Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Qaddafi Warns of Carrying Out Attacks in Europe
Fox News ^ | 07/01/11

Posted on 07/01/2011 1:45:27 PM PDT by MissesBush

A defiant Muammar al-Qaddafi threatened Friday to carry out attacks in Europe against "homes, offices, families," unless NATO halts its campaign of airstrikes against his regime in Libya.

The Libyan leader, sought by the International Criminal Court for a brutal crackdown on anti-government protesters, delivered the warning in a telephone message played to thousands of supporters gathered in the main square of the capital Tripoli.

It was one of the largest pro-government rallies in recent months, signaling that Qaddafi can still muster significant support. A green cloth, several hundred meters long and held aloft by supporters, snaked above the crowd filling Tripoli's Green Square. Green is Libya's national color.

March 16: Seif al-Islam Qaddafi, son of Libyan Leader Muammar al-Qaddafi, smiles during a TV interview in Tripoli.

Qaddafi spoke from an unknown location in a likely sign of concern over his safety. Addressing the West, Qaddafi warned that Libyans might take revenge for NATO bombings.

"These people (the Libyans) are able to one day take this battle ... to Europe, to target your homes, offices, families, which would become legitimate military targets, like you have targeted our homes," he said.

"We can decide to treat you in a similar way," he said of the Europeans. "If we decide to, we are able to move to Europe like locusts, like bees. We advise you to retreat before you are dealt a disaster."

It was not immediately clear whether Qaddafi could make good on such threats.

In the past, Qaddafi supported various militant groups, including the IRA and several Palestinian factions, while Libyan agents were blamed for attacks in Europe, including a Berlin disco bombing in 1986 and the downing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, that killed 270 people, mostly Americans. Libya later acknowledged responsibility for Lockerbie.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: libya; nato; obama; qaddafi; terrorism
I figured this was coming next.

The article states further:

In recent years, however, Qaddafi was believed to have severed his ties with extremist groups when he moved to reconcile with Europe and the United States.

Al-Qaida and other jihadi groups have opposed Qaddafi since he cracked down in the late 1990s on the Islamist Libyan Islamic Fighting Group which sought to replace his regime with an Islamic state.

Remember how Dems said Saddam fought and was opposed by Al Qaeda and Islamic radicals and that we should have left him in place for that reason? Why don't these same DemoCrites make that same argument against Obama's attempts at regime change in Libya?

1 posted on 07/01/2011 1:45:29 PM PDT by MissesBush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MissesBush

Because The One can do no wrong.


2 posted on 07/01/2011 1:51:46 PM PDT by GrandJediMasterYoda (Mark Halperin - The most honest journalist in the history of mankind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush

If Qaddafi does that it will mean troops on the ground in Libya.


3 posted on 07/01/2011 1:52:24 PM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush

“If we decide to, we are able to move to Europe like locusts,...”

THAT I can believe.


4 posted on 07/01/2011 1:53:22 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush

I thought that, according to the Obama Administration’s propaganda, Qaddafi’s departure was imminent? Maybe if they keep engaging in magical thinking in foreign and domestic affairs, it will all come true?


5 posted on 07/01/2011 1:55:44 PM PDT by oblomov
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush
NATO has been engaged in an unofficial and unprovoked war with Libya, Qaddafi seems entitled to return the favor.

Poking a hornet's nest can get you stung. D'uh.

6 posted on 07/01/2011 1:56:25 PM PDT by DTogo (High time to bring back the Sons of Liberty !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Bubba182
If Qaddafi does that it will mean troops on the ground in Libya.

But would that still be a kinetic action not subject to the War Powers Act?

7 posted on 07/01/2011 1:56:44 PM PDT by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush

This is just so wrong. Qadaffi was belligerent, but then Bush showed we have no more tolerance for terrorism and he did a 180 very quickly, denouncing terrorism, stopping his WMD programs, everything. Now how does he get repaid? With absolutely no threat against us, we attack his country in the middle of a civil war on the side of the opposition.


