I'm watching that right now and I don't get your point at all. The guy wants to sound as if he knows what he's talking about but he is just clutching at straws which are not relevant to the situation. 1. Countries traded arms with Libya: Yes they did, as they do with almost all countries in the world. How though does this mean they shouldn't intervene? 2. Countries met with Gaddafi and traded economically: Again, we live in a globalised society where world leaders have to meet. Libya has a large oil supply which the rest of the world needs. While the country was at peace, the rest of the world had no choice but to trade with Libya 3. Leaders of countries leading the attacks are falling in polls: Firstly why the hell does that even matter? Secondly are you sure? I know Cameron wasn't overly popular in the UK a short while ago but I actually think his popularity has been slowly rising for a few months since the budget cuts. I don't think 'nuff was said. The video was horrendously biased and, proven by the amount of view by all that guys videos, he doesn't know what he's talking about and isn't taken seriously. I just have a lot of respect of Stefan Molyneux, sorry that you don't, he's easily one of the wisest people on the web, and I wasn't replying to anyone, just sharing. Btw, it's just ignorant to conclude someone's integrity by the amount of exposure they receive. That guy purports that he knows what he's talking about because all of academia is lies and deceit. LIES AND DECEIT, MAN! His video provides NO sources for any of the claims he makes, but of course that's because all the sources he could use are LIES AND DECEIT. Come on dude, be realistic, there is no way any of these conspiracies are anywhere near true. Sure, some of his "facts" may be based on real events and real people, but the conclusions he draws from them are so far from the truth it's laughable.