I read that the Soviets eventually dug Hitler's ashes up a couple decades later and dumped them down a sewer drain. How's that for closure?
Nice! But now he is ONLY dead! I mean they didn't really torture him very much. They beat him and pulled his hair out....big deal. He got off WAY too easy. He should have had something like Lingchi torture done to him to get revenge on all the people he killed and tortured. Oh well, at least he is dead. They did the smart thing in killing him because these liberal courts today are so wimpish that they would have wanted to imprison him instead of carrying out justice. BTW, YouTube is pulling the videos off. I guess this one is still there because it's in arabic. You can also find it on liveleak.com. That site has no modesty. LOL
Yes, but its become common and acceptable, virtually unchallenged by Western heads of government - thus very worrying. One has to wonder why the Nazis received a fair trail at Nuremberg but, anyone Muslim, deemed an "enemy" by yours truly, is executed - sub judicial. The peal of exceptionalism rings loudly. Clearly indicates a criminal etchic from this mob, so what better future can Libyans expect - and the West is already crowing over the success of this intervention... Bush & Blair. And Obama for not prosecuting torturers, and authorizing extra judicial executions.
We actually did bomb quite a few Nazis, and we put some Muslims to trial, at least Clinton did. It all depends on whether they can be captured or not.
And that's precisely the way it should be, IMO. Move on folks, one less a-hole in the world to worry about.
Good analogy. It is similar. It's simplest this way, that's for sure. And kind of fitting too, in its way. Events coming around and completing the circle, Gadhafi's overblown karma finally catching up with him. It's a traditional rite of passage, the new dictator hypocritically denouncing the old dictator, before he sets to work emulating him. We haven't seen anyone quite like him since the days of Caligula in ancient Rome. I'm almost going to miss the costumes that he wore and the way that he strutted around. (I'm sure the Libyans won't miss that a bit.) Like all the best dictators, the man had his own unique sense of style.
Sargent Peppers lonely hearts club band . Wow that is blue . Is that Sky Blue? The Blue Bull Sacrifice. Now that threw Me off my horse Captain
if they are so literate ? I believe that statement well enough . That they are thinking people . People thinking for them selves. ...Why they kill em ?
. Even that I'm happy for Libya, but, it's very obvious that Libya's resources will be dominated by foreign countries, as a payback, to saving them from Gadhafi, now maybe you can tell positive things about things Gadhafi did, or, the first Gadhafi, but he's a criminal and he deserves death, and only death.
You may recall that a very large number of Nazis were "executed sub-judicially" in the years before the Nazis explicitly surrendered and turned themselves over to the custody of the Allies. If Al Qaeda sees fit to formally surrender to the USA, completely disband, place all officers into US custody and never again wage war against anyone, then you'd have a useful analogy there. It would indeed be very bad to execute those people without trial. Combattants waging war on you, on the other hand, are perfectly fair game for killing without consulting a judge or jury first. Let's also note that the US plan is more-or-less to try any captured AQ members in military tribunals - and that the Nuremberg Trials were also military tribunals. Likewise, it would probably have been for the best for Libyans to subject Qaddafi to trial before summarily executing him, if for no reason other than that he presumably possessed a lot of intelligence about where the bodies are buried, so to speak. But as a matter of simple justice in this particular case, there's little to complain about. His guilt was beyond doubt, and he'd earned a far worse fate many times over. It's essentially a procedural criticism. Supposing the new Libya can put together a credible legal system, it'll be a no-harm-no-foul type of situation. The only bells I'm hearing are those of facile analogy and prejudiced reasoning. Even if the new order possesses an "ethic" just as criminal as that of Qaddafi, they'll still have the recent experience of the fate that awaits such tyrants to restrain them. If they can take Qaddafi down, they presumably need to be careful not to piss off everyone else the way he did, no? Well, it does seem to have been pretty successful at getting rid of Qaddafi, and without using ground troops or incurring a backlash from the Arab/Muslim streets, so... what measure of success are the West supposed to be employing again?
