19,576
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 43:
Line 43: + + + +
→On Libyan civil war
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
Why did the US intervene in a civil war in a country that has neither attacked us nor poses a threat? We are told this was another humanitarian intervention, like Clinton’s 1999 war against Serbia. But as civilian victims of the US-led coalition bombing continue to add up, it is getting difficult to determine whether the problem we are creating on the ground is worse than the one we were trying to solve. [http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-03-28/ron-paul-end-the-libyan-war/]
Why did the US intervene in a civil war in a country that has neither attacked us nor poses a threat? We are told this was another humanitarian intervention, like Clinton’s 1999 war against Serbia. But as civilian victims of the US-led coalition bombing continue to add up, it is getting difficult to determine whether the problem we are creating on the ground is worse than the one we were trying to solve. [http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-03-28/ron-paul-end-the-libyan-war/]
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
Michael Scheuer, former head of the CIA’s Bin Laden unit, explained in a recent article that there is plausible reason to believe the rebels are current or former Islamist mujahedin, eager to engage in jihad. Indeed, Gaddafi has fought against Libyan Islamists for years and is seen by them as a bitter enemy. Astoundingly, it may well be that we are assisting al Qaeda in this new war! [[Ibidem]]
</blockquote>
</blockquote>