The war in Libya continues.

bluecode

Far too much of this thread belongs in the Conspiracy theory forum not in Politics. People who don't seem to grasp the reality that most people in these countries got sick and tired of their despotic rulers and got rid of them for better or for worse. Whether they get a better government or not is quite another matter. Fully free and democratic Arab countries are thin on the ground.

It is also far too soon to be drawing conclusions based on the current round of settling scores and troublemaking. After every revolution there is a period of instability. Sometimes there's a counter revolution.

It's actually laughable that to suggest America orchestrated the whole thing. Have any of you forgotten Iraq? Yes that was a good example of brilliant strategic thinking on the part of the Americans. Frankly I can't help thinking none of this suits the Americans at all. They have a history of supporting hardline regimes. Gadaffi, Mubarrak et al are exactly the type of regime they can deal with. Not this chaotic semi anarchy with the potential for Islamists to seize power.

Ridiculous.

cyberhog

Human rights watch said residents of Bani Walid are at risk and said there is " an urgent need to stop destruction of the town"

Civilians have tried to flee the violence but say "militias under the guise of government forces shot at them to make them turn back"

As Jaafa mentioned Russia drafted a UN resolution on Bani Walid calling on the Libyan authorities "to take urgent steps to resolve the conflict by peaceful means " but it was blocked by the United States.

What is clear from these reports is that a year after Gaddafi's execution at the hands of Western-backed rebels, the US continues to support the militias efforts to slaughter every last Gaddafi loyalist in Libya.

cyberhog

Libya considers curfew for Benghazi as violence skyrockets.

TRIPOLI - Libya is considering imposing a curfew on the violence-wracked eastern city of Benghazi, its prime minister said on Wednesday, a day after a car bomb killed a police officer there.

...

He added that the "army and police will be deployed in the streets and that draconian measures will be taken to maintain security."

Benghazi has emerged as a hub for jihadist groups, including militants who killed US ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans in an attack on the US consulate last September 11.

Many diplomatic missions and international organisations, such as the United Nations, have scaled down or ended operations there after envoys were targeted.

Italy temporarily closed its consulate in Benghazi on Tuesday and pulled its staff out of the country following a failed gun attack on the consul.

http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=56505

Welcome to the new Libya, where one of the largest cities in the country now serves as a hub for terrorists.

cyberhog

Report: Libya on the road to oil failure

WASHINGTON, Jan. 18 (UPI) -- An editorial from Bloomberg News states that Libya may eventually fail as a petro-state unless it does more to address ongoing security and political woes.

...

Bloomberg's editors note that "real progress is impossible" unless the country tackles institutional and security challenges.

"A failed petro-state in Libya remains a possible outcome of the revolution that began two years ago this week," they state.

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Energy-Resources/2013/01/18/Report-Libya-on-the-road-to-oil-failure/UPI-69921358516789/

Not only has Obama's botched regime change operation screwed up Libya, it has also turned some neighbouring countries into hostile danger zones and terrorist training camps.

analysts say that without the arrival of Libyan weapons and trained fighters, it would have been far more difficult for Mali’s extremist groups to seize control of the country’s vast desert north.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/africa/algerian-hostage-crisis-throws-spotlight-on-spillover-of-libyan-war/2013/01/18/56f9532e-61b6-11e2-9940-6fc488f3fecd_story.html


So much for it being one of the most successful missions in NATO history.

AlekSmart

cyberhog wrote: »

Report: Libya on the road to oil failure

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Energy-Resources/2013/01/18/Report-Libya-on-the-road-to-oil-failure/UPI-69921358516789/

Not only has Obama's botched regime change operation screwed up Libya, it has also turned some neighbouring countries into hostile danger zones and terrorist training camps.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/africa/algerian-hostage-crisis-throws-spotlight-on-spillover-of-libyan-war/2013/01/18/56f9532e-61b6-11e2-9940-6fc488f3fecd_story.html

So much for it being one of the most successful missions in NATO history.

