Gadhafi's Son, Grandchildren Killed In NATO Air Strikes

Options
Jesus Jackson
Jesus Jackson Members Posts: 1,957 ✭✭✭
edited May 2011 in The Social Lounge
TRIPOLI, Lybia --- April 30, 2011

The youngest son of Lybian leader Moammar Gadhafi and three of his grandchildren were killed (murdered, assassinated) in a NATO airstrike, the government said early morning, NBC news reported.

Gadhafi and his wife were in the Tripoli house hit by the NATO missile but were not injured, said government spokesman Moussa Ibrahim.

Saif al-Arab Gadhafi, 29, had spent much of his time in Germany in recent years.

Lybian officials took journalists to the house, which had been hit by at least three missiles. The roof had completely caved in in some areas, leaving strings of reinforcing steel hanging down among chunks of concrete.

Ibrahim said the villa was attacked "with full power".

"This was a direct operation to assassinate the leader of this country", the spokesman added.

The strike came after Gadhafi early Saturday called for negotiations with NATO powers to end airstrikes on Lybia.




I'm disgusted... Your thoughts.
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • Lorenzo de Medici
    Lorenzo de Medici Members Posts: 5,739 ✭✭✭
    edited April 2011
    Options
    ? 'em. I think you'll understand if I don't have sympathy for anyone in that family.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • glowy
    glowy Members Posts: 3,995 ✭✭✭
    edited April 2011
    Options
    Damn, lmao.

    Link?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • G Mack
    G Mack Members Posts: 6,255 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2011
    Options
    condolences to his lost ones

    but he wanted war....he got war
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • politicalthug202
    politicalthug202 Members Posts: 3,098 ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2011
    Options
    its a ? war,khadaffi shouldnt have start killing protesters ? em.

    Damn when obama beef with ? ,he dont play around he killing everybody
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Aristo_V300
    Aristo_V300 Members Posts: 6,118 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2011
    Options
    Um... el oh el.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • kingblaze84
    kingblaze84 Members Posts: 14,288 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Options
    Obama is gangsta!!!! Dont let that Nobel prize full you, he's not afraid to ? . Ask Pakistan.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • StoneColdMikey
    StoneColdMikey Members, Moderators Posts: 33,543 Regulator
    edited May 2011
    Options
    dont ? with obama
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • kingblaze84
    kingblaze84 Members Posts: 14,288 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Options
    its over: 2012! wrote: »
    uuuuuh, I do believe he conceded...then begged...for a cease-fire


    http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&rlz=1R2ADFA_enUS406&source=hp&q=Gaddafi+asks+for+cease-fire&rlz=1R2ADFA_enUS406&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=40d12f84dda1c17c






    but fortunately...



















    ? was Watching, and he is keeping score!

    It doesn't seem ? is on Gaddafi's side right about now.......Obama and NATO won't stop until his whole family is killed. I have no sympathy for Gaddafi, but I always thought NATO was enforcing a no fly zone, not deliberately targeting his palace???
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Jonas.dini
    Jonas.dini Confirm Email Posts: 2,507 ✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Options
    Side note, it's interesting that the sons of these tyrannical dictators are often at the top western schools and financial institutions. One of Gaddafi's sons was on his way to completing a doctorate at London School of Economics (in fact the director of that university stepped down because of his affiliations with Gaddafi fam), the one who did get killed was attending an elite university Germany; mubarak's son Gamal was an investment banker with Bank of America...

    A lot of elite western institutions are being used to groom the sons of tyrants to take that role themselves one day.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Jonas.dini
    Jonas.dini Confirm Email Posts: 2,507 ✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Options
    its over: 2012! wrote: »
    now does Jonas, equitably apply, the same above concept to yon Bush family? And a few other Great, White American families I can think of...


    Who are experts at using great Institutions Of Higher Learning and Corporate-Giants, to breed and groom, the sons of tyrants to take that role themselves one day?

    Of course America has its own aristocracy of sorts. But why does every post have to include a provision for relativism?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Jonas.dini
    Jonas.dini Confirm Email Posts: 2,507 ✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Options
    Also, it isn't really the same thing insomuch as we have elections in this country (flawed tho they may be). Chelsea Clinton also went to elite Western schools, but it isn't like she's going to return to be handed the presidency by her parents; this in direct contrast to Gamal and Gaddafi's son (altho neither seem likely to inherit that mantle now).
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • fiat_money
    fiat_money Members Posts: 16,654 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Options
    Lauce .
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • janklow
    janklow Members, Moderators Posts: 8,613 Regulator
    edited May 2011
    Options
    after the last time he claimed something like this, i am going to have to ask for proof that this child/these grandchildren actually existed
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Jonas.dini
    Jonas.dini Confirm Email Posts: 2,507 ✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Options
    its over: 2012! wrote: »
    now I can't join you/go as far as calling your posts relativism-laden, my friend, although I wouldn't expect the abundance of truths facts and realities that I ensure births each of my anti-Racism posts.

    For instance, I can lay out truths and facts that Bush Rockefellers' Kennedy's etc...did the exact same thing, as Gaddafi, in terms of what you listed as Life's path taken by offspring

    I didn't call my post relativism-laden.

