Maybe a jump to conclusions. Are the “Allies” sure who the good guys are?

Maybe a jump to conclusions. Are the “Allies” sure who the good guys are?

I found a brief summary of it all in The New York Times. Basically, it says: In the U.S. his name is still spelled Muammar el-Qaddafi (at least by The New York Times). And, the U.K. and U.S. governments have opposed him for years for being a socalist and too tough. He has been accused of terrorist attacks, and the the U.K. and U.S. bombed and killed innocent Libyans in response to the accusations, accusations which were denied by Qaddafi. Also, under Reagan the U.S. began training Libyan troops to overthrow him.<ref></ref></nowoki> Also, Muammar el-Qaddafi came to power when he overthrew the United Kingdom of Libya in 1969, which was established after the French and the British controlled Libya following WWII. Qaddafi established the Libyan Arab Republic. He supported the Palestine Liberation Organization, against the theft of of land by the UN in Canaan to establish a modern Israel. He also supported the use of oil prices for Arab self-defense. He nationalized Libyan banks and the oil industry and required businesses in Libya be owned by Lybyans<nowiki>.<ref>pp. 112-113, ''Funk & Wagnalls New Encyclopedia, Volume 16.'' 1983. ISBN 0-8343-0051-6</ref>

In February of 2011, demonstrators waving the flag of the United Kingdom of Libya seized the city of Benghazi and got support from England, France and then the United States, because President Gadhafi responded using the military rather than the police because the rebels were taking over cities..<ref>A-1,4,&5, ''The Wall Street Journal.'' March 19, 2011. News Corporation.</ref>

On 19 March 2011 UK, the US and France fired on people in vehicles in Libya. The Cruise missiles were from the US.<ref>BBC. 19 March 2011.</ref>

This seems to be a struggle against Libyan isolationism, since Libya had a king before Qaddafi, or an attempt to establish the republic he promised. Personally, I don’t understand how capitalism works, because of the business cycle. Also, maybe some workers think they would rather work for a republic than for some rich family. I see nothing wrong with being on welfare and think a capitalist state could be run without taxes, by considering money to be a government asset. (talk) 04:44, 20 March 2011 (UTC) (talk)04:44, 20 March 2011

wat. You should compose your thoughts better. (talk)20:52, 20 March 2011