My thoughts on Libya 2

108 posts / 0 new

Topic locked

Wed, 2011-04-27 23:42

Frmrsldr

Snert wrote:

I guess I can't really buy into a lot of this "compromise" business because as far as I can see, Gadaffi has no real legitimacy. Why should what he wants be taken into account? Why should the same Libyans who've been living under his rule for 40+ years now have to go beg him for whatever scraps he's willing to "compromise" on? That just doesn't make sense. To me, anyway.

I could suggest one other possibility that the Libyans could consider, and that in my humble, non-Libyan opinion seems reasonable:

1. Gadaffi immediately steps down
2. The people of Libya organize themselves and form a provisional government on their own
3. The Provisional Government of Libya holds free and fair elections
4. Gadaffi runs for office

If the people decide Mo' wasn't that bad, they can vote him right back into office. And if they don't, they don't.

That seem fair to you?

[Bolding added]

No. (That does not seem fair to me.)

Notice it's all your opinion.

What right do countries and persons who are not Libya and Libyans have to decide what is right and good for Libyans?

None.

If Libyans get to a point where they are in a position to hold an election/referendum to determine the future and nature of their government (they're not there yet), they will have got there as a result of our illegal War of Aggression, regime change against Libya and choosing sides. Not on the basis of any free and independent actions of Libyans themselves.

A careful reading of your above post reveals that it is nothing more than another justification for our war on Libya.

Thu, 2011-04-28 00:39

#53

Snert

Quote:
Notice it's all your opinion.

Notice it? All you've done is bold the parts where I was explicitly stating as much. When I say "in my humble, non-Libyan opinion" I thought I was kind of acknowledging that this is my opinion, and that I'm not Libyan.

But thanks for the reminder all the same.

Thu, 2011-04-28 00:51

#54

Fidel

Should the people of Chile sit down for a long talk and a hug with members of the Pinochet regime still running for elections? Sit down and chat with GHW Bush and thank him and the CIA for insulating the dictator and regime from justice?

What about dozens of US-backed dictators who simply died of natural causes and some of them having lived out the rest of their lives in peace and prosperity in Florida and California as rewards for jobs well done?

Thu, 2011-04-28 00:55

#55

Frmrsldr

Snert wrote:

Notice it? All you've done is bold the parts where I was explicitly stating as much. When I say "in my humble, non-Libyan opinion" I thought I was kind of acknowledging that this is my opinion, and that I'm not Libyan.

At no point did you make an effort to find out what's really going on in Libya and what Libyans "want."

You just assert the (unstated) assumption that what the U.S., the U.K, France, Canada, etc., are doing is good and just for Libyans and that Libyans "want" that.

Do you still assume/believe that?

Thu, 2011-04-28 01:02

#56

Fidel

It's whatever UNcLe SAm says goes in this democracy for amateurs hour. It's a pattern for some people.

Thu, 2011-04-28 09:26

#57

Snert

Quote:

Indeed, what right do you or I or the U.S.A. or the U.K., or France, or Canada, or Italy, or anyone have to tell (with war and bombs, i.e. force and killing) the Libyans to do anything?

Absolutely none. Right?

I would agree to the point that if the rebels say "we don't want your assistance any more" then any foreign help should leave immediately.

But you seem to be suggesting that the uprising against Gadaffi's rule began with the UK, and not Libyans themselves. We're not "telling" them anything.

If I ask you to help me move my sofa, and yoiu help me, are you then somehow "telling" me something? Of course not.

Quote:

You just assert the (unstated) assumption that what the U.S., the U.K, France, Canada, etc., are doing is good and just for Libyans and that Libyans "want" that.

Quote:

[url=http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/950261--libyan-rebels-pin-hope... Provisional Transitional National Council of Libya has asked for immediate action[/url] to halt the flow of arms and mercenaries to the Gadhafi regime and is asking for protection from air raids as it continues its efforts to push the revolution toward Tripoli. But on the ground, many Libyans are pleading for even more - including actual air strikes on Gadhafi's fortified Bab Al-Aziziya barracks in Tripoli.

"You don't need Tomahawk missiles to flatten the entire compound. Just a few bombs to breach the walls," Abdullah Shanaki, a grandfather from Ajdabiya, told the Star.

"Open the door, and the people of Tripoli will do the rest. It will save so much Libyan blood. We pray for this answer."

My bold.

Thu, 2011-04-28 11:50

#58

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

The problem Snert is that neither you nor I nor anyone else who isn't Libyan really knows who speaks for the people. Is it the brutal dictator. Well he still appears to have some support and his regime compared to his neighbours has provided the economic goodies over the forty years so that is to be expected. However there is no doubt there is a large segment of the society that wants him and his party gone because they have apparently become bloated and corrupt. However there is no logic that says that the Provisional Council speaks for all the or even most of the people who want Gaddafi ousted.

You are accepting the legitimacy of people who have their power because NATO has handed them the guns and in unprecedented manoeuvres has allowed access to the wealth of the people to this unelected group led by expats who have lived in the US for decades. I do not accept any such legitimacy for them and see them as the tool of NATO not the will of the people. NATO's presence is the reason I cannot tell because foreign intervention has all kinds of consequences that are not easily isolated to a single cause.

What I don't get Snert is if you accept the legitimacy of the Provisional government why do you constantly talk about Cuba as a dictatorship? I guess you would also recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan or did the rigged elections last year satisfy your standards for legitimizing a government backed by a NATO occupying force.

Thu, 2011-04-28 12:35

#59

Snert

Quote:
What I don't get Snert is if you accept the legitimacy of the Provisional government why do you constantly talk about Cuba as a dictatorship?

I'm agnostic regarding the legitimacy of the Provisional government, and I don't assume they speak for all Libyans. But it seems to me that there is a significant chunk of the Libyan population who, like a similar chunk of the Egyptian population (etc.), would like a say in their governance. I accept the legitimacy of their struggle. I accept the legitimacy of someone like Abdullah Shanaki, quoted above, wanting a change from four decades of dictatorship.

Also for the record, I'm not at all thrilled by the involvement of other nations in this. But without the help, the Libyan rebels might as well just kill themselves and save Gadaffi's forces the trouble. Without assistance, they're kind of outgunned, it seems. So for so long as they welcome assistance, I'm not going to go to great lengths to criticize that assistance, or where it's from. I do note that Zimbabwe was kind enough to help Gadaffi with some extra troops. What else has any other African country done for the people (not the dictator) of Libya?

Thu, 2011-04-28 13:27

#60

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

But you seem to have accepted the compromise forced on the people of Egypt. The NATO backed military is in control of the government and that was a major compromise that came about by negotiating between the protestors and the Egyptian regime. That is what peaceful movements do. I do not see the same thing in Libya.

There is no way to end the bloodshed because one side is now demanding everything they want guaranteed as an outcome before the negotiations have even started. As well I don't trust groups that import their leadership from expats who have lived in luxury in the West. It looks to me that these rebels have as much legitimacy as the Karzai government. I hope for the sake of the people of Libya their country does not tumble into the chaos that has befallen both Afghanistan and Iraq. That chaos is the greatest evil that a civil society can face. A truce and talks have to happen now for the good of the people.

Thu, 2011-04-28 20:01

#61

Frmrsldr

Snert wrote:

I would agree to the point that if the rebels say "we don't want your assistance any more" then any foreign help should leave immediately.

But you seem to be suggesting that the uprising against Gadaffi's rule began with the UK, and not Libyans themselves. We're not "telling" them anything.

If I ask you to help me move my sofa, and yoiu help me, are you then somehow "telling" me something? Of course not.

[Bolding added]

Notice the words "any more."

The uprising with the Libyan Libertarias initially began in the same way the peaceful protests began with the Tunisian, Egyptian, Kuwaiti, Yemeni, Bahraini, Western Saharan, Moroccan, Syrian, etc., people.

Just like our wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen and (covert CIA war) in the DRC and elsewhere, nobody asked us to wage war on these countries. We just took it upon ourselves to wage war on them.

In the case of Libya, the Libyans did not ask us to convene a United Nations Security Council meeting. Libyans did not ask us to pass UNSCR 1973 the "No-Fly Zone" resolution. To add insult to injury, the Resolution reads that it, "Authorizes Member States... to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory..." and we have violated the resolution. Libyans did not ask us to do this either.