    And in the second half of your post you are once again appealing to relativism, so while I do hear what you're saying or whatever I repeat: does every post have to have a provision for relativism? Apparently you say yes.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cobbland
    cobbland Members Posts: 3,768 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Options
    Just imagine if someone bombed London during the "royal wedding?"
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] rubbed off from friction Posts: 0 ✭✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Options
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Alkindus
    Alkindus Members Posts: 1,677 ✭✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Options
    Nato and the UN have infinite license to ? /endless pohibilities, read the 73 resolution and dont forget the 'by any means neccessary' part.

    Obviously, Qatar, the UK and French want qadhafi out(they have stressed this numerous times), the Germans seem to seek a political solution instead oof military one and the African Union urged for a truce not so long ago but the Nato dismissed that plight because they didnt mention the departure/death of qadhafi.

    Face it, the man and his fam has wealth evrywhere, whether onwing parts of Unicredit, football club Juventus or the entire oil industry etc. They dont want peace with qadhafi they want him dead and gone. There have been plights for truces which have never been tested, eventhough african/asian countries visited libya not one of the nato memnbers came to qadhafi to talk peace. This is mos def not about humanitaion aid or protecting human rights or the libyan people, the nato/un highjacked the revolutions in libya and have caused no solutions whatsoever for weeks now.


    and Janklow, in 86 it was his adopted daughter.....
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • janklow
    janklow Members, Moderators Posts: 8,613 Regulator
    edited May 2011
    Options
    Alkindus wrote: »
    Nato and the UN have infinite license to ? /endless pohibilities, read the 73 resolution and dont forget the 'by any means neccessary' part.
    well, the US should not be targeting him (as we have executive orders saying not to do that kind of thing) but i can't speak for the Europeans/Arabs involved.
    Alkindus wrote: »
    and Janklow, in 86 it was his adopted daughter.....
    or it was a fictitious claim about an "adopted daughter" that never existed. i remember the incident, it's why i don't necessarily believe him now.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • blackgotty
    blackgotty Members Posts: 345 ✭
    edited May 2011
    Options
    whoever is responsible better pray that gadhafi never takes control of his country again ...i wouldnt be surprised if he starts financing new terrorists groups

    i dont mind trying to ? him but respect the UN resolution and if u ? him or try then take responsabilities
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Bully_Pulpit
    Bully_Pulpit Members Posts: 5,501 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Options
    kingblaze84 wrote: »
    Obama is gangsta!!!! Dont let that Nobel prize full you, he's not afraid to ? . Ask Pakistan.

    That ? ? probably never got his hands ? , ? you talkin bout?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Alkindus
    Alkindus Members Posts: 1,677 ✭✭✭
    edited May 2011
    Options
    janklow wrote: »
    well, the US should not be targeting him (as we have executive orders saying not to do that kind of thing) but i can't speak for the Europeans/Arabs involved.

    or it was a fictitious claim about an "adopted daughter" that never existed. i remember the incident, it's why i don't necessarily believe him now.

    From what I know the French/Qatari and British can do whatever it takes(also the nato said it did/could do whatever it takes according to the 1973 resolution, it was dissapointed in the civilian deaths etc in a reaction to the qadhafi government/death of the grandchildren and youngest son), I know the Dutch arent allowed to shoot/target anything at all and just enforce a no fly zone lol(no own combat initiative), dont really know about the part the US plays honestly

    didnt know about the claim to be fictitious, so many vague claims/stuff going on, I really should do more research before I take things as fact.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • blackgotty
    blackgotty Members Posts: 345 ✭
    edited May 2011
    Options
    Alkindus wrote: »
    From what I know the French/Qatari and British can do whatever it takes(also the nato said it did/could do whatever it takes according to the 1973 resolution, it was dissapointed in the civilian deaths etc in a reaction to the qadhafi government/death of the grandchildren and youngest son), I know the Dutch arent allowed to shoot/target anything at all and just enforce a no fly zone lol(no own combat initiative), dont really know about the part the US plays honestly

    didnt know about the claim to be fictitious, so many vague claims/stuff going on, I really should do more research before I take things as fact.

    The resolution says that they can do whatever it takes to protect the population that is directly attacked
    Attempting to ? the head of a state is specifically prohibited by the international law

    i dont care about gadhafi ,i just dont like to be lied to ,its funny how nobody will even investigate or reveal who took this decision
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • janklow
    janklow Members, Moderators Posts: 8,613 Regulator
    edited May 2011
    Options
    Alkindus wrote: »
    From what I know the French/Qatari and British can do whatever it takes(also the nato said it did/could do whatever it takes according to the 1973 resolution, it was dissapointed in the civilian deaths etc in a reaction to the qadhafi government/death of the grandchildren and youngest son), I know the Dutch arent allowed to shoot/target anything at all and just enforce a no fly zone lol(no own combat initiative), dont really know about the part the US plays honestly
    i think the role the US plays is "being the only country in NATO that actually brought missiles and bombs for more than one day."

    the US isn't supposed to target heads of state, so maybe one can argue he's not a REAL head of state anymore and could be targeted. but if you don't go that route... you're not really supposed to target him.
    Alkindus wrote: »
    didnt know about the claim to be fictitious, so many vague claims/stuff going on, I really should do more research before I take things as fact.
    well, i can't personally prove it one way or another, but one thing that came out after the initial attack/claim back in the day was people saying "what adopted daughter, he never had one, it's a story that was concocted to make the raid more outrageous"
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Categories