All so predictable,for those who focused on Libyan reality rather than the self-fulfilling propaganda which proceeded NATO/UN's action.

I,however,differ from the accepted wisdom here in that I do not believe the "Great Satan" America was the driving force behind Col.Gadaffi's overthrow and execution.

I believe that the European "elite",a loose alliance of Berlusconi,Sarkozy,Cameron,Merkel,Rutte and their relevant backers were at the core of the Libyan adventure.

Americas role,was always about being the big-stick left in the cupboard just in case those Libyans did'nt buy into being rescued from their long-time oppressor.

We know that significant numbers of Libyans did not buy-into this European crusade,but once the PR ball had been pushed then it gained an ever increasing momentum until the Gadaffi end game.

What many western observers still appear to have difficulty with is the fact that Gadaffi was Libyan to the core,and made no secret of his desire to see his country maintain a strong presence in the greater North-African region.

We can be reasonably confident that the Malian situation now requiring the expertise of France's military machine,would not have arisen had Libya remained under Gadaffi's leadership.

It is interesting to watch the French embark on this military crusade against the onward Islamicist threat,one which Gadaffi was well aware of,and,adapt at dealing with.

It is open to debate whether we,in our lifetimes,will get the full unabridged account of exactly what led to UN 1973 and all that followed.

The story-line we all need to accept is based largely upon Gadaffi's blood-curdling threats to use Anti-Aircraft weapons on Benghazi civilians as well as other Gadaffi-ism's about "Rats in sewers" etc.

Now,as New Libya struggles to emerge from the debris,we stand watching a potentially far greater threat to innocent civilian life across North Africa as a whole,which our original happy bunch of European forces will struggle to understand,never mind contain.

cyberhog

AlekSmart, I agree with your assessment except I think you give the Euro "elities" too much credit.

When the operation was over the US Defense Secretary gave a warning to NATO that revealed the truth about Europe's capabilities.

Mr. Gates said that NATO had become a two-tiered alliance divided between those who bore the burden of defense spending and those along for a free ride.

He warned of “a dim if not dismal future” for the alliance unless its European members increased their participation, and he said that Washington would not forever pay for European security when the Europeans could do that for themselves.

..."nowhere were the gaps more obvious than in critical enabling capabilities — refueling tankers, the provision of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms such as Global Hawk and Predator drones."

Without those American assets, “the Libya operation would have had a very difficult time getting off the ground or being sustained,” he said.

...

NATO’s shortcomings have long been the subject of black humor in Afghanistan, where American military officers sometimes refer to the official NATO command — called the International Security Assistance Force, or ISAF — as “I Saw Americans Fighting.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/06/world/panetta-exhorts-european-nato-members-to-share-defense-spending.html?_r=0

It was important for the legitimacy of the operation that it had the appearance of a multinational military intervention. To that end, the US delegated much of the PR work to Sarkozy and Cameron, to make it seem as though the Europeans had a lead role. It was all bluster. The US orchestrated the whole thing.

Jaafa

In regards to the above, it was quiet well reported that the European airforces ran out of ammo not long into the enforcement of the no fly zone and had to take US shipments to compensate.

I find it impossible to think they did not know in the first place that they would not have enough ammo, and so the only conclusion I can come to is they knew, or had guarantees the US would step in and help them.

AlekSmart

cyberhog wrote: »

AlekSmart, I agree with your assessment except I think you give the Euro "elities" too much credit.

When the operation was over the US Defense Secretary gave a warning to NATO that revealed the truth about Europe's capabilities.



http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/06/world/panetta-exhorts-european-nato-members-to-share-defense-spending.html?_r=0

It was important for the legitimacy of the operation that it had the appearance of a multinational military intervention. To that end, the US delegated much of the PR work to Sarkozy and Cameron, to make it seem as though the Europeans had a lead role. It was all bluster. The US orchestrated the whole thing.

I stand corrected,then,on the USA's role,although I remain a believer in,a so far well concealed, murky Euro involvement.

