"Invading Libya (in the name of Democracy) means suicide for the United States
and the International despotic system"
"Last March 20, 2011 US and UK cruise missiles from both fleets hit more than 20 Libyan air defence targets, as Pentagon officials said that the intention of the combined American, British and French actions is to enforce a UN-mandated no-fly zone."
"Pentagon officials say the US and the UK have fired more than 110 missiles, while French planes struck pro-Gaddafi forces attacking rebel-held Benghazi."
"Cruise missiles hit air-defence sites in the capital, Tripoli, and Misrata."
These actions manifests how the rotten global system, to be led by the Imperialist United States, wanted such measures to destroy the struggle of the Libyan people against Imperialism. It also meant supporting Libya's domestic enemies against those who fought for the well being of the people, to be led by the Caid Qaddafi.
But despite the firing of missiles and alleged Imperialist support for the "Libyan Republic", we've also witnessed how these actions also resulted to massive deaths and disaster to the Libyan nation, that, in a guise of a so-called "Revolution", lays 48 deaths and 150 wounded in the attacks. It manifests such dangers as we've wittnesed Imperialist support to a regime jealous of the achievements laid by the Jamahriyya.
There are some people who may have against Qaddafi's leadership, but it doesn't mean that they are also in favor of Imperialist action against the regime. Sad so to speak about it, but then once I even think that if Americans wanted "Democracy" be institutionalized all over the world, and destroy all dictatorships "left" and "right", why not also destroy the Single-Party state of Singapore and pursue their attacks against Military-ruled Burma? Of a massive scale attack against Juche Korea and Islamic Iran? Yes, America simply wanted everything according to their own plan-that is to dominate in the name of their so-called "Life, Liberty and Happiness".
Is that the will of the American people to set forth another conflict after Afghanistan and Iraq? They even used Great Britain and even France to join in their conflict, and speaking of that France how come they shifted differently from their Gaullic stances to those of Sarkozy? Is this also the will of the French people, who professed "Liberty, Equality and Fraternity" to do so?
And as the battle continues in Libya, people around the world felt so dismayed that Uncle Sam again raised up the banner of war in the middle east-that every news reports are tackling about the events concerning the so-called "revolutions" that in fact, initated by members of a certain order wanting to impose a worser one. But as for the missiles firing over Tripoli, Berenice (Benghazi), and other towns and cities in that desert land "all in pursuit of having a no-fly zone" will they fire again Qaddafi's abode and kill every household living there-like the youngest daughter being killed by an air strike years ago?
Too bad so to speak upon noticing these hell-of-a-kind events erupting over Libya. That the forces of reaction under the star sprangled banner supported the so-called 'revolutionaries' who blindly followed them. The conservatives around us in our respective societies kept on justifying the actions most of the time regardless of its absolute tendency that is, suicidal. One post even speaking much about Republicans and Democrats and their actions concerning "war and peace", here it goes:
"Republicans have been reticent to commit American forces to combat operations, and have acted decisively when they have."
"Democrats and liberals commit American forces to war promiscuously because they are arrogant and cocksure that their gassy ideals about 'democracy' and the 'international community' are correct and everybody else is stupid. "
"By contrast, Republicans have been concerned with concrete American interests. When Bush invaded Iraq, making sure that Saddam did not possess weapons of mass destruction that could be given to terrorists was indeed a concrete American interest. He went "off the reservation" when the mission morphed into creating an Iraqi democracy."
Regardless of its justifications, causes, and any other similar sentiments a Republican or a Democrat would say, they simply wanted nothing but putting everything "In order" according to their interest. By the way, isn't it the Republican who initiated occupying the Philippines and commit a series of atrocities there? Isn't it also the Republican who initiated occupying Nicaragua that made Sandino famous in resisting their actions? Democrats even supported dictatorial regimes like those of Somoza and Castillo Armas, and Republicans who supported Franco, Pinochet and Marcos! They may still kept on justifying it, but whether directly or indirectly, it was and is still these people, fueled by their Ayn Rand-like sentiment, Benevolent Assmilation and Expansionism obviously created this hell-of-a-kind mess what the world hath witnessed nowadays and so forth.
But despite of the tanks, the bombs, the missiles and any other war materiel these people kept on trying to put on, it is still the people who are dictating and not the weapons which are being launched and fired by. They may have misunderstood about the dictum and kept on continue doing it, and this makes more conflicts come regardless of casualties, that, as according to the leader of the great Al-Fateh Revolution:
“We are going to fight for all of our land inch by inch...We will die as martyrs.”
But as expected much by many, that long noisy shooting war is not just situated around Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, or in the entire Arabiyya-but rather the whole world. Protests and armed mass strikes will come-for the global people's war of International Liberation hath commenced.
And America itself, along with its die-hard followers and allies are starting to dig their own graves, performing what Emile Durkheim's highest form of escapism: SUICIDE.