Osama Bin Laden

[Flixy]

Did you miss the part where I asked if it was millions or billions, and admitted my memory wasn't the hottest? In the big picture context, we had no reason to give ANY money to Libya (hundreds, thousands, millions or more) but we did. Even when it was funneled by a corrupt regime.

I'd be happy to admit if I'm wrong.

The support plus lifting restriction helped to get Libya to stop their chemical weapons program, to denounce and stop terrorist activities, and to settle compensation to the victims of several terrorist attacks (a few billion dollars, so more than they received), so I would say that, yes, you did have a reason to give ANY thing to Libya.

[GGT]

I'd be happy to admit if I'm wrong.

I asked because my memory isn't very reliable lately.

I was wrong! I'm sorry that led to such a derailment. Moving right along.....

(Not that it matters, but I was either recalling $30 billion in assets frozen by the US, or the Libyan Investment Authority with $30 billion invested in US banks.)

[Loki]

Again, you recall wrong. Not only did we not send money to Libya, A) we froze Libya's money, B) we made Libya pay us money, and C) we were preventing our firms from doing business in Libya (unlike some Europeans, like the Italians and the Greeks).

[GGT]

Was that after Lockerbie?

[Flixy]

Yeah, I read it. But couldn't find a source showing how much money the US had given Libya over the years. (Granted, I wasn't looking too hard.) I'm not sure the USA had strict embargoes against Libya recently, even though the EU may have. I recall the US sending millions of dollars to Egypt, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon....many Arab nations. Sending money to dictators we knew, for fear of others we didn't know.

The USA did have strict embargoes against Libya, until 2003, and slowly decreased sanctions since then. From 2004 on their assets were unfrozen, and in 2006 removed from the terrorist watchlist. See it as a 'payoff' to Libya to dismantle their chemical warfare program, and paying restitution to the victims of their terror attacks, not so much as support for Ghadaffi.

By the way, while I agree that supporting dictators is, at best, dubious, there is from the US perspective a difference between a nation that oppresses their own people, and a nation that actively tried to kill US citizens.

Also, if you did read it, why the hell did you post it as an article supporting your case that the US donated millions to Ghadaffi? This money is going nowhere near Ghadaffi. Why would you post it when it has nothing to do with your point? Trying to cause confusion, or think that just reading the headline people might think money went to Libya before the uprising? I just don't get it, sorry.


By the way, I found that with one minute of 'research' , so your 'not looking too hard' is definitely true.

[GGT]

The USA did have strict embargoes against Libya, until 2003, and slowly decreased sanctions since then. From 2004 on their assets were unfrozen, and in 2006 removed from the terrorist watchlist. See it as a 'payoff' to Libya to dismantle their chemical warfare program, and paying restitution to the victims of their terror attacks, not so much as support for Ghadaffi.

By the way, while I agree that supporting dictators is, at best, dubious, there is from the US perspective a difference between a nation that oppresses their own people, and a nation that actively tried to kill US citizens.

Also, if you did read it, why the hell did you post it as an article supporting your case that the US donated millions to Ghadaffi? This money is going nowhere near Ghadaffi. Why would you post it when it has nothing to do with your point? Trying to cause confusion, or think that just reading the headline people might think money went to Libya before the uprising? I just don't get it, sorry.

By the way, I found that with one minute of 'research' , so your 'not looking too hard' is definitely true.

I only made one attempt to look for funds sent to Libya, not to Qaddafi's regime. Sorry if I mixed up Western with American. I think my point remains true, though. The West (including the US) has given millions of dollars to LIBYA.

[Flixy]

I only made one attempt to look for funds sent to Libya, not to Qaddafi's regime. Sorry if I mixed up Western with American. I think my point remains true, though. The West (including the US) has given millions of dollars to LIBYA.

