all the good stuff you mentioned.  Qaddafi was a crazed dictator who used his ARMY against his own people, long before NATO got involved.  And this is just a fact, and it will stay a fact regardless of your next logical fallacy.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
 You latch onto the word

 You latch onto the word "entire" because you seem to have nothing else and I really think that's ridiculous but I'm still willing to have a rational discussion with you. I tell you they have NATO funded rebels imposing sharia law on them and you're silent about that. Tapey brings up that the IMF and World Bank have now come in and they are in debt. You ignore that. I show you that they are facing a humanitarian crisis. You're flippant. Do you have anything relevant to say other than your platitudes about bad people?

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
Tapey wrote:Gauche is right,

Tapey wrote:

Gauche is right, it would be silly to argue that right now the lives of the majority of Libyans are better than they were before the war, but that is the very nature of war. The country now has the potential to improve again, possibly exceed where it was before the war in a couple of decades if things go very well, they might, they also might not. You cannot predict how things are going to turn out yet. But a whole lot of good potential is today even if things go right. This is why I say until they get that democracy and the right choices are made everything that has happened has been for nothing and a huge waste. And even if things go the right way and the country recovers this whole mess has been one big tragedy, not the glorious victory many people seem to think it is.

Maybe it will be better but as it stands there's very indication it will be worse. How will they provide the same social services when their government is in debt? How will women have equal rights when they're under sharia law?

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1474
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote:Tapey

Gauche wrote:

Tapey wrote:

Gauche is right, it would be silly to argue that right now the lives of the majority of Libyans are better than they were before the war, but that is the very nature of war. The country now has the potential to improve again, possibly exceed where it was before the war in a couple of decades if things go very well, they might, they also might not. You cannot predict how things are going to turn out yet. But a whole lot of good potential is today even if things go right. This is why I say until they get that democracy and the right choices are made everything that has happened has been for nothing and a huge waste. And even if things go the right way and the country recovers this whole mess has been one big tragedy, not the glorious victory many people seem to think it is.

Maybe it will be better but as it stands there's very indication it will be worse. How will they provide the same social services when their government is in debt? How will women have equal rights when the have sharia law?

I do agree, it seems likely that things won't get better anytime soon. But I don't want to completely discard the possibility after all nothing has been finalised yet. I do see the warning signs that the country is in for a rough time after this.

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote:Tapey

Gauche wrote:

Tapey wrote:

Gauche is right, it would be silly to argue that right now the lives of the majority of Libyans are better than they were before the war, but that is the very nature of war. The country now has the potential to improve again, possibly exceed where it was before the war in a couple of decades if things go very well, they might, they also might not. You cannot predict how things are going to turn out yet. But a whole lot of good potential is today even if things go right. This is why I say until they get that democracy and the right choices are made everything that has happened has been for nothing and a huge waste. And even if things go the right way and the country recovers this whole mess has been one big tragedy, not the glorious victory many people seem to think it is.

Maybe it will be better but as it stands there's very indication it will be worse. How will they provide the same social services when their government is in debt? How will women have equal rights when they're under sharia law?

In debt?  To WHOM?

We're getting ready to liberate tens of billions of dollars in frozen assets.  The country will be seriously flush with cash in very short order.  Rumor has it that Qaddafi had $220B socked away.  When that money comes back they will be an extremely wealthy nation.  They are a net-exporter of oil.  When the oil fields resume production they will be even more flush with money.

As for the second attempt at Islamophobia, do you actually know what Sharia actually is?  Have you ever spoken -- one on one -- to women who live in moderate Muslim countries, or who are practicing Muslims outside of Muslim countries?  And while my 'nym is gender-neutral, I'm a woman, so I have a vested interest in the rights of woman.  There are aspects of Sharia that make Western cultures look like gang rapes waiting to happen.  Try not to get your education about Sharia from Faux News.  Try talking to Muslim women, if you want to understand how Muslim women actually feel about real Sharia law.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1474
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:Gauche

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Gauche wrote:

Tapey wrote:

Gauche is right, it would be silly to argue that right now the lives of the majority of Libyans are better than they were before the war, but that is the very nature of war. The country now has the potential to improve again, possibly exceed where it was before the war in a couple of decades if things go very well, they might, they also might not. You cannot predict how things are going to turn out yet. But a whole lot of good potential is today even if things go right. This is why I say until they get that democracy and the right choices are made everything that has happened has been for nothing and a huge waste. And even if things go the right way and the country recovers this whole mess has been one big tragedy, not the glorious victory many people seem to think it is.

