Libya VI

I love that statement. I hear it all the time from the Hillary/Biden/Lieberman/Likudnik/AIPAC camp. It's a great euphemism for mass murder.

Dealing with Iran: a country that has not attacked or threatened to attack anyone. A country that is currently surrounded by the openly hostile and ultraviolent NATO, which has openly and repeatedly threatened to annihilate it. Yet we are told that it is Iran that is the problem. 

Hold fast, Libyan rebels! The Canadian Air Force is on its way! 

So it's all a lie that Iran in fact is doing all the threatening, that Iran in fact has the hidden agenda, that Iran in fact is supporting

most of the terrorist groups and has absolutely no qualms about killing their own. On top of that, there are quite a few Arab states

that live in fear of Iran. I used the term "deal with" to get my point across in the shortest form possible.

If by "quite a few Arab states" you mean "Israel," then yes, your assertion is somewhat accurate.

Did someone change the babble policy while we weren't looking? "Lovers of imperialism and zionism, come on down! You're the next contestant on, Bait and Provoke!!"

What is it with these characters? Slumming?

I don't agree with VectoV's - statements

Libya: Hypocrisy and Betrayal by the UN  - by Felicity Arbuthnot

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23767

"The bombing of Libya will begin nearly to the day, of the 8th anniversary of the beginning of the destruction of Iraq...

Libya too will be destroyed...The infrastructure will be destroyed. The embargo will remain in place. They will move in, secure the oil installations, and oil fields, the Libyan people will be an incidental inconvenience and quickly become 'the enemy', 'insurgents'...and a US friendly puppet 'government' will be installed.

The invaders will award their companies rebuilding contracts, the money - likely taken from Libya's frozen assets without accounting - will vanish and the country will remain largely in ruins.

And this Libyan 'Shock and Awe'? Shame on France, Shame on Britain, [SHAME ON CANADA AND ALL POLITICAL PARTIES THAT SUPPORTED THIS!] and the US and a UN avowed 'to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war.'

Every shattered body, every child maimed or blown to bits, every widow, widower, orphans, will have the name of those countries and the UN written in their blood on their place of death.

The countries who have ganged together these last days to overthrow a sovereign government, have, again, arguably conspired in Nuremberg's : "supreme international crime, differing only from other warcrimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.'

In time it will emerge, who was stirring, bribing, destabilising, and likely few will be surprised at the findings. But then, Libya will be long broken and its people fleeing, displaced, distraught. When it comes to dealing with the usual 'liberators', be careful what you wish for.

In 6 months or so, most Libyans whatever the faults of the last 40 years rule, will be rueing this day."

The Iranian government is not a problem to the region or world. Only to its own people.

Yeah, and last month Obama was Khaddafi's ally.

Well, he was being nice, Khaddafi that is.

Sorta like me having a friend that goes nutso one day and kills his family, uh we're not friends anymore.

Hypothetically that is.

Okay Catchfire, I always see the silver lining, so 1 outta 3 ain't bad.

10 Reasons to Say No to Western Intervention in Libya  - by Andrew Murray, National Chair Stop The War Coalition

http://warisacrime.org/content/10-reasons-say-no-western-intervention-li...

"Military aggression in Libya - to give it the right name - will be used to revive the blood soaked policy of 'liberal interventionism'. That beast cannot be allowed to rise from the graves of Iraq and Afghanistan.."

And in the real world, the US did kill a member of Khaddafi's family.

I think it was around 100,000 kids killed by the "coalition of the willing" that de facto included Canadian participation in all but name. That's 100,000 children killed by states that are members of the same despicable military alliance that Canada is a party to.

Instead of drawing attention to the monstrous hypocrisy of standing by while the Egyptian, Tunisian, Saudi and other regimes carried (and continue to carry out) violence against their own populations, the NDP does the usual pro-imperialist "Me too!" in regard to Libya along with the the war criminal Liberals and Conservatives.

I hope that political middle is worth it.

Sorry. I was off by 400,000 dead children.

Anger is good but please don't encourage the idiots.

A quick answer to our newest member from Hasbara who said:

We have this

So by "states" what he means is "despots and dictators friendly to Israel".

Yes, I can never forget that infamous quote.

Yeah, that must be why Paul Dewar condemned Harper for not moving fast enough against Libya as far back as Feb. 27:

That's the same Paul Dewar that praised Harper for boycotting Durban II.

With Mike and Paul at their side, the Libyan people's salvation is surely nigh!

I know, I know, "don't call me surely"...

You neglected to mention that the US has the Ronald Raygun Carrier Group in place with planes, drones, and cruise missiles - and amphibious vehicles that can be deployed from several US ships in the area carrying US Marines.