The Berlusconi/Sarkozy axis in itself as a bottomless pot for both Financial and Social shennanigans.

Just to confirm,and most likely infuriate some,I consider Gadaffi to be a far more principled and democratically minded leader than either of of the above.

Gadaffi's belief in his own principles and country,misplaced as they may well have been,place him well above the French and Italian leaders in my league table of principles.

Mssrs Cameron and Hague too figure beneath Gadaffi IMO,but remain mere pack-members when placed alongside the former Libyan coloniser and his gallic accomplice.

Like it or not,the deposition of a strong Libyan leadership and a stable country has directly led to the potentially disasterous North African situation we currently see.

How long,I wonder,until we are being asked to help starving displaced Nigerois,Algerian and others to survive their apocalypse....:(

G Power

AlekSmart wrote: »

I stand corrected,then,on the USA's role,although I remain a believer in,a so far well concealed, murky Euro involvement.

The Berlusconi/Sarkozy axis in itself as a bottomless pot for both Financial and Social shennanigans.

Just to confirm,and most likely infuriate some,I consider Gadaffi to be a far more principled and democratically minded leader than either of of the above.

Gadaffi's belief in his own principles and country,misplaced as they may well have been,place him well above the French and Italian leaders in my league table of principles.

Mssrs Cameron and Hague too figure beneath Gadaffi IMO,but remain mere pack-members when placed alongside the former Libyan coloniser and his gallic accomplice.

Like it or not,the deposition of a strong Libyan leadership and a stable country has directly led to the potentially disasterous North African situation we currently see.

How long,I wonder,until we are being asked to help starving displaced Nigerois,Algerian and others to survive their apocalypse....:(

can you please explain how Gaddafis principles were misplaced exactly??

Have you read his green book? you should check this video out too https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THlaMUq6MKU

Jonny7

AlekSmart wrote: »

The Berlusconi/Sarkozy axis in itself as a bottomless pot for both Financial and Social shennanigans.

Just to confirm,and most likely infuriate some,I consider Gadaffi to be a far more principled and democratically minded leader than either of of the above.

Maybe I'm a little hazy I don't remember Sarkozy seizing power, subsequently outlawing elections, the free press and any opposition, while at the same time siphoning off up to 200 billion of his country's wealth over a period of four decades.

G Power

Jonny7 wrote: »

Maybe I'm a little hazy I don't remember Sarkozy seizing power, subsequently outlawing elections, the free press and any opposition, while at the same time siphoning off up to 200 billion of his country's wealth over a period of four decades.

ok, so are you saying to me that somebody could fill Gaddafis shoes?

Sarkozy may well have been elected democratically but trying to paint him as a saint is a massive fail. Most grown ups today, are smart enough to realise that what passes as democracy in the west is a faux democracy and that if voting changed anything it would most likely be abolished, for our own good I lol at the fact that from beyond the grave Gaddafi is haunting the french weasel! http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/03/gaddafi-financed-sarkozy-campaign-2007_n_2403097.html

here's a 9 minute video of what Libya was like before the new world order came and took it all away https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XorKTwkFPDU

i defy you to tell me whatever plays out in Libya will be better than what was on offer before they were "liberated". that would be impossible in my view. The true depth of what happened in Libya still hasn't dawned on most people

wake up and smell the coffee for the love of all that's good!! Gaddafi was no saint but he had a handle on things and was fighting a great fight against the free worlds agenda right up until the bitter end

Jonny7

G Power wrote: »

Sarkozy may well have been elected democratically but trying to paint him as a saint is a massive fail

He was elected. Any comparisons with Gadaffi can end there thanks.

G Power

Jonny7 wrote: »

He was elected. Any comparisons with Gadaffi can end there thanks.

ok, so do you at least acknowledge that democracy has it's flaws that have suited the greater players agendas for far too long or are you in complete denial as to what is happening in the greater picture??

i do realise this could be a huge ask as there are none so blind as those who will not see

AlekSmart

G Power wrote: »

ok, so do you at least acknowledge that democracy has it's flaws that have suited the greater players agendas for far too long or are you in complete denial as to what is happening in the greater picture??

I do realise this could be a huge ask as there are none so blind as those who will not see

Quite true G Power.

G Power

AlekSmart wrote: »

Quite true G Power.

my spidey senses are telling me you're being a smartalek

AlekSmart

G Power wrote: »

My spidey senses are telling me you're being a smartalek

Not really G Power,As the poster with whom you're jousting regarding Sarkozy=Good,Gadaffi=BAD will most certainly not be seeing your point any day soon....:rolleyes:

The demonization of Gadaffi was always a necessary part of the UN/NATO exercise and it worked,put bluntly the UN/NATO PR was better than Gadaffi's.

The reality,post Gadaffi's execution,however has been of a Despotic Leader who'se domestic excesses never really appeared on the scale at all.

Apart from the Abu-Salim prison massacre,there has been little hard evidence of the genocidal attacks upon which the UN based its decision to get Gadaffi.

I would,at this stage,have been confident that the Libyan Freedom Fighters themselves would have uncovered mass-graves in the thousands,with incontrovertible evidence of Gadaffis guilt.

I guess Gadaffi's legacy will probably end up having to be the Great Man Made River project,a visionary and single-minded project unequalled by any of those "Leaders" who rushed to topple him.....;)

http://www.water-technology.net/projects/gmr/

When completed, irrigation water from the GMR will enable about 155,000ha of land to be cultivated - echoing the former Libyan leader's original prediction that the project would make the desert as green as the country's flag.

Given the almost total desertification of Libya,I make no apology for seeing Gadaffi's MMR project as being of prime importance to any culture attempting to live in such an environment.

Let's see what UN/NATO's vision for Libya entails ?

G Power

AlekSmart wrote: »

Not really G Power,As the poster with whom you're jousting regarding Sarkozy=Good,Gadaffi=BAD will most certainly not be seeing your point any day soon....:rolleyes:

ok, it's just you never can tell around these parts.

Jonny7

AlekSmart wrote: »

Not really G Power,As the poster with whom you're jousting regarding Sarkozy=Good,Gadaffi=BAD will most certainly not be seeing your point any day soon....:rolleyes:

I certainly hope this isn't a reference to myself. To call Sarkozy or Berlesconi (one of whom I detest but I disgress) less democratically minded that Gadaffi is beyond ridiculous.

The demonization of Gadaffi was always a necessary part of the UN/NATO exercise and it worked,put bluntly the UN/NATO PR was better than Gadaffi's.

Pre-uprising he was universally reviled by just about everyone. Over 100 nations, including the likes of Iran, publically condemned his actions. No PR needed.

The reality,post Gadaffi's execution,however has been of a Despotic Leader who'se domestic excesses never really appeared on the scale at all.

Eh, up to 200 billion, mansions all over the world, public funds which his children could "dip" into.

Apart from the Abu-Salim prison massacre,there has been little hard evidence of the genocidal attacks upon which the UN based its decision to get Gadaffi.

Driving armor across the desert threatening to kill the cockroaches is one sure way to get the attention of the UN, Russia, China, the Arab League

I would,at this stage,have been confident that the Libyan Freedom Fighters themselves would have uncovered mass-graves in the thousands,with incontrovertible evidence of Gadaffis guilt.

Is there some law dictating that a certain bodycount must be reached before international action is taken?

I guess Gadaffi's legacy will probably end up having to be the Great Man Made River project,a visionary and single-minded project unequalled by any of those "Leaders" who rushed to topple him.....;)

Ah Hitler and Stalin those great visionaries with their large social projects. So misunderstood.

Strange how the Libyan people don't seem to be bemoaning his loss as much as yourself.

Let's see what UN/NATO's vision for Libya entails ?

Well if it's a 40 year nepotistic dictatorship with a large internal security apparatus and water project then I know one person who will be very happy.

G Power

Jonny7 wrote: »

I certainly hope this isn't a reference to myself. To call Sarkozy or Berlesconi (one of whom I detest but I disgress) less democratically minded that Gadaffi is beyond ridiculous.


Pre-uprising he was universally reviled by just about everyone. Over 100 nations, including the likes of Iran, publically condemned his actions. No PR needed.

are these the same countries that were laughing at Gaddafi during that now infamous 90 min speech he gave during Obamas first UN meeting? as he chillingly predicted his own murder or the murder of any other state leader who have allowed themselves to be bullied into complete submission by the veto countries aka the UN "security" council https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKMyY2V0J0Y


Eh, up to 200 billion, mansions all over the world, public funds which his children could "dip" into.

who cares, the Libyans were one of 5 countries left on the planet that were left in control of their own monies meaning they got debt free money from the banks, free electricity, free health care etc etc etc. Hell, if we had that here I'd vote for the man who brings it in and enforces it to have the same perks and benefits without a seconds hesitation!!

...

Jonny7

G Power wrote: »

are these the same countries that were laughing at Gaddafi during that now infamous 90 min speech he gave during Obamas first UN meeting? as he chillingly predicted his own murder or the murder of any other state leader who have allowed themselves to be bullied into complete submission by the veto countries aka the UN "security" council https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKMyY2V0J0Y

Really, was that before or after he demanded 7 trillion in payment for colonialism?

Entertaining stuff

who cares, the Libyans were one of 5 countries left on the planet that were left in control of their own monies meaning they got debt free money from the banks, free electricity, free health care etc etc etc. Hell, if we had that here I'd vote for the man who brings it in and enforces it to have the same perks and benefits without a seconds hesitation!!

lol, you ever met a Libyan? yeah you might want to talk to them about that.

G Power

Jonny7 wrote: »

Really, was that before or after he demanded 7 trillion in payment for colonialism?

Entertaining stuff

and why shouldn't he demand compensation for what has been inflicted on the African Nations??

AlekSmart

Nothing personal Jonny,life's too short for that,however there are a few who support your revulsion for the Man we all knew as Gadaffi-The Great (Oppressive) Dictator.

Jonny7 wrote: »

I certainly hope this isn't a reference to myself.To call Sarkozy or Berlesconi (one of whom I detest but I disgress) less democratically minded that Gadaffi is beyond ridiculous.

?? Which one ?

Pre-uprising he was universally reviled by just about everyone. Over 100 nations, including the likes of Iran, publically condemned his actions. No PR needed.

I'd suggest that much of this revulsion was down to the relative success of his tenure of Libyan leader.
He did,uncontestably,support and contribute to terrorism at a very unstable time in world,and,somewhat uniquely in modern world history,apologised for it and offered restitution.

Eh,up to 200 billion, mansions all over the world, public funds which his children could "dip" into.

I have seen reports of these mansions,but I would not put them up there at the levels of other despots,more admired by the developed world...our friends in the house of al-Saud would put him to shame for example.

Driving armor across the desert threatening to kill the cockroaches is one sure way to get the attention of the UN, Russia, China, the Arab League

His threats were directed at those who,at the time,were only getting into their revolutionary stride and the support for whom was somewhat muted,both within and without Libya itself.


Is there some law dictating that a certain bodycount must be reached before international action is taken?

.I would suggest that there is indeed a level of "badness" which will be "tolerated" as long as one does'nt upset certain applecarts,such as Gadaffi was threatening to do with telecommunications and African self-sufficiency..


Ah Hitler and Stalin those great visionaries with their large social projects. So misunderstood.

Strange how the Libyan people don't seem to be bemoaning his loss as much as yourself.

.Odd,but I find the Hitler/Stalin comparisons quite weak,as they point to a desire to simplify away Gadaffi's rule,and it just wont fit that comparitive format.

