www.owohrod.com.

And oftentimes be even more detrimental than the government which has been overthrown, as it is replaced with the 'new ruling elite.'  Whose security might be dependent on their foreign sponsors, whose bidding and tune they are now required to observe and dance to. So, what are the people of Libya to do, as they continue to live and exist in the state of instability which the 2011 invasion of their country, albeit, with the support of many of them, has continue to subject them?  Do they continue to live under the rule and misrule of two opposing governments and opposing militias, which the United Nations is trying to reconcile?  Or do they, as the Benghazi-based government, under General Haftar, is doing, try to resolve the matter by trying to defeat the Tripoli-based Libyan government? It seems to me that, as much as wars are repugnant, there are times when circumstances have made them necessary.  And probably the most cost-effective or least detrim

But now, they are telling the Libyan people that, the option of  intensified military conflict, so as to bring to an end the current de facto state of continuing tension, distrust and regular flare-ups of inter-factional conflict.  Is not the way to go about the seeking a resolution to the very complex and unsustainable situation which is persisting in their country. Of course, the West has had more than amble example that. As, oftentimes, and especially when it is a matter of them, the West, invading other peoples' countries to impose their will on them.  And, although military action is definitely not the solution to whatever problem they are citing as the reason for the conflict. It has not stopped the West from invading Libya and subjecting it to the state of chaos it now is in.  Just as they had done in Iraq, and sowed and/or nurtured the subsequent and continuing conflict which has become a curse to Iraq and the Iraqis. Neither has it prevented them from i

So, when the west, which we can characterised as the United States and America and her Nato allies, primarily.   Tell us that the warring factions in Libya, should realise that there is 'no military solution to the post-2011 catastrophic war factionalisation and conflicts.  Which they, the Americans and their allies, had waged on the Libyan state to bring about its downfall.  How are we to respond, and what are we to believe? If these western forces believed and argued that military intervention by them, was a solution to bringing about the overthrow of the previous government.   And was, according to their analysis and moral and legal compasses.  Then why are they now opposing the attempts by the combating Libyan governments and disparate forces, to effect a military solution to the continuing conflict? The only sense which their logic makes, I believe, is one of hypocrisy. They are saying to the still warring parties.  Military action, only makes sense

While those enjoying relative peace, such as Saudi Arabia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates, are denying their people their basic human rights and freedoms, in deference to an imaginary Allah.  Is something which I see as a major threat to western liberalism and enlightenment.  For me, and others who perceive of the world, of the gods, similar to how I do.  The life of a human being is of greater worth than that of the unseen 'God' or 'Gods' but I fear that for man Muslims, 'Allah' is worth more than the lives of all humans. I would not want to see the personal rights and freedoms which the ordinary citizens of the western world have come to take as a given I am fearful that, while it is the case that many Muslims in western countries, will have, over generations, become 'westernised', free themselves from the shackles of religious orthodoxy, and take on the freedom of secularism.  There are others who have not yet, and probably shal

These terrorist massacres are more prevalent in Muslim countries, or countries with large Muslim populations. Such as Nigeria, Libya, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Kenya, Sudan. Looking at what is happening in these wholly or predominantly Muslim countries.   It is not surprising that many, if not most non-Muslims, are not feeling reassured by what their Muslim fellow citizens are telling them, about 'Islam being a peaceful religion.'  The fact is that, Islam, like Christianity, did not become what it is today, by peaceful means, and, by having to use the methods of violent conquest oppression to spread it maintain it.  Whatever claims it, and, yes, Christianity, has towards it being peaceful, has greatly compromised,devalued and deligitimised the validity of its claim. Being a 'peaceful religion' is not the same as being a 'compassionate or benevolent religion.'  There is a perceived disconnect, and it is one which concerns me and would

So, consider this. After conspiring with her allies, and with spurious machiavellianism, to make the case for war against Iraq and her people.   The former President of the United States of America, George Bush, stood on one of his country's warships, and declared that his country and its European and other allies.  Have achieved victory over the Iraqis. Yes, over the Iraqis, although, for tactical reasons, it would have made it 'victory over Saddam Hussein's Regime.'  Well, which dictator do you know of, who requires the awesome military might of the United States and her Nato and other allies to kill him.  Without incurring the massive destruction of Iraqis and their country's infrastructure which the 2003-20..invasion of Iraq has resulted in, so far?  As I said, it was and still is characterised as a 'war against the former dictator', but in every meaningful sense,  it was and is a war against the people Iraq, all the people of Iraq.

Valtterl Bottas has been brilliant in laying down the pace and faultless 'racing by wire' driving.  Which has made him the dominant driver of the Hamilton-Bottas duo all weekend, including snatching Pole from Hamilton on Saturday.  And yet, I had this feeling, and sometimes it is no more than 'a feeling', rather than something based on 'facts,' that, come the race, come Sunday.   It would be Hamilton who would be fated to snatch the winning of the race from the competitors.  What with the added incentive of being the racer who was to win the 100th Formula 1 race.  And so it was, that, Hamilton, just as Bottas had done in the Australian Grand Prix, by snatching the lead from Hamilton during the start of the race.  Was to relieve Bottas of his Pole advantage, by having an aced start off the Starting Grid, and taking and maintaining the lead for the duration of the Grand Prix.  Yes, somehow, the race had gone as it was fated to have b