Maybe it will be better but as it stands there's very indication it will be worse. How will they provide the same social services when their government is in debt? How will women have equal rights when they're under sharia law?

In debt?  To WHOM?

We're getting ready to liberate tens of billions of dollars in frozen assets.  The country will be seriously flush with cash in very short order.  Rumor has it that Qaddafi had $220B socked away.  When that money comes back they will be an extremely wealthy nation.

100% guaranteed that a lot of that money will disappear into corruption. How can I know this? Look at every country that has had a revolution in Africa, corrupt as it gets. Even my own country and we had a rather good handing over of power has had huge corruption. Even today almost 20 years after liberation R30 billion is lost to corruption every year and it was far worse in the begining. Whats more in Libya, who is going to get payed to rebuild the damage? Companies from outside the country are the only possible option as far as I can see, most of that money is just going to leave the country again in short order. The thing is $220B sounds like a lot to you, but to a country on the edge who going to have to use that money to support the entire country until industry gets back online it is doubtful it will be enough, but who knows I am no expert. We shall have to wait and see if Libya will have cash problems

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Tapey wrote:100% guaranteed

Tapey wrote:

100% guaranteed that a lot of that money will disappear into corruption. How can I know this? Look at every country that has had a revolution in Africa, corrupt as it gets. Even my own country and we had a rather good handing over of power has had huge corruption. Even today almost 20 years after liberation R30 billion is lost to corruption every year and it was far worse in the begining. Whats more in Libya, who is going to get payed to rebuild the damage? Companies from outside the country are the only possible option as far as I can see, most of that money is just going to leave the country again in short order. The thing is $220B sounds like a lot to you, but to a country on the edge who going to have to use that money to support the entire country until industry gets back online it is doubtful it will be enough, but who knows I am no expert. We shall have to wait and see if Libya will have cash problems

I don't know where you're getting your news about Libya, but it sounds like some weird mash-up of sources, most of which are wrong, and most of which are trying to say that the revolution was a bad idea and they should dig Qaddafi out of his grave and put him back in power.

What happened in ZA is nothing like what happened in Libya.  ZA for all of its past European "influences" (ahem) is more African than Libya, which is more Arabic than African.  Hell, even Qaddafi had to =assert= that Libya was an African nation because it was in Africa.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
 I don't know where Tapey

 I don't know where Tapey gets his information. he lives in Africa so maybe he gets it there. I thought he was talking about debt to the World Bank which is funding the repair of their transportation, water and energy systems.

 http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/NEWS/0,,contentMDK:22998913~pagePK:34370~piPK:34424~theSitePK:4607,00.html

 I don't think it's "Islamophobia" to say that women don't have equal rights under sharia law. Aside from the fact that I've expressed no value judgment about this it is true and uncontroversial. I see no reason to even cite sources about that but the article I linked from CNN discusses polygyny which until now had been illegal in Libya. Whether I know Muslim women or not is irrelevant. Maybe I know lots and they all hate sharia law. It wouldn't matter because it's anecdotal.

 

 

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1474
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:Tapey

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Tapey wrote:

100% guaranteed that a lot of that money will disappear into corruption. How can I know this? Look at every country that has had a revolution in Africa, corrupt as it gets. Even my own country and we had a rather good handing over of power has had huge corruption. Even today almost 20 years after liberation R30 billion is lost to corruption every year and it was far worse in the begining. Whats more in Libya, who is going to get payed to rebuild the damage? Companies from outside the country are the only possible option as far as I can see, most of that money is just going to leave the country again in short order. The thing is $220B sounds like a lot to you, but to a country on the edge who going to have to use that money to support the entire country until industry gets back online it is doubtful it will be enough, but who knows I am no expert. We shall have to wait and see if Libya will have cash problems

I don't know where you're getting your news about Libya, but it sounds like some weird mash-up of sources, most of which are wrong, and most of which are trying to say that the revolution was a bad idea and they should dig Qaddafi out of his grave and put him back in power.

