| Kasz216 said: I dunno. I'm more likely to trust the media of a country that is free, and has tons of independent news organizations then I am a country that is headed by one guy by birth which any criticizing of him can result in being punished according to the law. Espiecally when it's in support of one dictatorship governments like that one guy.... and the many indepenedent news orgizations have no collective reason to lie... and playing conspiracy theory guy here... WERE controlled by the democratic government (unlike the dictators media?) would if anything want to argue FOR dictators.
Aside from which, even if it became fractionlized groups of warlords... there would still be decisions being made by more people then just the one guy currently. Aside from which, lack of weapons was basically the whole big trouble with the Libyian rebels side.... at the start of the war... they didn't have any tanks. Not until they got defections from the army and captured army technology. The deploying of tanks was a pretty recent thing. As for freedom fighters buying guns on the black market... yeah, that's what they do, even the "good ones". |
Pretty much, this.
Even though I think the Libyan rebels could be no better than the Taliban in Afghanistan by the time everything is said and done, I'd rather them have a democratic chance than none at all. If they can get in some basic human rights, there is always the chance for a free, representative media that can call leaders on corruption and problems. Comparatively, a dictator is going to have heavy censorship and destroy things.
Does this mean every dictator is 100% evil, and Democracy is 100% good? No. But I'd say that Qudaffi is 100% evil, and the rebels are likely between 50-90% evil - still a net gain in my book.
Time will tell what happens, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt - although we shouldn't have intervened in their conflict.
Back from the dead, I'm afraid.