8 posted on 07/01/2011 1:57:54 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush
Change Korea with Libya and Truman with Obama.
9 posted on 07/01/2011 1:59:38 PM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush

He does that, and the Europeans suddenly remember that they know how to aim. He’s quite lucky that OTAN hasn’t decided yet (!) what they want to do in Lybia; carrying out attacks on the continent may cause them to make out their minds.


10 posted on 07/01/2011 2:02:49 PM PDT by Moose Burger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush

In 1986 President Reagan authorized one air strike on Libya. Qaddifi was quiet and peaceful until this stuff happened.


11 posted on 07/01/2011 2:03:29 PM PDT by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

If he attacks NATO we are obliged under the treaty. Kinetic action is BS Obama is using.


12 posted on 07/01/2011 2:04:29 PM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush
Remember how Dems said Saddam fought and was opposed by Al Qaeda and Islamic radicals and that we should have left him in place for that reason? Why don't these same DemoCrites make that same argument against Obama's attempts at regime change in Libya?

Being as pro-war as I am (I even supported us finishing the job in Vietnam) I still struggle to muster an ounce of support for this whole Libyan campaign we're involved with. And because of that, it just cannot be the right thing to do what we're doing. It's the first war I'm 100% against. I actually managed to find just a little bit of support for the Clinton European war though I was never 100% in support of it.

But this Libyan war... sorry... I still struggle with the whole idea. We do NOT belong there!

13 posted on 07/01/2011 2:09:07 PM PDT by tsowellfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oblomov

Relax, have a beer it was just another lie told by the liar-in-chief and totally expected when his lips started moving.


14 posted on 07/01/2011 2:14:04 PM PDT by chiefqc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Moose Burger
“He does that, and the Europeans suddenly remember that they know how to aim”. As of yet they seem to have amnesia . It's fun to watch old Europe bungle a simple oil theft .
15 posted on 07/01/2011 2:31:12 PM PDT by fantom (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Moose Burger

Maybe the Europeans can start drafting people and sinking some of their GNP into the military for a change. Lot of young people can be put to work—even some Arabs might join the cause. They have little love for Qaddafi.


16 posted on 07/01/2011 3:13:36 PM PDT by Forward the Light Brigade (Into the Jaws of H*ll)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Moose Burger

“He does that, and the Europeans suddenly remember that they know how to aim.”

Aim what? A British 3 inch butter knife? A 45 y/o fat, gay sgt from the Netherlands with his 14 comrades and their WW11 gear?

Unfortunately the Eurabians did not support the action in Afghanistan with more troops and gear because that was just about all they had to send. I guess France could send their aircraft carrier if the propellers would stay on. Or the British could send one of theirs if they had planes.., oops. I forgot, they will just call the Americans... again. I hope nobody answers the phone (because they are out golfing!)


17 posted on 07/01/2011 3:26:41 PM PDT by TxDas (This above all, to thine ownself be true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
But would that still be a kinetic action not subject to the War Powers Act?

If Qaddaffi were to attack France, the UK or another member of the NATO alliance? Yes, we're treaty-bound to join the fight if they were to ask us to (which they certainly would, just like we asked the UK and NATO to join us in Afghanistan).
18 posted on 07/01/2011 3:48:21 PM PDT by SunStar (Democrats piss me off!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush

This would be enough for NATO to decide to send in a large ground force to remove Qadaffi.


19 posted on 07/01/2011 4:55:50 PM PDT by Thunder90 (Fighting for truth and the American way... http://citizensfortruthandtheamericanway.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

If Qadaffi does attack Europe, it would be the same as Al Qaeda attacking the US during 9/11. We would be required by treaty to send in ground forces.


20 posted on 07/01/2011 4:56:50 PM PDT by Thunder90 (Fighting for truth and the American way... http://citizensfortruthandtheamericanway.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush

We have to know where he is hiding out.

Instead of using some puny little guided missile -

- why not use a “Daisy Cutter” and get rid of him and ALL of his associates in one felled swoop.


21 posted on 07/01/2011 4:59:51 PM PDT by jongaltsr (It)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Bubba182
If Qaddafi does that it will mean troops on the ground in Libya.

