General Discussion

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)

70. What was done to Libya by NATO was to create a hell on earth for a people who lived in

Mon May 18, 2015, 01:03 AM

May 2015

one of the more advanced countries in Africa. And it was NOT done to 'rescue people from a dictator'. There was zero interest in the people there. It was done as are all these invasions by the Western Imperial powers, for the 'interests' of Western powers.

If anyone doubts that now, all they have to do is compare what that country was like before NATO decided to destroy it, and then look at the suffering of the people there now.

Not a word is ever mentioned by our 'news' media about that country they were all over while it was being destroyed and its people brutalized as they still are.

And now those allies of ours do not want to take in the refugees they created. THAT is how much they really cared.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

94 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

"Elizabeth Warren can snatch the candidacy from Hillary" [View all] NYC_SKP May 2015 OP

Ben Ghazi ~ said in my best god father voice... boston bean May 2015 #1

Apropos of what? MannyGoldstein May 2015 #9

If only it could be reduced to a joke. delrem May 2015 #10

What was done to Libya by NATO was to create a hell on earth for a people who lived in sabrina 1 May 2015 #70

***The clip. It is pretty disgusting. Ewwww. NYC_SKP May 2015 #73

Dailykos had it right! pocoloco May 2015 #58

Excellent cartoon. GoneOffShore May 2015 #93

The Examiner sharp_stick May 2015 #2

this is an improvment for this OP dsc May 2015 #31

Huge K & R !!! - Thank You !!! WillyT May 2015 #3

I seem to have upset a member or two. But the message holds true. Voters are a discerning lot. NYC_SKP May 2015 #8

Oh Hell... That's An Hourly Occurence For Me... WillyT May 2015 #13

~~~DU Poll of 796 members, only 9% choose Hillary to 91% Sanders. NYC_SKP May 2015 #18

But her and her supporters expect that money to be a steamroller. zeemike May 2015 #25

Sad, isn't it? They are prepared to let the Citizens United ruling chose their candidate. NYC_SKP May 2015 #27

Aw, c'mon now. Jackpine Radical May 2015 #34

We are Legion! NYC_SKP May 2015 #36

Well, at least nobody can accuse us of pulling the wool over their eyes. Jackpine Radical May 2015 #40

Second worsted, at the very least!. merrily May 2015 #63

Knitpicker. Jackpine Radical May 2015 #84

You've had me in stitches today. merrily May 2015 #85

Wha'd I do? Jackpine Radical May 2015 #86

knitpicker--knit--stitches. Sigh. I guess I didn't spin that yarn very well. merrily May 2015 #89

Aw, you're a true purl, m'dear. Jackpine Radical May 2015 #90

Elegantly done. I'm about to unravel. merrily May 2015 #94

Still early but.... Segami May 2015 #78

I haven't given up hope. Imagine Warren and Sanders running. NYC_SKP May 2015 #79

The examiner.com is not a reputable news site. Agnosticsherbet May 2015 #4

also, see this... boston bean May 2015 #6

Truth is truth no matter the source. How about the LA Times? NYC_SKP May 2015 #7

Funny, I didn't see the word Benghazi in tha LA Times article and I saw boston bean May 2015 #11

She won't endorse any candidate until a nominee is chosen, and then she will support the nominee still_one May 2015 #52

There is no truth. It's pure propaganda BainsBane May 2015 #64

And just like that you dismiss Elizabeth Warren's speech to CA Dems. delrem May 2015 #12

The Examiner pays it's bloggers to write sensationalized stories Agnosticsherbet May 2015 #81

Interesting demmiblue May 2015 #15

That is why I criticized the source. Agnosticsherbet May 2015 #82

...except for the fact that she doesn't want to. brooklynite May 2015 #5

Holy Cow! Right-wing horseshit right here on DEMOCRATIC Underground! 6000eliot May 2015 #14

+1000! n/t ColesCountyDem May 2015 #53

"If she continues with her messaging" okasha May 2015 #16

Examiner.com is run by a wingnut who wants to be the 'Fox News Of The Internet.' onehandle May 2015 #17

Anything in the article that is wrong? merrily May 2015 #62

There is truth to this, but I'd still support Sanders in the primary. joshcryer May 2015 #19

Yes, indeed! Her's and Bernie's messages and policies are not far apart. NYC_SKP May 2015 #21

Wait... Who are you supporting? onehandle May 2015 #24

I'm supporting any real Democrat willing to run. Warren, Sanders, they both rock. NYC_SKP May 2015 #30

Not Hillary FTW. onehandle May 2015 #43

Because I want to win in the General Election, I have to prevent Clinton from being the nominee. NYC_SKP May 2015 #44

Then you do Bernie supporters a disservice with that logo. onehandle May 2015 #46

Well I guess I won't be allowed to. joshcryer May 2015 #55

I saw that and I don't know why. NYC_SKP May 2015 #56

Two actually. joshcryer May 2015 #57

This message was self-deleted by its author joshcryer May 2015 #20

The Examiner is a rw source so it is hard to take them seriously. hrmjustin May 2015 #22

It is obvious the RW wants somebody other than Hillary to run. Sure they do not Hillary to run. Thinkingabout May 2015 #29

Warren has charisma. Bernie not so much. redstateblues May 2015 #37

I don't see Sanders as presidential either. hrmjustin May 2015 #41

We should be so lucky. AtomicKitten May 2015 #23

Warren. is. not. running. bvf May 2015 #26

Sanders, very much like Warren, is running, I think, I'm pretty sure. Yeah, he's in. NYC_SKP May 2015 #28

Sanders is in because he said so. bvf May 2015 #33

Because is not is not the same as will not. zeemike May 2015 #38

Uh... bvf May 2015 #47

If only... whatchamacallit May 2015 #32

Everybody loves Elizabeth Warren. KMOD May 2015 #35

Not everybody, but many people....but she'll never run and if she does, she'll never win. George II May 2015 #48

K&R CharlotteVale May 2015 #39

She would not "snatch" it at all. sadoldgirl May 2015 #42

You never know with Elizabeth Warren. JDPriestly May 2015 #51

She actually is from the midwest dreamnightwind May 2015 #74

HUH? How can a person who has proclaimed DOZENS of times she's not running "snatch" the candidacy? George II May 2015 #45

You have to imagine what a thrill it is to be sitting in the audience of a California Democratic JDPriestly May 2015 #49

Thanks! I can't wait for my delegate friend, Tom, to report back. NYC_SKP May 2015 #50

. MohRokTah May 2015 #54

the examiner..... quickesst May 2015 #59

I don't think there was any good reason to post this thread. blue neen May 2015 #60

No right wing source goes unturned BainsBane May 2015 #61

Beautifully stated. blue neen May 2015 #67

Survey says.... merrily May 2015 #65

If the primaries were over, the alerting member might have had a point. NYC_SKP May 2015 #66

The source may well have had its mind in the gutter, but using the same merrily May 2015 #69

If I had been on the jury I would have voted to hide! B Calm May 2015 #92

Clap for Tinkerbell!! Clap as hard as you can!!... SidDithers May 2015 #68

'kay AtomicKitten May 2015 #71

Ha! Last time I wished this hard I got a Black President named Hussein Obama! NYC_SKP May 2015 #72

I want to watch whatever they're watching! merrily May 2015 #76

Sanders is the progressive alternative to Clinton. Not Warren. nt geek tragedy May 2015 #75

Then let us shift our support to Sanders. I will start with a sigline shift and reTweet: NYC_SKP May 2015 #88

Would LOVE to cast my vote for Warren, but, always watchful not to buy in blm May 2015 #77

The point of the OP isn't Warren. It's that Hillary's progressive credentials are thin. NYC_SKP May 2015 #80

You should know me by now - I've focused on RW propaganda machine since the 90s. blm May 2015 #83

I want Warren to run too... kenfrequed May 2015 #87

I thought the Benghazi and e-mail scandals are made up republican talking points! B Calm May 2015 #91