View Single Post
      11-11-2011, 08:39 PM   #23
Brigadier General
Kroy's Avatar

Drives: E90
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA

iTrader: (1)

Originally Posted by BKsBimmer View Post
When our strategic and economic interests clearly merge with a humanitarian cause I think it's a no brainer.
That's actually my point. We step in only because of our interest, not because of humanitarian reasons. There are many other places we step in but choose not to. It's all politics, humanity is just an excuse. At least that's my belief.

I'm sure you know one of the 2 Libyan intelligence officers you mention was found guilty in the bombing incident. Subsequently in 2003 Libya accepted responsibility for the bombing and begain paying the victims families. I think this is reason enough to conclude Gaddhafi had some responsibility for the bombing of Pan Am 103.
My point is still that this event was from 2 decades ago. If as you say Libya accepted responsibility for the bombing and began paying victim's families, then what is the problem? They've acknowledged and started reparations.

I really haven't done too much homework on this incident so I'm not aware of all the facts.

If Gaddhafi was in power at the time of the bombing, then yes he has to hold some sort of responsibility since he is the leader. But at the same time, I can't say for sure he was responsible for the attack. I'm sure there are many orchestrated events by our government's arms and legs that our president won't know about. This is really beside the point though.

All in all, I was very confused to why you were bringing up the Pan Am incident. I understand you want to link Gaddhafi to the incident but even if you could link him, it's been 20 years; shouldn't there be some type of statute of limitations? :P And again my point from last post, USA has done worse. Not an excuse or justification, just a truth.

Why was only 1 of 2 intelligence officers convicted?

I'm not sure why it's relevent that the current president wasn't the sitting president during the court proceedings.
I only brought that up because you made reference about presidents, so I thought you were talking about our current one. I mean, why would you bring up the Pan Am incident from 20 years ago, then ask us "what would you have done if you were president?" Were you talking about our president from when the event happened? Thought you were talking about this as a current event. Might not have understood your point as you intended.

I'm not criticizing President Reagan's actions at the time. I don't know enough about what happened then to pass judgement.

I'd also like to know your answer to my previous question. What you have done as president?
What I would have done if I were president when the bombing took place?

Or if I was in our current president, Obama's shoes?