web analytics

What Me Worry? Libya’s Madman’sLaughter

By Mahons On March 18th, 2011

The United Nations No Fly Zone has been approved for Libya.  Some issues for discussion.  First, is it too little too late?  Does it provide any real security or is it to ease the Western conscience?   What are the motives of those who are to be protected?  Are we protecting innocents with this, or merely the other side of the same coin?  Once we are militarily involved, how do we get out?  Do we have the capability to sustain this and meet other obligations?   And whose next?  Yemen fired on its people today.   

Germany, India and Brazil abstained.  Why?  I get that the regimes in China and Russia would abstain (and not participate) but why are those other democracies sitting on their hands?

Whose going to be the muscle here?  The US, The UK and France?  Does the confederacy of despots also known as The Arab League lack planes?   Are we going to have to land on the shores of Tripoli? 

Look, I don’t like Libya’s madman who happens to be responsible for a no fly zone himself (over Lockerbie a few years back).   I’d love to hear that he’s been strung up on a meat hook.  And his evil spawn too.   But if the World ain’t gonna come together and stomp him out and insure the country heads towards freedom and stability, then why should we few (we unhappy few) do it for the World?

14 Responses to “What Me Worry? Libya’s Madman’sLaughter”

  1. Mahons, That’s quite a list of issues you have there! Not least the last one, ‘why should we few do it for the World?.

    The answer lies surely with the questions you didn’t ask, such as, ‘Is it really any of our business? – just how many times do we – that is mainly the US, and to a lesser extent, the UK, get to be accused of being the ‘world’s policemen’, without any mandate to do so? – and no, a corrupt UN isn’t the one to issue that sort of permission.

    Or why are we so intrigued with the ME when there are countries in Africa who are vastly more culpable when it comes to general genocide, domestic brutality and a general disregard for human rights, and others in Asia, such as North Korea, Burma, and even China, to only a slightly lesser degree, who have pretty dismal ‘human rights’ records, and who ruled by dictators and/or military juntas.

    As you rightly point out, – are we merely aiding another set of tyrants to gain power, and perhaps be far worse than the current lunatic, at least this one desn’t seem to be quite such a religious fanatic as the one in Iran.

    As for the abstentions by those havens of ‘warriors for democracy’ – i.e., India, Germany and Brazil, surely, are they not just just being pragmatic about the whole pantomime, safe in the knowledge that they will still be around to pick up the lucrative pieces, when the curtain finall falls.

    You put it so succintly, calling the Arab League, a Confederacy of Despots. Who would ever have thought that the Confederacy of Fools would join them to help them achieve their goal of a United Arabia?

  2. I find it rather ironic that all those who spent all those post-2003 years alleging that the US invaded Iraq exchanging blood for oil as a means to bludgeon Bush now have President HopeNChange & Shillary embroiled in the a real ‘blood for oil’ war in a third Muslim nation.

    So far I have yet to see mass protests of Lefty’s bearing effigies and crude signs denouncing Obama, Biden, and the rest of the Neo-Dems. I doubt we’ll see them. The entire idea re Libya is horrible. No real plan, no real exit strategy. Ill-conceived and ill-thought out.

  3. It is Nicholas Sarkozy who has been the driving force here so I imagine the French will be taking the lead in enforcing the no fly zone.

    Gaddaffi does appear to have backed down, something which has done in the past when seriously threatened by more powerful forces (he isn’t into Saddam style brinksmanship).

  4. But you’d have damned Obama if he had vetoed the UN resolution, wouldn’t you?

    Your political bigotry is only exceeded by your ignorance. Was there a mass revolt against Sadaam before Bush invaded? Would Bush have invaded in 2003 if Iraq did not have the fourth largest oil reserves in the world?

    And Libya has less than one third of the oil reserves of Iraq, number nine in the world. And there will be no US boots on the ground.

  5. Gadaaffi and his spawn need to be taken out by the rebels, preferably suffering the same fate that Ceaucescu suffered in Romania in December 1989.

  6. I saw on TV last night a French flag prominently displayed in Benghazi.

    The French military is very competent and a French lead here could be no bad thing.

  7. “But you’d have damned Obama if he had vetoed the UN resolution, wouldn’t you?”

    Actually, I would have applauded him for it. I’m still waiting for him to fully withdraw US forces from Iraq as Bush made a hash out of ‘nation-building’ in Iraq and even Afghanistan.

    “Was there a mass revolt against Sadaam before Bush invaded?”

    Actually, there was in 1991 while Bush’s father was POTUS and he mucked that up too.

    “Would Bush have invaded in 2003 if Iraq did not have the fourth largest oil reserves in the world?”

    Yes. Every bit of evidence from the UN, IAEA, CIA, MI5, et al pointed to Saddam’s regime possessing WMD’s of one sort or another and tolerating Islamic terrorism operations on their soil. Granted, the intel proved extraordinarily dodgy if not error-ridden, but Bush, Cheney, were hell-bent on invading Iraq to removing Saddam, refocus the theatre of ops vs. Islamic terroism, WMD’s, and a variety of other reason. Many of which I disagree with.

    “And Libya has less than one third of the oil reserves of Iraq, number nine in the world. And there will be no US boots on the ground.”

    We shall see won’t we? If one uses the experience of Kosovo and the former Yugoslavia as a measure, I’m afraid we will see US troops on the ground although most of the oil from Libya is exported to Italy and Europe.

  8. Jim

    Thanks for the considered reply. I agree with you about Iraq, but I think the west had to act on Libya. To stand by and let this scumbag murder tens of thousands would have been unconscionable.

    Shame on Germany for not supporting the resolution last night, but I expected no better from Brazil and India, never mind China and Russia.

  9. Most of the world’s countries are very amoral, and China and Russia in particular would sleep very well at night even if there were huge massacres in Benghazi.

    I am disappointed in Brazil. This was a moral and geopolitical no brainer. We can’t get involved in all conflicts, but this is one where we can control things from the sea and sky and there will be very little need for many boots on the ground from anyone.

  10. My problem isn’t quite about the decision to intevene in some fashion-I’m uneasy about that, it’s the timing. At this point, I’m not sure what can actually be done. Thousands(tens of 1000’s?) of rebels have died already, Gaddaffi’s forces clearly have the upper hand, and I don’t see that changing. I think the opportunity to remove Gaddaffi was missed.

  11. Phantom

    I think that Brazil and India both carry what you might call post-colonial chips on shoulders. Rightly or wrongly, but probably for several generations to come.

  12. Ironically, Gadaffi’s best fighter planes are Mirages supplied by France.

  13. I to some extent agree with you. This action would have been ten times easier a couple or three weeks ago. All the momentum was with the rebels, following the dramatic events in Tunisia and Egypt. A feather would have toppled Gadaffi a few weeks ago.


  14. Great link http://www.zerohedge.com/article/nigel-farage-blasts-eurocomission-president-van-rompuy-cozying-gaddafi-recently-december

    Farage shows up the EU yet again. Watch Van Rumpuy’s face as he is exposed.