many people who support him there. It's also likely that there are people who do not want to be involved in any of the fighting. Nothing is black and white.
This article is from the Guardian. If you know anything about Libyan history, you know that at least half the country is probably not supportive of NATO's intervention.
Learning the history of these nations, and Libya is a relatively new 'country' which was never completely united, is helpful in at least not jumping to conclusions we may have to reconsider later.
We cannot possibly understand the situation but to just have a knee-jerk reaction as to who is right and who is wrong, is not very smart without knowing much more about the reality there.
Khamis Mohammed, a Sirte University lecturer, accused Nato of deliberately targeting innocent civilians and supporting "mercenaries and terrorists" in the east.
"Our grandfathers fought Mussolini and we will fight and live free in our land," he said. "If Nato really cared about civilians it and the UN would send a mission here to find out who is really the aggressor."
Hatred for the Benghazi rebels has been fuelled by an incident on Sunday when pro-Gaddafi loyalists taking part in a peace march were confronted near Bin Jawad and three of them reportedly shot and killed, despite carrying white flags and olive branches. But according to some accounts armed volunteers were in one bus at the rear of the convoy.
This person may or may not be right, I don't live there, nor do you, but he is a Libyan and yes, they did fight the Italians for their right to live free of colonialism. There are definitely factions in the country going back decades and are we really in a position to know who is right or wrong in a country we know virtually nothing about?
I think people here need to take a little time to try to understand the people of these various countries we invade before holding forth on what WE believe is right for them.