What happened in ZA is nothing like what happened in Libya.  ZA for all of its past European "influences" (ahem) is more African than Libya, which is more Arabic than African.  Hell, even Qaddafi had to =assert= that Libya was an African nation because it was in Africa.

Please state what I have said that is wrong not just claim that I have, I shall attempt to clear everything up despite not knowing what you are talking about.

90% of my news about libya - www.news24.com a completely rubbish site which constantly writes rubbish but they normally don't make stuff up.

 

Where have I said the revolution was a bad idea? I merely said it has and may continue to have negative consiquences. Where it was a good thing remains to be seen.

 

Because the Arab African world has a better track record in regards to corruption?

 

In regards to loans you might go back and notice I never said they have loans I said they were trying to get, I do not know the current status of those. They could be the one Gauche has linked, they could not be, they might have changed there minds I don't know you are focusing on the wrong aspect. The point of that bit was everyone in this thread has been talking about how the rebels are not a government, my point was if they are not a government how can they make the decsion to make a loan which future governments will have to up hold despite the loan takers not ever being voted into power.

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote: I don't know

Gauche wrote:

 I don't know where Tapey gets his information. he lives in Africa so maybe he gets it there. I thought he was talking about debt to the World Bank which is funding the repair of their transportation, water and energy systems.

 http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/NEWS/0,,contentMDK:22998913~pagePK:34370~piPK:34424~theSitePK:4607,00.html

 I don't think it's "Islamophobia" to say that women don't have equal rights under sharia law. Aside from the fact that I've expressed no value judgment about this it is true and uncontroversial. I see no reason to even cite sources about that but the article I linked from CNN discusses polygyny which until now had been illegal in Libya. Whether I know Muslim women or not is irrelevant. Maybe I know lots and they all hate sharia law. It wouldn't matter because it's anecdotal.

He lives in SOUTH AFRICA, not all over Africa.  It's an entire continent, you know -- not a country.

Sharia is a different legal system, which has different approaches to a wide range of problems.  There are aspects of Sharia which are better than anything the West has to offer, and aspects which are far worse.

I'll give you an example -- women receive half the inheritance of men.  Sounds pretty unfair, right?  Except that women have a priority claim, and their claim starts with their basic human needs.  If their needs consume every available dime, the men get nothing.  Sharia is filled with examples like this -- a loss of potential reward is replaced by a greater certainty of basic needs.

Some aspects of Sharia -- modest attire -- seem oppressive, but I've known plenty of Muslim women who find dressing modestly far better than being a piece of meat.  When I was doing more professional work with various government agencies and large businesses I wore a lot more skirts and blouses.  I got flirted with and sexually harassed a lot more.  When I went back to my jeans-and-knit-shirts attire, the flirting went away.  There's a lot to this "sexual modesty" thing, at least until men learn how to be civilized.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1474
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:Sharia

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Sharia is a different legal system, which has different approaches to a wide range of problems.  There are aspects of Sharia which are better than anything the West has to offer, and aspects which are far worse.

I'll give you an example -- women receive half the inheritance of men.  Sounds pretty unfair, right?  Except that women have a priority claim, and their claim starts with their basic human needs.  If their needs consume every available dime, the men get nothing.  Sharia is filled with examples like this -- a loss of potential reward is replaced by a greater certainty of basic needs.

Some aspects of Sharia -- modest attire -- seem oppressive, but I've known plenty of Muslim women who find dressing modestly far better than being a piece of meat.  When I was doing more professional work with various government agencies and large businesses I wore a lot more skirts and blouses.  I got flirted with and sexually harassed a lot more.  When I went back to my jeans-and-knit-shirts attire, the flirting went away.  There's a lot to this "sexual modesty" thing, at least until men learn how to be civilized.

