Libya: Benghazi unrest, to Civil War, to a new government and Gaddafi's death.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Did you actually think he would do what he says?

Of course not. I'm the sardonic one, remember.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh I think it predates the concept of a military...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Poison Dwarf is a better insult, I think.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Gaddafi loyalists are reported to be shelling the main hospital in Misrata. Classy.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What's so special about Libya.

Mostly its closeness to the European mainland.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Why don't we just call it Operation Mission Creep?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

So the Men in Beards get another country. 

I didn't know Al and Lewis were into global conquest. 

Shhhh... keep it quiet. People might hear.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

There are reports that the Gathavi (lol) family have been moving money and assets out of the country for the past couple of days.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Reports that Gaddafi's compound has been broken into.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

In the classic Monkey/Organ Grinder situation he's absolutely not the Organ Grinder, so... er... why even...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Interesting issue coming up, maybe. The NATO bombing is officially justified as a means of protecting civilians (we all know that the real reason is regime change, but let's ignore that for a moment). The new government has issued an ultimatum to Sirte; surrender or we storm you. Sirte is a big place and a lot of civilians will die if that happens (obviously) so to what extent can NATO get away with helping out government forces in taking it?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Yeah, I know that's the rationale. But, fundamentally, a civilian is a civilian even if they happen to (probably) support the wrong side and even if they (certainly) live somewhere held by said wrong side. A slight sense of disquiet isn't entirely inappropriate, given some of the rhetoric. That's all.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

There had been speculation about Gathavi legging it to South Africa, so I'm not sure where the surprise comes from.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Somewhat amusingly, there's a picture already.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Another picture:  http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/56180000/jpg/_56180922_gaddafi_aljaz.jpg

[Filuwaúrdjan]

There are reports that Saif al-Islam is dead as well. Someone should send the LSE a bunch of flowers in condolence.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

They found Wonderland!

Actually there used to be a tunnel like that where I went to school. Endless fun for everyone. Until it was removed because it was 'dangerous' and 'could collapse at any time' or some similar nonsense like that.

Also: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2011/oct/20/muammar-gaddafi-dead-body-video

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Also the Obama-haters who opposed NATO intervention are looking pretty silly now.

yes, Qaddafi was a tyrant who deserved to die, but he was a secular tyrant...what will replace him will be much worse.  if you dont understand this, then you are very naive about the world.

I seem to remember people making exactly the same argument regarding Saddam Hussein. Want him back as well?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I wonder if we'll ever know for sure the circumstances surrounding Gaddafi's death.

I think we know enough already. He was found, he was captured, he was (eventually) lynched.

Personally I don't think it's right to ride moral high-horses over the latter. Obviously it's not right to lynch someone, but under the circumstances... it's actually quite understandable that it happened and I'm less than comfortable about judging it. It isn't as though a court would have done anything other than order his death anyway.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Of all the thousands of people to die in this conflict on both sides, Qaddafi is the one least mourning.  I don't understand condemning the death of a man that fired on unarmed protesters with AA guns back in February.  Where was their due process?  Their trials?  Live by the sword, die by the sword.

This is what I mean, yeah. I mean... it's not exactly ideal, but who can blame them? And what right do we have to get outraged? For Gaddafi, see Ceauşescu, I think.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Gaddafi was never taken particularly seriously. When Western governments started talking to him again (something that was, of course, essentially a consensus position at the time) it wasn't because they suddenly respected him; it was because of the money. Because that's the way these things work.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Those bloodthirsty Brits...

For The Scum, everything is about us.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Oh come on, no one is 'respected' for any other reason than power.  It happens Libya has never been a very powerful nation, and thus Gaddafi was a minor world figure.

However it is worth noting that the Imperialists did bother to attack him and have him murdered, so he must have been somewhat worth 'taking seriously'.

I never used the word 'respect'. But the thing with late-period Gaddafi was that Western governments (and related organisations) were taking his money (and getting him to get rid of his weapons; recent Western diplomatic/commercial involvement in Libya might have been sordid, but there were accidental (?) positive consequences) and laughing at him behind his back. He was a figure of fun; all those silly, silly costumes, along with his increasingly bizarre behavior and that entire eternity of half-baked drivel.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Gaddafi obituary: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/20/colonel-muammar-gaddafi

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Some new and... er... lurid... details have emerged...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/middle-east-live/2011/oct/25/gaddafi-burial-live-updates#block-4