[CircleSpokes]

Because real life isn't a TV show. That isn't how national security agencies work. They don't dump raw intelligence to the public. The US knew it was Libya obviously, and the data released since then has proved that. Hell even the Stasi & the soviets knew it was Libya.

Again this isn't a TV show. No country needs permission to react to an attack against them by another state like Libya.

[4gotunameagain]

Oh, so your advice is to blindly trust whatever they shovel into the public's mouths ?

I totally trust US three letter organisations, and cannot see what could possibly go wrong as they have never shown signs of incompetence and malice in the past.

The fact that the stasi thought it was the Libyans could very well mean that it was a very successful false flag operation. This is the problem with the intelligence apparatus. It is war against the truth.

[CircleSpokes]

>Oh, so your advice is to blindly trust whatever they shovel into the public's mouths ?

Are you being serious? By this time in history Libya had already established a history for terror attacks and targeting civilians. So yeah I wouldn't have any issue believing it.

Just like when the UK blamed Russia for poising people Salisbury with chemical weapons. I believed them because they had intelligence about it & Russia has a history with this type of attack. Just like Libya already had a proven history of terror attacks in the 80s.

It is beyond silly to think a false flag bombing (injuring 250+ friendly nationals) is more likely than LIBYA, a know rouge state and user of terrorism, bombing a civilian dance club.

You and others are more than happy to bury your heads in the sand and pretend like the world is a TV show where countries post all their intelligence to twitter or in the paper lol.

[mardifoufs]

Again I'm not sure why you're ignoring this but it was only the US that came up with that conclusion, and super quickly too. The other european intelligence agencies, including the German one, didn't agree with the libyan connection. But I'm sure the US knows more, and more quickly than everyone else in Europe (which at the time, had a very strong intelligence apparatus since each country was more independent than it is now).

It's especially convenient that the US did not wait for the results of any investigation before launching an attack. This is just pure american chauvinism, where the US can do no wrong as long as we just believe that their intelligence agencies are always right. I guess it works for americans but to the rest of the world, it just doesn't cut it.

[mardifoufs]

I guess we should just trust when the Chinese or Russian agencies come up with their conclusions too, then.

And yes, the US is a democracy and russia/china aren't. But that doesn't seem to have made the US any more trust worthy when it comes to not being prone to baseless war mongering. And the US population seem to be pretty excited to vote over and over again for (or at least, it used to be) war hawks or even outright war criminals. Bush was re-elected in 2004 after outright lying about an incredibly destructive war, so it seems like democracy isn't an argument for trusting the US more on these matters. I guess Americans and westerners in general (mostly) don't live with the consequences of those wars so it's very easy to handwave demands of actual proof by saying that life isn't a movie, or that it was all done with good faith(tm).

But for muslims and the MENA region in general, those arguments just don't resonate well with us at all.