I love how both if those are examples of terrible ways of doing things.

 

Seriously, you are promoting a system which is rooted in inequality? Loss of potential reward in exchange to certainty? That might be a good idea in a society that opresses woman where they cannot meet there needs on there own but why would this system be good in a free and equal society where woman are not denied economic opertunities? It is inherently discriminatory when men and woman are equal.

 

Just because some people like to dress modestly and men can sometimes be inappropriate the solution is to force all woman to dress a certain way? Seriously? Is that not punishing the victim? Some woman may like dressing modestly but not all do.

 

I am sure sharia law does have some nice stuff in it, I don't know much about it, but these two are not things that I could support. Yeah you can argue that this certainty vs loss of potenial reward is an equal trade and fits the needs of woman in the third world context and there might be some truth to that but it is still discriminatory and should be avioded in my books.

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13675
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence wrote:Finally.But

BobSpence wrote:

Finally.

But when I heard the 'rebels' thank Allah for finally freeing them from his tyranny, I wanted to grab them ask WTF did Allah allow him to stay on in power for 40+ years???

 

Amun Ra brother!

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13675
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:Gauche

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Gauche wrote:

 I don't know where Tapey gets his information. he lives in Africa so maybe he gets it there. I thought he was talking about debt to the World Bank which is funding the repair of their transportation, water and energy systems.

 http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/NEWS/0,,contentMDK:22998913~pagePK:34370~piPK:34424~theSitePK:4607,00.html

 I don't think it's "Islamophobia" to say that women don't have equal rights under sharia law. Aside from the fact that I've expressed no value judgment about this it is true and uncontroversial. I see no reason to even cite sources about that but the article I linked from CNN discusses polygyny which until now had been illegal in Libya. Whether I know Muslim women or not is irrelevant. Maybe I know lots and they all hate sharia law. It wouldn't matter because it's anecdotal.

He lives in SOUTH AFRICA, not all over Africa.  It's an entire continent, you know -- not a country.

Sharia is a different legal system, which has different approaches to a wide range of problems.  There are aspects of Sharia which are better than anything the West has to offer, and aspects which are far worse.

I'll give you an example -- women receive half the inheritance of men.  Sounds pretty unfair, right?  Except that women have a priority claim, and their claim starts with their basic human needs.  If their needs consume every available dime, the men get nothing.  Sharia is filled with examples like this -- a loss of potential reward is replaced by a greater certainty of basic needs.

Some aspects of Sharia -- modest attire -- seem oppressive, but I've known plenty of Muslim women who find dressing modestly far better than being a piece of meat.  When I was doing more professional work with various government agencies and large businesses I wore a lot more skirts and blouses.  I got flirted with and sexually harassed a lot more.  When I went back to my jeans-and-knit-shirts attire, the flirting went away.  There's a lot to this "sexual modesty" thing, at least until men learn how to be civilized.

"Filling the basic needs", sounds nice I agree. But where that noble concept gets fucked up is that even in this context it treats women as if they are weaker than men. BECAUSE it is rooted in a religion written and dominated by males. It sticks women in gender roles.

And as far as dress, I don't care if a woman dresses modestly or wears a hot tight dress or is a nudist or a stripper. THIS is still is a religious based law rooted in a book written by men in a history where men told women what to do. A woman's body is hers and her's alone and does not belong to men, or other women our a god. She should have the right to dress the way she wants.

I don't think any human has the right to tell another human, what they can or cannot wear.

And whatever good laws you can find in any culture or religion they dont' need superstition or an ancient myth to be common law. Just like you dont need a road god to know doing 85mph in a school zone is a bad idea.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
 As a system of

 As a system of jurisprudence it's clearly and unapologetically nonegalitarian. The record of human rights violations under sharia law is there for anyone who cares to look. I don't really see anything to discuss. If you're arguing the merits of sharia law on this website you've pretty much lost all credibility anyway. 

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft