Now that Nato has directly targeted, bombed and killed Ghadaffi's family members, including 3 grandchildren all aged under 6, is this still a humanitarian effort?
Ghaddaffi may not be a great man but why target a home knowingly populated with other civilians including his wife, kid, and grand kids? is the thought that if Gaddafi's gets eliminated, then it was worth it? The end justifies the means?
Can anyone walk into a country with civil discord of any kind, pick sides and honestly claim to know what they're doing? I mentioned in a post before that it is never possible to know the facts on the ground about divided nations. You're likely to take sides from the people you hear from the most. In the spirit of democracy though, it does not negate the opinions, values and rights of the opposing side. Be they down, 30 to 70 or 50/50.
This killing of people's children is just disgusting. It was disgusting when they killed Saddam's kids and justified it with that they were horrible human beings. I'm not saying they shouldn't have been tried and given due punishment. But they cannot be targeted because their father's leadership is despised and that called fair. It was ridiculous that they bombed Ghaddafi's compound and killed his son after pearl harbour. And it is still abhorrent now with another son and 3 grand kids.
There isn't a better man than Obama in for the 2012 race yet. But I'm watching carefully. If Barack does not condemn this and make some appeasing effort, I'm flushing him down the tubes of disgusting politicians. And because he is officially running in 2012 now, he needs to make an official campaign statement. So we can know where he stands on this.
I said this whole Libya invasion thing was a mess. Why isn't Nato in Syria yet? They have the same atrocities going on?! Sick, sick.