As for the bemoaning of the Libyan people,it is indeed difficult to quantify their desires and opinions on Gadaffi,some undoubtably always disliked his rule,others equally stridently,supported it..the vast majority I suspect,simply got on with their lives on a level far above their fellow North Africans.
.

Well if it's a 40 year nepotistic dictatorship with a large internal security apparatus and water project then I know one person who will be very happy.

It obviously was'nt large enough then was it ?

It was also one of the less savvy dictatorships I've come across,as can be gleaned from the numbers of New Libyan revolutionaries who were in Gadaffi's jails before being pardoned and released....a bit of the benevolent dictatorship there mayhap.?.at least these folks can share in the happiness ?

Jonny7

AlekSmart wrote: »

however there are a few who support your revulsion for the Man we all knew as Gadaffi-The Great (Oppressive) Dictator.

Not quite

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reactions_to_the_Libyan_civil_war

Condemnation from virtually every country.



Below countries which recognised the NTC and not Gadaffi as the legitimate authority in Libya (in blue)

AlekSmart

Jonny7 wrote: »

Not quite

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reactions_to_the_Libyan_civil_war

Condemnation from virtually every country.

Below countries which recognised the NTC and not Gadaffi as the legitimate authority in Libya (in blue)

I'm happy enough to share a spot with Hugo Chavez,Jonny.

Its certainly a very full and comprehensively compiled page detailing a somewhat incredibly concerted Worldwide reaction to Gadaffi's threat to anhiliate his own people,is'nt it ?

So full and comprehensive in fact,that whilst I commend it's (after the event) post hoc thoroughness,I remain sceptical.

The list is of itself impressive,but it does not provide,for me, any unbiased insight into matters Libyan.

AlekSmart

I suppose,in keeping with the Thread Title,the latest developments in Benghazi are worth introducing into the debate...

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/ireland-among-european-countries-urging-citizens-to-leave-libyas-benghazi-3364198.html

I was somewhat amused,if not surprised by this little gem....

A LOT OF THREATS

The city has been the scene of power struggles between various armed Islamist factions. U.S. intelligence officials say Islamist militants with ties to al Qaeda affiliates were most likely involved in the deadly Sept. 11 assault on the U.S. mission in the city, Libya's second biggest.

Libya, whose vast desert borders are hard to police, fears that France's military operation in Mali could fan Islamist flames at home, and Libya's foreign minister called for United Nations peacekeepers to be deployed in Mali to prevent uprooted fighters destabilising countries nearby.

Security experts said the European warnings were probably in response to threats from groups angered by the French operation in Mali and inspired by the attack at In Amenas.

One European national security official said "a lot of folks" were doing "a lot of threatening".

I'm sure it will be argued that whilst Gadaffi's regime had a stable security system in place along those same borders,it was not the right sort of security,and totally different to that which the current Libyan Foreign Minister desires somebody else to provide.

Means Of Escape

bluecode wrote: »

Far too much of this thread belongs in the Conspiracy theory forum not in Politics. People who don't seem to grasp the reality that most people in these countries got sick and tired of their despotic rulers and got rid of them for better or for worse. Whether they get a better government or not is quite another matter. Fully free and democratic Arab countries are thin on the ground.

It is also far too soon to be drawing conclusions based on the current round of settling scores and troublemaking. After every revolution there is a period of instability. Sometimes there's a counter revolution.

It's actually laughable that to suggest America orchestrated the whole thing. Have any of you forgotten Iraq? Yes that was a good example of brilliant strategic thinking on the part of the Americans. Frankly I can't help thinking none of this suits the Americans at all. They have a history of supporting hardline regimes. Gadaffi, Mubarrak et al are exactly the type of regime they can deal with. Not this chaotic semi anarchy with the potential for Islamists to seize power.

Ridiculous.

Things looking swell now in Libya a year on.
US backed Syrian revolutionaries will be a great change from Assad.
Egypt couldn't be better after the "Arab Spring", bit more tweaking to do .
Iraq speaks for itself.