So - you're saying the world should just sit idly by and let Gadafi have his way with the civilians and rebels?

this intervention is neither 'humanitarian', nor 'liberating'. This is a war crime. The 'supreme' war crime. There is no lawful or ethical basis for it. If the people of Libya, perhaps even neighbours like 'revolutionary' Egypt, wish to lend support, to Libyan popular resistance, let them. Canada has no good reason for participating in this vile imperialist adventure for blood, oil and geopolitical advantage.

Actually, this intervention is necessary to prevent further war crimes from happening. Gadafi has threatened genocide against at least one city (Bengazi) and it was only the action by the UN that made him back down.

Libya's neighbours have had lots of time to organise against Gadafi - it is their lack of action that led the UN to finally intervene.

So - if not UN intervention - then what?

Christ, I give up.

I really thought the last 15 years of manipulation by the hyperviolent military-industrial powers would iinnure people from falling for the same shit again and again and again. Yet here we are, after Serbia, Kosovo, Yemen, Iraq, Afghanistan, Haiti, Somalia, etc, etc, etc, and people who consider themselves educated, savvy progressives hip to the ways of militarist propaganda one again falling into line and calling for blood and bombs. 

Fucking sad.

We should start a pool for when the first "appeaser" or "Munich" or "Chamberlain" reference is thrown down.

@ Jingles...

"Of one thing only can we be sure - we shall remain stupid." Voltaire

West Spurns Libya Call for Ceasefire  -  by Jason Ditz

http://news.antiwar.com/2011/03/18/west-spurns-libyan-call-for-ceasefire...

"The offers are largely calling on deaf ears in the West, however, where the decision to turn the internal conflict into a major international attack on Libya has already been made. French officials, indeed, say the attacks are likely to begin around 8:00 AM EST on Saturday, irrespective of what the Libyan government does between now and then..."

Even though in recent years he had cynically tried to ingratiate himself with "the west", I get the impression that some people still have a nostaligic soft spots in their hearts for Gadhafi. They remember the good old days when he ran training camps in Libya for the IRA, the Red Brigades and the Baader-Meinhof gang and when he was amusing himself ordering his agents to plant bombs on commercial airplanes...I think this is why I see such mixed emotions about Gadhafi, some people just can't decide whether he's "the good guy" or not.

I think it's the belief of some that "Western Countries" are the enemy, so anything they do is seen through that prism. It seems more likely than any love/long lost or not for Gadhafi 

You're asking people who started out with mid-power guns, and no formal military training, to run up against a state-sanctioned army, with tanks, fighters and bomber.

The intervention has as much legal authority as is concievable. Most countries on the planet are in favour of it. The Arab League is in favour of it. The African Union is in favour of it. The UN Security Council, who almost never agree on anything, are in favour of it. 

The intervention also meets every ethical ground concievable as well.

Just cause - Gaddafi's oppression and threats of the elimination of resistance fighters in Benghazi and other rebel held cities constitute a grave public evil.

Legitimate Authority - UN, Arab League, African Union

Probability of Success - With the UN taking air suporiority, they can effectly protect rebel fighters and the cities they hold.

Last Resort - Many, at this point, were saying that the protesters were 72 hours from being, as Gaddafi himself put it "cleansed"

Proportionality - A no-fly zone/air support will do far more good than harm in the long run. 

Washington's UN War Resolution on Libya  -  by Stephen Lendman

http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2011/03/washingtons-un-war-resolution-on-l...

"...it's to replace one despot with another, perhaps assassinate Gaddafi, colonize Libya, control its oil, gas and other resources, exploit its people, privatize its state industries under Western control, establish new US bases, use them for greater regional control, and perhaps balkanize the country like Yugoslavia and Iraq.."

And thus, alot of posters here will latch on to anyone who is willing to make broad denouncements of western imperialism, even if the human rights records of these rulers range from questionable to Stalin-esqe. I'd like these people to look at Al-Jazeera. They provide very good coverage from a democratic and West-skeptical point of view.

German Left Party Leader Votes in Favour of Military Intervention in Libya

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/mar2011/left-m19.shtml

"Handel's justifications reveals more than he intended. Both he and the Left Party faction in the EU parliament are in fundamental accord with all other parties regarding punitive measures against Libya designed to safeguard European interests in the oil-rich country and to stifle revolution throughout the Arab world.

The leadership of Libya's National Transitional Council consists of former ministers of Gaddafi who turned their backs on him at the last minute and immediately guaranteed the country's contracts with international oil companies. They have as little to offer the impoverished masses of Libya as Gaddafi in Tripoli.

Bisky's vote to support military intervention in Libya is an important lesson for all those seeking to oppose militarism and social attacks in North Africa and Europe. When the interests of the ruling class are seriously threatened, it can rely on Bisky and the Left Party. These pseudo-left forces will play the same role in the near future in Europe as social resistance develops."

beware of the same treachery by 'pseudo-left forces' here in Canada.

You think aggression and intervention are more acceptable if they come from "neighbours"? Like, home invaders from the next town are bad, but the bully next door is welcome any time? Do you have any clue (sorry) about international law? You think the U.S. had the right to invade Canada to stop the G20 arrests in Toronto?

That is a pretty weak analogy. Big difference between peoples right to assembly being trampled on and people being wholesale slaughtered.

Tell me something - are the Libyan opposition forces armed, or not? Are two sides actually shooting at each other, or is one side simply slaughtering unarmed civilians? Or do you know? Or care?

I'd feel more comfortable with that prism than with yours, which is the mirror image.

RT: French Warplanes Over Libya (and vid)

http://rt.com/news/international-military-action-libya/

French military jets have fired the first foreign shots in Libya, targeting military vehicles as enforcement began of the UN imposed no-fly zone. A French plane fired the first shot in Libya at 1645 GMT. A vehicle that was providing assistance to the Libyan military was the target. According to the latest unconfirmed reports, another 3 vehicles have been attacked.."

RT: Foreign Intervention in Libya: Creation of 4th War Theater (and vid)

http://tv.globalresearch.ca/2011/03/foreign-intervention-libya-creation-...

"Western nations are interested in Libyan oil and other resources, not protecting the people and that is why they care more about the fight in Libya than elsewhere in the Arab world."

When the WMD turned out to be a lie, the "Allied" invasion of Iraq was hastily converted as a war of liberation of the Kurds and Shias etc. from Saddam Hussein's murderers. When Osama Bin Laden was nowhere to be found (indeed, they rejected offers to hand him over to a third-party country), the U.S. and its bootlickers transformed the invasion of Afghanistan into the liberation of women and girls and whatever else.

In both cases, there was no shortage of "native" cowards vying for the role of U.S. puppet-in-chief.

There is no difference of kind - only of circumstance - between those recent experiences and the current aggression against Libya - which has probably already begun to take its toll.

For anyone describing herself as left or progressive to be confused about such matters would once have been a forgiveable error - today, it is the sheerest craven cowardice in the face of imperial ambitions and propaganda. People will look back at their applause for the warmongers today and wonder how they could have been such suckers.

This is not a matter of getting the most accurate news reports. This is a fundamental matter of where you stand on this planet.

and doesn't france get a large proportion of it's oil from libya?

to be honest, i'm kinda divided on this.  One one hand we know the history of US/NATO interventions, we know it's extremely hypocritical to take libya to task while essentially ignoring yemen, bahrain and all the other revolutions being crushed by force in the region.

On the other hand, i don't want to see libyas revolution stamped out by airstrikes and shelling of revolutionaries by a much more well equipped/trained libyan army when a series of well placed airstrikes could cripple the libyan military, and give the revolutionaries a big edge.  If ghaddafi can't launch airstrikes of his own, and if his columns of tanks/troops are destroyed before they reach the cities he's done for.  all he has is military force.

And since it's actually backed by a SC resolution that explicitly refuses ground troops and is supported by the arab league/AU and most other countries it is certainly a step in the right direction compared to the many US unilateral invasions...

The real question is are libyans asking for this or are we imposing it?  I'm sorta torn between my negative attitude towards nato and my hope that the libyan revolutionaries defeat ghaddafi.  

How? Airdrops? Drive it in from Egypt? Send ships to Benghazi? All of those methods entail risks that Gadhaffi will attack them, unless they are defended by people with big guns and planes.

There are so many dictators it is creating an unsustainable burden on white men everywhere.  How will we ever save everyone in the world and give them the benefit of our civilization?  

I can't tell if the real question is why Libya or which country is next.  How many countries will NATO protect by destroying their infrastructure?  It should be good business for SNC Lavalin.  That should be reason enough for Canada to be there protecting the people of Libya.  

The Hens were fed up. Fox lay in the corner of the henhouse, and grinned through bloody teeth. "We must rise up and defeat Fox", said Hen, "for we shall never be free while he's in here, and our chicks will never be safe!"

Fox grinned through bloody teeth. "Sister Hen" he said, "Don't concern yourself with such matters. Lay eggs, see that I am fed, and I will protect you from harm"

Hen had had enough. One morning, while Fox slept, the hens attacked. But what could they do, with stunted beak and wing, to defeat Fox, whose teeth gnashed and spit blood and feathers?

"We must have help", said Hen.

"Someone help Sister Hen!" cried Rat, looking through the boards at the fight inside. "Fox will kill them all!" Rat gnashed his teeth with worry, but his beady eyes beheld the eggs.

"We must help Sister Hen!" cried Badger. "There is much we can do to stop Fox". She shed tears and gnashed her teeth, and her black eyes beheld the chicks.

"We will help Sister Hen" cried Wolf. "My pack and I have the tools to stop it. We shall ask our Sister Bobcat, and our Brother Eagle to help us save the coop! For Hen shall live in freedom, and never more fear Fox's gnashing teeth." And their cold, white eyes beheld the warm nests within.

So Fox was vanquished. And Wolf, and Bobcat, and Eagle, and Badger, and Rat, rested contentedly and righteously, their teeth red with blood, and their beds soft with feather.

If this provides the defence Libyan democrats need to win - and does only that - I can deal with it.

10 year-long medieval siege followed by a good shellacking and military occupation. It'll be a repeat of the bloodbaths in Iraq and Afghanistan. They'll air lift some al-CIA'da to Libya from Central Asia and North Africa, like they did when creating militant Islamic bases in Bosnia and Macedonia and installing a criminal narco administration in Kosovo.

The Yanks want to protect their investment in the "Islamic Front for the Salvation of Corporate interests in Libya". Don't bullshit us, we're not stupid around here.

It's funny that you say that, since the death toll in Libya has, at this point, reached about 1/3 of that in Afghanistan. Difference is, while the War in Afghanistan has had 10 years to reach that number, Libya crossed the 10,000 mark in two weeks.

Mine,too...

Bullshit and exaggeration is not your talent. They never found any "WMD" in Iraq either. Why? Because that was Yanqui bullshit, too.  Like "nurse Nayirah" in Kuwait. And there were staged massacres in the former Yugoslavia Nazi Germany style as well.

The Gladio Gang Inc. are so full of shit that their eyes must be a deep brown by now and oozing out their ears and eye sockets.

Oh yes...well off under an iron fist, always looking over your shoulder, having to be very careful about what you say and to whom. Yeah, that could be categorized as well off in a really long stretch of the imagination.

Mostly because the anti-Gaddafi supporters are getting shot by the army.

I think, at this point, arguing is getting a little futile. Over the next couple of months, we'll see which one of our points of view is vindicated.

If Libya starts flying the American flag above their capitol, starves the country, butchers civilians, and literally steals thier oil, then I guess your right.

If NATO commits ground troops and Libya is getting thrown into a years-long quagmire where tens of thousands are getting killed then you're partially right, and I'm certainly wrong.

If the protesters/National Council take over and democratize Libya, then I'm right, and you'll claim that Obama is pulling the strings behind the scenes somehow.

Actually, Fidel. That shit is an Arab-based source from the International Criminal Court.

None of our vicious toadies in Ottawa nor their imperial masters in Warshington give a shit about Africans. They didn't say shit about Uncle Sam's proxies Rwanda and Uganda slaughtering 5 million Congolese since 1998. That's an ongoing holocaust in the name of the corporatocracy.

No, Libyans are not the most oppressed people in Africa. According to the UN HDI for 2010, Libya is at the top of the list for human development in Africa.

The only rights to be liberated in Libya are Libyans from their birth rights to Libyan oil.

Actually its more like, farm owner finds a fox in the hen house, and shoos it out of the coup.

Back to studying. I might not be back in this topic for a while. Thanks for joining me in this something-between-a-heated-argument-and-straight-up-flame-war.

Well, of course you are.That's his propaganda machine at work. He's into it up to his neck now. If in fact there are 10,000 dead in Libya, it sure as hell wasn't the UN forces that did that. I personally think this is going to be over quick and the international community is going to bend over backwards to make this work, because right now it is what the world in general needs and what the freedom loving Libyans want. I also can't see all this being over 2% or less of the worlds oil production.

I'm on the fence to see how it goes. (wussie eh?)

But I just heard Global tv news say "Canada is at war in Libya." I think that's incorrect phrasing.

I'm not sure if your speaking to me Fidel, but I can assure you, I am the last person you can brainwash.

Spot on WCG !

You don't come to the rescue of people by bombing and escalating a ground war. Did they rescue Iraq? No, they did not. They ended up murdering more than one million human beings. How can that be rescuing people.

This is not a "no-fly zone". What it is is a Nazi Germany style blitzkrieg attack on a sovereign country. Just like Hitler and the Nazis said that attacking and invading Poland was for humanitarian reasons, so, too, are the gladio gang incorporated using the humanitarian ruse to bomb and murder people in sovereign countries today. And they are doing it in Libya for a total of four theaters of war:

1. Pakistan-Afghanistan, 2. Iraq, 3. Palestine, 4. North Africa.

The BRIC countries and Germany are diplomatically opposed to this latest intervention and fascist attack on a sovereign country.

Quite right. It's far better to just bomb a country without declaring war on it. The U.S. has much to teach us in that area.

Stop confusing those who see no evil unless and until Obama and Harper declare it so.

Honestly, Al-Q, you know better than to pull anti-imperialism at a time like this, when the Libyan people just want someone like Nick Sarkozy or Silvio Berlusconi as their chef d'état.