Yes, to the civilian population in cities like Misurata, which are bombed by Ghadaffi, and you were talking specifically about US federal aid (or western for that matter) sent to Libya WHILE GHADAFFI WAS IN CHARGE.

Why don't you recount the amount of federal dollars sent to Libya over the years while he was "in charge"?

[GGT]

Yes, to the civilian population in cities like Misurata, which are bombed by Ghadaffi, and you were talking specifically about US federal aid (or western for that matter) sent to Libya WHILE GHADAFFI WAS IN CHARGE.

I'm not convinced any money sent to LIBYA found its way to the civilian population, or cities like Misurata. Funds had to be first funneled by LIBYA's government, aka Qaddafi. Or his cronies. Am I wrong about that?

[Enoch the Red]

I'm not convinced any money sent to LIBYA found its way to the civilian population, or cities like Misurata. Funds had to be first funneled by LIBYA's government, aka Qaddafi. Or his cronies. Am I wrong about that?

Yes. They didn't send a check to the Ghadaffi government and tell them to use it to rebuild the cities they are sieging.

[Hazir]

I'm not convinced any money sent to LIBYA found its way to the civilian population, or cities like Misurata. Funds had to be first funneled by LIBYA's government, aka Qaddafi. Or his cronies. Am I wrong about that?

Now, if you read up a bit about Ghadaffi you could have found out that he was propping up half a dozen of dictatorships in Africa and paid for the upkeep of the African Union. Does that sound like the kind of man who's dependent (or even wants) handouts from the US?

[Loki]

By the way, while I agree that supporting dictators is, at best, dubious, there is from the US perspective a difference between a nation that oppresses their own people, and a nation that actively tried to kill US citizens.

I could never understand that logic. What do you mean by "support"? And why is it dubious? Should we not have relations with autocrats? Not trade with them? Actively seek to overthrow them? Even if you say the first one, what do you think would be the effect of that policy on international security (let alone America's security)?

Also, is America "supporting" the government of the Netherlands by having relations with it and engaging in trade with it?

Was that after Lockerbie?

You realize that the reason for Lockerbie was that we had horrible relations with Libya, right? We had good relations with the Libyan king, whom Qaddafi overthrew. We had decent relations with Qaddafi the first few years of his rule, but went as far as recalling our ambassador by 1972.

[GGT]

You realize that the reason for Lockerbie was that we had horrible relations with Libya, right? We had good relations with the Libyan king, whom Qaddafi overthrew. We had decent relations with Qaddafi the first few years of his rule, but went as far as recalling our ambassador by 1972.

Nothing can "reason" Lockerbie.

The whole Qaddafi history and regime is tainted with a big WTF.

[Loki]

You still haven't shown the US giving foreign aid to Libya. It doesn't cancel our support for Martians either.

Nice attempt to derail the discussion yet again in the previous post by the way.

[Loki]

Apparently we gave Libya about a million a year for the last few years to secure its borders and professionalize its military. That must be the three billion a year GGT referred to. Of course if we gave Libya $3 a year, she would also take that as support.

[GGT]

Apparently we gave Libya about a million a year for the last few years to secure its borders and professionalize its military. That must be the three billion a year GGT referred to. Of course if we gave Libya $3 a year, she would also take that as support.

Oh come on, stop being an ass. I clearly stated I wasn't sure about millions or billions.

The US helped fund Libya's borders and military, or their educational or medical structures. We have sent Libya money for a long time, even after Lockerbie.

Are you saying we did not?

[Enoch the Red]

Oh come on, stop being an ass. I clearly stated I wasn't sure about millions or billions.

The US helped fund Libya's borders and military, or their educational or medical structures. We have sent Libya money for a long time, even after Lockerbie.

Are you saying we did not?

We've been sending it for five years, GGT. You don't know what you are talking about.

[Loki]

WTF, that refers to aid given to rebels. You specifically referred to billions in aid given to Qaddafi over many years.

The first article doesn't refer to aid at all. Can you not read?

[Loki]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

[LittleFuzzy]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

It's not cognitive dissonance. There's nothing conflicting on her side. It's willful ignorance/denial.

[Loki]

And that was in the wake of the Lockerbie settlement, which saw Qaddafi give $10 million for each victim of the attack. I.E. He gave more per victim than he received in his entire time as Libyan leader.

[GGT]

And that was in the wake of the Lockerbie settlement, which saw Qaddafi give $10 million for each victim of the attack. I.E. He gave more per victim than he received in his entire time as Libyan leader.

So what? Do you think money can replace a loved one? Then you have the nerve to suggest I'm the one suffering from cognitive dissonance?



Edit to add how crappy that comment sounds from you, Loki. You can call me names and suggest I'm stupid....but your above post sounds like dictators or terrorists can do whatever they want, even bomb and blow passengers from the air, as long as they give millions in exchange. Qaddafi "gave more than he received?"

Bullshit.

[Loki]

She does interpret things that have no relation to her argument as being supportive of her argument. I suppose that doesn't strictly meet the definition of cognitive dissonance.

[GGT]

Wow, any one else want to tell me how wrong I am? Window open.....

And how does that translate to how right our foreign policy has been? Especially when it comes to bin Laden, AQ, Taliban, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan

After a while, when you stop dissing me for being an idiot, you'll still have to discuss the issues at hand.

[Enoch the Red]

Wow, any one else want to tell me how wrong I am? Window open.....

And how does that translate to how right our foreign policy has been? Especially when it comes to bin Laden, AQ, Taliban, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan

After a while, when you stop dissing me for being an idiot, you'll still have to discuss the issues at hand.

I'd agree our foreign policy has been a mess, and I agree that discussion regarding it's future direction is important, however I think you'd be taken more seriously in that discussion if you have shown any knowledge grounded in reality on the subject. Claiming that America has been supporting Libya with billions of dollars a year for several years isn't just mentally fudging figures, it's demonstrating complete ignorance in our foreign policy with regards to Libya over the last thirty plus years, let alone our countries shared history. Trying desperately to dig yourself out of that hole instead of admitting being wrong isn't the sign of someone wanting to have a thoughtful discussion on foreign policy, it's a sign of someone trying to rationalize their dogma.

I can't help but be reminded how as a child my when I was being stubborn or bullheaded, my grandfather used to recite an old Psalm that ended with "...but fools despise wisdom and instruction."

[Nessus]

my grandfather used to recite an old Psalm that ended with "...but fools despise wisdom and instruction."

I'm sorry you had to experience that

[Enoch the Red]

I'm sorry you had to experience that

Considering the things he could have quoted from the Bible, it certainly could have been worse.

[Nessus]

Considering the things he could have quoted from the Bible, it certainly could have been worse.

True!

[GGT]

How did I not admit to being wrong about millions or billions? I thought that was clear. How many ways to Tuesday do I need to say that?

Lets pretend the US didn't spend a dime on Libya, Pakistan, Yemen, etc.....none of those nations, not one dime. We'd still have photo-ops of US politicians and leaders meeting and shaking hands. Whispering about secret deals, trade-offs, favors. Charlie Wilson's War type of thing.

That's not me trying to dig out of a hole. That's others refusing to admit the cavern our politicians are yelling from.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Can you explain to me how you read in Loki's post "dictators or terrorists can do whatever they want, even bomb and blow passengers from the air, as long as they give millions in exchange"?

[GGT]

Can you explain to me how you read in Loki's post "dictators or terrorists can do whatever they want, even bomb and blow passengers from the air, as long as they give millions in exchange"?

And that was in the wake of the Lockerbie settlement, which saw Qaddafi give $10 million for each victim of the attack. I.E. He gave more per victim than he received in his entire time as Libyan leader.

IE, Qaddafi GAVE MORE PER VICTIM THAN HE RECEIVED ....