It certainly was not justice in my understanding of the term - he should have stood trial, with all the embarassment for Western leaders who have aided his regime when it suited them.
Any capture, other than by Nato troops, was going to result in Gaddafi's death. The rebels hate him with a passion that is frankly alien to the British psyche - he should be...
well according to some on here, he deserved everything he got, and perhaps they are right. I would rather he had gone into exile, but then again where to?
Probably the same place as justice for the famillies of all those at that iraqi restaurant the Americans hit with a cruise missile because they thought Saddam Hussein was there - he wasn't?
Or are you only interested in justice for Westerners?
I thought there was only one place for Gaddafi to go into exile. The very place that all Libyan exiles come. And Russian exiles. The list goes on. London.
I think that it was a foregone conclusion that Gaddafi would hide out in Libya. He was never going to be classed with all the Middle Eastern persona non gratas who spend half their lives in London. Not in a million years.
The article said he was captured AND killed, the facts seem to indicate he was captured THEN killed. No problem to me but don't lets to carried away by the spiel from Cameron et al about a new democracy.
Of course there are lots of exiles in London - most if not all, especially the Libyan ones, were driven away by Gaddafi himself.
We've welcomed political exiles for centuries. I'm rather proud of that, even if some of them (like Lenin and Stalin!) don't turn out too well.
Lockerbie? I think it would be more beneficial to ask the Americans about that one. After all US agents were first on the scene on the night. Doesn t that strike anyone as strange?
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.