RE: So. Qaddafi is dead.

2011-10-20 Thread Jacob
Libya may be better off, but who will be in charge of Libya? That can be scary in itself! -Original Message- From: GMoney [mailto:gm0n3...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 7:55 AM To: cf-community Subject: Re: So. Qaddafi is dead. I found that the news barely even drew a

Re: So. Qaddafi is dead.

2011-10-20 Thread Scott Stewart
You mean the Kennedy Center is behind it? /runs On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Maureen wrote: > > Nah, Qaddafi has been one of the propaganda machine's boogeymen since > forever.  I'd bet money on that revolution be funded from Foggy Bottom. > > I could see regime change in Cuba, yeah.  Mexi

Re: So. Qaddafi is dead.

2011-10-20 Thread GMoney
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Maureen wrote: > > Nah, Qaddafi has been one of the propaganda machine's boogeymen since > forever. Right, which means our propaganda machine sucks. 40+ years it took it to finally yield results! Or maybe.sometimes things happen without cause from the Uni

Re: So. Qaddafi is dead.

2011-10-20 Thread Maureen
Nah, Qaddafi has been one of the propaganda machine's boogeymen since forever. I'd bet money on that revolution be funded from Foggy Bottom. I could see regime change in Cuba, yeah. Mexico, not so much. On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Jerry Milo Johnson wrote: > > Oh, I wasn't thinking atta

Re: So. Qaddafi is dead.

2011-10-20 Thread Jerry Milo Johnson
Oh, I wasn't thinking attacking. I was thinking "regime change" and stirring the local political pots. We didn't get involved in Libya until well after the fires started. On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Maureen wrote: > > Nah. Mexico and Cuba don't have enough propaganda value. Fidel is pre

Re: So. Qaddafi is dead.

2011-10-20 Thread Maureen
Nah. Mexico and Cuba don't have enough propaganda value. Fidel is pretty much out of the picture and Raul spits and sputters but doesn't draw much attention. Attacking Mexico would bring too much attention to the US mistakes in the drug war. On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Jerry Milo Johnson

Re: So. Qaddafi is dead.

2011-10-20 Thread Jerry Milo Johnson
i would bet more money on Mexico and Cuba. On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Maureen wrote: > > This is very remindful of George R.R. Martin's Songs of Fire and Ice > series, > which I am reading currently. Nothing more than a Game of Thrones. > > The next propaganda target for the US will lik

Re: So. Qaddafi is dead.

2011-10-20 Thread Maureen
This is very remindful of George R.R. Martin's Songs of Fire and Ice series, which I am reading currently. Nothing more than a Game of Thrones. The next propaganda target for the US will likely be either Iran or Venezuela. On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Ras Tafari wrote: > > meh. > > I'm ju

Re: So. Qaddafi is dead.

2011-10-20 Thread PT
Pffft. That guy is a tool. His main job is to spout off rhetoric on the international stage while trying not to embarrass the people really in charge. He does one of these well. On 10/20/2011 10:51 AM, Ras Tafari wrote: > > meh. > > I'm just wondering who's next? > > Ahmadinejad! Down!

Re: So. Qaddafi is dead.

2011-10-20 Thread Bruce Sorge
Fox News was saying that they hope that there is not chaos like when Saddam was captured in Iraq. My response is simple, don't send us in to fix it, there will be no chaos, lol. ~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http:

Re: So. Qaddafi is dead.

2011-10-20 Thread Erika L. Rich
A. +1 On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Ras Tafari wrote: > > and all i can do is read between the lines... > > [now we can get their oil cheaper, or maybe even control it if we play our > cards right] > > and > > [look out mahmoud, you're next] > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Erika L

Re: So. Qaddafi is dead.

2011-10-20 Thread Ras Tafari
and all i can do is read between the lines... [now we can get their oil cheaper, or maybe even control it if we play our cards right] and [look out mahmoud, you're next] On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Erika L. Rich wrote: > > I guess this about sums it up (dont beat me up about the source

Re: So. Qaddafi is dead.

2011-10-20 Thread Scott Stroz
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:54 AM, GMoney wrote: > > I found that the news barely even drew a response from me when i read it > this morning. Libya will probably be at least slightly better off in the > future without that guybut who knows for sure. What he ^ said.. -- Scott Stroz ---

Re: So. Qaddafi is dead.

2011-10-20 Thread GMoney
I found that the news barely even drew a response from me when i read it this morning. Libya will probably be at least slightly better off in the future without that guybut who knows for sure. On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Erika L. Rich wrote: > > What does that mean to people here? Is t

Re: So. Qaddafi is dead.

2011-10-20 Thread Erika L. Rich
I guess this about sums it up (dont beat me up about the source, it's just the first news article I clicked on): U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said her department was still attempting to confirm the reports. "[We] can't confirm Qaddafi's capture or death but if it's true, it's a big si

Re: So. Qaddafi is dead.

2011-10-20 Thread Ras Tafari
meh. I'm just wondering who's next? Ahmadinejad! Down! On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Erika L. Rich wrote: > > What does that mean to people here? Is this going to help Libya? Should we > celebrate? > > > ~| Order the Ad