Is Libya the new Iraq?

[sunnyp]

So have we started something which we cannot finish? Is this a new war for oil which the west cannot achieve?

This is an invitation to all NATO and non-NATO persons to say what they feel on the subject. To me, this feels like another long campaign which we first thought was easy, but will actually be a long and costly shit-storm.

Let's not forget to be respectful of others' opinions throughout. 

[Sean]

meanwhile Lockerbie bomber is still saying goodbye to his family in the safety of his lush home.  funny dat' --  "LOCKERBIE bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi has been enjoying chauffeur-driven trips in a Lamborghini to see his new mansion being built in Libya."   I guess he is planning on sticking around after 2 years..   there is a god!

but yea sunny....  any reason to keep an eye on the bubbly 

[mooney]

probably a little more similar to the overthrowing of mossadeq in Iran, 1953, with regard to nationalistic policies. The reason Iraq has gone on so long is because of grassroots uprisings by the people. Here there seems to be *slightly* more common ground between "us" and the "rebels". Of course, this has nothing to do with humanitarianism.

[sunnyp]

probably a little more similar to the overthrowing of mossadeq in Iran, 1953, with regard to nationalistic policies. The reason Iraq has gone on so long is because of grassroots uprisings by the people. Here there seems to be *slightly* more common ground between "us" and the "rebels". Of course, this has nothing to do with humanitarianism.

I've drawn parallels between Iraq and Libya because of the time context. It's interesting how old conflicts were reported, fought and settled, and how they differ to new conflicts. I suppose this may have striking similarities with an old conflict, but be so different in terms of strategy etc.

I hope that our leaders have learnt from Iraq and Afghanistan. However, to date, it seems like they haven't.   

[mooney]

I've drawn parallels between Iraq and Libya because of the time context. It's interesting how old conflicts were reported, fought and settled, and how they differ to new conflicts. I suppose this may have striking similarities with an old conflict, but be so different in terms of strategy etc.

I hope that our leaders have learnt from Iraq and Afghanistan. However, to date, it seems like they haven't.   

Almost certainly parallels with reporting and media coverage (the noble west vs a monster dictator). I drew the Iran '53 comparison (which was a coup, not a bombing campaign) due to the underlying policies... which you can see from the internal records and, with regards Libya, in the wikileaks documents. Gaddafi isn't a reliable dictator (like the ones we usually support). The threat of nationalism (referred to as a "virus" because it can spread) is intolerable to western imperial powers (in this case the major 3 - US, UK and France) in the same way it was when Mossadeq was nationalising oil in Iran, or Nasser's nationalist policies in Egypt.

The goal was always, and is now openly conceded, as regime change. Which isn't what UNS 1973 permits. To my knowledge Gaddafi has called for 2 ceasefires, both without reply (or rather, there was a reply - more bombing and violence). Essentially we, or rather, "we", want to install a more obedient client, which does in indeed have similarities with Iraq. Although that's the only real comparison i think there is.

There's plenty more to be said of course, but personally im a little tired and hungover!

[Rocket Queen]

Lol at NATOs appology for "accidentally" bombing civilians that are on "their team".

[polar]

from a US pov, obama has no authority to send any US forces there.

it's funny that the US president has become a 1 man dictator that can just kill any figure in the world, such as khadafi or bin laden, without even a kangaroo court trial in absentia.  our congress just rubber stamps any kind of spending be it for corporate welfare or waging war.  taxes, no matter how you spin it, are still theft, it's just okay if the person stealing gets a govt paycheck and wears a govt badge.  it's ok to kill people using drone attacks as long as they're "gooks or towelheads"

in a nutshell, libya is mass murder, there is no reason for a western nation to be there.  they don't threaten us.  the state is a murderer who steals your privacy, and the people demand their increased presence to ward off the boogie man of the month they themselves give power, be it a banker or a terrorist

[mooney]

http://www.medialens.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=632:three-little-words-wikileaks-libya-oil&catid=24:alerts-2011&Itemid=9

good article on the motives behind the war and western mainstream media complicity.

[sunnyp]

from a US pov, obama has no authority to send any US forces there.

it's funny that the US president has become a 1 man dictator that can just kill any figure in the world, such as khadafi or bin laden, without even a kangaroo court trial in absentia.

It's just like George Bush sending troops to Iraq to get Saddam Hussein, isn't it?

[polar]

It's just like George Bush sending troops to Iraq to get Saddam Hussein, isn't it?

in theory yeah, well, maybe.  i think bush had congressional approval to wage war, but he should still be put on trial and hanged for treason

[sunnyp]

in theory yeah, well, maybe.  i think bush had congressional approval to wage war, but he should still be put on trial and hanged for treason

Sarkozy is in trouble. The little man needs a war to boost his popularity. Every new British Prime Minister gets one free war: Cameron has chosen Libya.

I honestly hope Britain and America remain strong for my lifetime. A world with America at the helm is not perfect, but I'm sure it's a much nicer place than if China or Russia were in charge. I think a lot of the "banter" between Brits and Yanks on this site is often confused for criticism. For me, being able to criticise a state shows that one lives in a true democracy. 

[mooney]

Sarkozy is in trouble. The little man needs a war to boost his popularity. Every new British Prime Minister gets one free war: Cameron has chosen Libya.

I honestly hope Britain and America remain strong for my lifetime. A world with America at the helm is not perfect, but I'm sure it's a much nicer place than if China or Russia were in charge. I think a lot of the "banter" between Brits and Yanks on this site is often confused for criticism. For me, being able to criticise a state shows that one lives in a true democracy. 

you say that but China's foreign policy is an absolute picnic compared to UK/US. In deaths alone, the UK has been complicit - either through direct violence and aggression (terrorism, by our own standards), or indirectly through proxy wars, backing of brutal tyrants, overthrowing democratic regimes/supporting coups etc.... in about 10 million since 1945. Never mind displacement of people, damage to social infrastructure and crucial resources like crop fields (remember we only bomb defenseless third world nations).

Seeing as Cameron is part of a double act, dya reckon he gets 2 attempts? Blair had 2 all by himself.

EDIT: Blair had 3 (i forgot the NATO bombing of Serbia).

[sunnyp]

you say that but China's foreign policy is an absolute picnic compared to UK/US. In deaths alone, the UK has been complicit - either through direct violence and aggression (terrorism, by our own standards), or indirectly through proxy wars, backing of brutal tyrants, overthrowing democratic regimes/supporting coups etc.... in about 10 million since 1945. Never mind displacement of people, damage to social infrastructure and crucial resources like crop fields (remember we only bomb defenseless third world nations).

Seeing as Cameron is part of a double act, dya reckon he gets 2 attempts? Blair had 2 all by himself.

EDIT: Blair had 3 (i forgot the NATO bombing of Serbia).

Yeah, but we're so organised that we kept count. I'm pretty sure that a country like China has killed millions of people, but they just didn't write a list.

Blair did have 3. If you consider Sierra Leone as one, then that makes 4.

[mooney]

Yeah, but we're so organised that we kept count. I'm pretty sure that a country like China has killed millions of people, but they just didn't write a list.

Blair did have 3. If you consider Sierra Leone as one, then that makes 4.

actually the count was made by a brilliant historian called Mark Curtis. I highly recommend his books and his other work (he has a website and research site with some very interesting research documents).