Simpler just to stop the BS as Qadaffi is requesting before anything like that happens. Free people should not fight wars over base causes and this one is super-base. It's about that $5T which Libya owns and George Soros and Bork obunga wanting to control it. No other reason would the slammite bro-hood set up a central bank before they even have a country. Basically, George and Bork are trying to use US military assets to perpetrate something terribly close to a bank robbery.

22 posted on 07/01/2011 5:31:45 PM PDT by varmintman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Thunder90
This would be enough for NATO to decide to send in a large ground force to remove Qadaffi.

That might have been true in 1940 but it would be highly questionable at present when Germany is averaging 1.4 children per family. Attempting it could easily spark rebellion in Europe particularly given the baseness of the cause.

23 posted on 07/01/2011 5:35:03 PM PDT by varmintman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TxDas

Even a slingshot, if it hits Qaddafi. The problem with Europe is that they won’t do zilch unless heavily pressed to. They don’t want Qadaffi out, not yet, and they’re not sure themselves where they’ll want him. A bit of action inside Italy, for example, and they’ll worry just a bit, maybe enough to say “know what? I don’t care, take him out”.


24 posted on 07/01/2011 5:58:55 PM PDT by Moose Burger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MissesBush

If he does, a door will attended to by Katy - some sort of “bar”

Perhaps a box owned by Pandora will be opened (if it’s not already with the “Arab Spring”)

That would definitely bring a new wrinkle to the following day


25 posted on 07/01/2011 6:40:44 PM PDT by F15Eagle (1 John 5:4-5, 4:15, 5:13; John 3:17-18, 6:69, 11:25, 14:6, 20:31; Rom10:8-11; 1 Tim 2:5; Titus 3:4-5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R. Scott

Well there was 1988 a couple years later - just sayin’

Khadafy laid low for about 2.5 years - and appeared to work through his agents

This seems to be supported in the “hero’s return” of the guy from GB.


26 posted on 07/01/2011 6:44:11 PM PDT by F15Eagle (1 John 5:4-5, 4:15, 5:13; John 3:17-18, 6:69, 11:25, 14:6, 20:31; Rom10:8-11; 1 Tim 2:5; Titus 3:4-5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Bubba182
I bet he has the assets in place, and is going to pull the trigger if it gets worse. When he has nothing to lose.

Farrakhan's boys are probably getting ready here in the states.

27 posted on 07/01/2011 7:09:29 PM PDT by PA-RIVER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: oblomov
Yes, Qaddafi must have left months ago. Obama said it would be about a two week deal.

Qaddafi is probably Living in Florida by now.

28 posted on 07/01/2011 7:17:06 PM PDT by PA-RIVER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DTogo
NATO has been engaged in an unofficial and unprovoked war with Libya, Qaddafi seems entitled to return the favor.

Poking a hornet's nest can get you stung. D'uh.


My thoughts exactly. If it was 1986, then I think there would be a reason to fight Kadaffy, but this is 2011 and although he might have opened up his mouth a little, he generally behaved himself. I still believe he will have to answer for his past actions, but overall that is between him and God for now. All I can say is the hornet's nest comparison is right on. Because he did keep radical Islamic elements down, in a twisted way, Kadaffy is an ally or should be. Thinking back, I now have to question if going into Iraq to get Saddam was the right thing to do given that he kept the radicals down as well. Kadaffy and Saddam were more 1950's era Pan-Arab nationalists instead of radical Islamists.
29 posted on 07/02/2011 6:23:59 PM PDT by Nowhere Man (General James Mattoon Scott, where are you when we need you? We need a regime change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TxDas
Aim what? A British 3 inch butter knife? A 45 y/o fat, gay sgt from the Netherlands with his 14 comrades and their WW11 gear?

Unfortunately the Eurabians did not support the action in Afghanistan with more troops and gear because that was just about all they had to send. I guess France could send their aircraft carrier if the propellers would stay on. Or the British could send one of theirs if they had planes.., oops. I forgot, they will just call the Americans... again. I hope nobody answers the phone (because they are out golfing!)


Here ya go:

Military Fairy
30 posted on 07/02/2011 6:28:34 PM PDT by Nowhere Man (General James Mattoon Scott, where are you when we need you? We need a regime change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson