Libya almost liberated now what?

[Joelcool7]

I find it funny that some users suggest the US was the only reason for Libya's uprising.

Seriously if Libyan's had it so good and such why would so many millions of them rise up in the first place? Now how could the US have caused these Libyan's to rise up on their own if Libyan's had it so well? What did the US brainwash all of them, hypnotise them , use mind control? The Libyan's who rose up did so of their own free will and in droves, infact I'm not even sure its in America's best interest to have spent months in a Nato conflict. Heck voters don't like word of billions of dollars being spent.

Also if the US directly manufactured the rebelion in Libya what about the ones in Egypt (Their ally) and Tunisia? If those weren't caused by America then how would the rebellion in Libya have gotten inspiration?

Its funny that right now their are multiple rebelions occuring accross the arab world, some US allies other enemies. But this one is the only one caused by the US.

Also the idea that Spec Op's of any Nato country were behind or instrumental in the capture of Tripoli is hilarious. Now you may believe that the American press is spinning things. But what about Al-Jazeera and all the arab news networks, does the US control the whole worlds media? Infact not even Gaddafi's own state TV reported Nato Spec Op's invading Tripoli. You'd think Gaddafi's own television network would report such an event if it occured.

Why did Tripoli fall to a ragtag army of rebels.

A- The military and many of the troops fighting for Gaddafi had divisions. Many did not agree with firing on civilians or the orders they were given. These divisions led to insabordination. But since Gaddafi had every defector shot and killed many just kept following orders. But the second the rebels arrive in thousands, will all those soldiers just following orders give their lives following orders they don't agree with?

B- Nato bombed the shit out of Tripoli for six months. Their were virtually no command structures left. No command and control centers left in Tripoli. So when rebels arrive by the thousands and their is no command structure or anybody giving orders. Only a few are going to stand up and start fighting blindly.

C-The city was surrounded. To the East West and South the rebels were moving in on Tripoli. Supplies were cut off and their was two options. Fight to the death, go down with the ship. Or surrender. Reports indicate the majority of Gaddafi's forces fled and melded in with the population. They knew that even if they fought they would loose eventually and many of them due to the divisions didn't want a blood bath.

D- Not fact, however Gaddafi already stated that the take over of Tripoli would result in a Guerilla war like Iraq. If Gaddafi's forces all fought to the death. Who would do this Guerilla war. I wouldn't be suprised if Gaddafi himself ordered some troops to meld in with the population so that they could attack later.

E- The tribes, very strong in Libya. But barely any tribes remained in support of Gaddafi. Most of his troops show loyalty to the tribes over him. So they would see their whole country against them. Would you stand up against your own tribe if you were Libyan?

Their are so many more reasons for the take over of Tripoli. Infact the major military base that was supposed to defend Tripoli was abandoned. So did the Spec Ops or Nato drive all those troops out? Or more logically did they abandon their positions and retreat? Also very little opposition was met in Tripoli. So did Nato's Spec ops kill 65,000 troops? Remember Gaddafi himself said he had 65,000 troops stationed in Tripoli to defend it, or were these 65,000 troops secretly loyal to the US and helped the Spec Op's clear the way for the rebels?

I'm one to always question what I am told. But seriously a conspiracy theory that the US had boots on the ground and the rebels never actually took Tripoli. Or that the troops Gaddafi had hired would abandon Tripoli due to the US brainwashing them or something.

No the US did not start the revolution. Did they assist it and cause it to succeed, maybe. But they didn't cause it and they didn't send troops into Tripoli. If they did they weren't instrumental in taking Tripoli their would have been only a few.

Do I believe everything the American media is saying? No. But what about all the arab media and European media and African media? I follow multiple media outlets and all seem to concur that Libya's Government fell at the hands of the Libyan people. Not American Spec Op's!