The no-fly zone was supposed to be a defensive war to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack (i.e., cities, towns, villages, etc.,) at the time, Gadhafi's forces either completely or nearly completely controlled all Libyan northern cities except Tobruk and Benghazi, which was under imminent threat of attack. Oh look, Benghazi is even mentioned by name in UNSCR 1973.

Our original mandate was to protect (any) "civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack." As the only "civilian populated area[] under threat of attack" at the time was Benghazi, that was all we were authorized to do - defend Benghazi (by preventing if from being attacked by (potentially) advancing Gadhafi forces.)

Not to extend the "no-fly zone" over all of Libya's airspace.

Not to wage a War of offense or Aggression.

Not to choose sides.

Not to attack Tripoli, Ajdabiya, Misrata, and other cities (UNSCR 1973 authorizes us to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack. By attacking civilians and civilian populated areas, we have violated the Resolution yet again by becoming the attackers. The Resolution does not mention any attackers by name. Therefore, anyone who attacks civilians and civilian populated areas is an "attacker" and has violated the Resolution. The Libyans also did not ask us to attack them or their cities) or fly over the Libyan countryside seeking out to attack radar, anti-aircraft guns and missiles, tanks, AFVs, APCs, military trucks and vehicles, ammunition depots, army baracks, etc.

Not to place "a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory."

Not to attempt regime change.

Not to attempt to assassinate Moammar Gadhafi (by bombing his home in Tripoli with Tomahawk missiles.)

All of these violations of the letter and the spirit of UNSCR 1973 and all relevant international laws, we have done.

By choosing sides and engaging in regime change, we are forcing a particular outcome of the future of Libya. An outcome that would not have occurred naturally.

This is what we are "telling", dictating or forcing upon the Libyan people.

Are people born heroin addicts?

No.

Some people start out experimenting or using heroin "recreationally" and then end up with an addiction once they start the habit.

Not all Libyan rebels asked for Western military interference but once given, they are now dependent, "hooked" or "addicted" to it.

So, going back to your sofa analogy;

What we are doing in Libya would be like us being neighbors and I go up to you, unasked, and call a moving van, march into your house and start chucking your furniture on your front lawn - doing it under the unstated conviction that it is in your best interests, it's for "your own good."

You don't think I would be "telling" you something?

Fri, 2011-04-29 09:27

#62

Bec.De.Corbin Bec.De.Corbin's picture

Yeah but one problum with that is only governments have and control most of the weapons the rebels really need... my local gun shop dosn't carry Javlin anti-tank missles.

For example I could, in theory, go crew an M1 or M60 tank for the rebels... the problem would be where would the tank come from?

If that counsel buys or gets some tanks from the US or whomever is that interference or a business deal between "governments"?

In the end it comes down to your threshold of what constitutes interference is.

Fri, 2011-04-29 10:30

#63

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

Bec.De.Corbin wrote:

In the end it comes down to your threshold of what constitutes interference is.

Selling or giving arms to either side is interference. Providing military advice is also interference. It was for the French in Vietnam and the Russians in Afghanistan. The UK "advisors" will follow the same pattern because their presence will not be enough to turn the tide of the civil war. More people will die in Libya because NATO has intervened than would have been killed in a short civil war no matter how brutal.

The more we arm the angry men the more innocent civilians will be killed by both sides. I have seen this pattern on too many occasions to really expect anything more than a quagmire that will last for years and kill tens of thousand if not hundreds of thousands of Libyans. A short brutal war would have killed hundreds or maybe even thousands but as this progresses it becomes apparent the body count will be far higher because of Nato's interference.

Fri, 2011-04-29 16:24

#64

Noah_Scape

And just to complicate things, we don't really know if Libyans want Gaddafi or not, because we cannot trust the MSM...

Here is a video that tries to show that Libyans don't want Gaddafi taken out:

http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_62878.shtml

But surely the brutal dictator is not loved. Perhaps the alternative - domination by western/Global Elite powers - is less loved.

Fri, 2011-04-29 16:25

#65

Noah_Scape

And just to complicate things, we don't really know if Libyans want Gaddafi or not, because we cannot trust the MSM to tell the whole tale ...

Here is a video that tries to show that Libyans don't want Gaddafi taken out:

http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_62878.shtml

But surely the brutal dictator is not loved. Perhaps the alternative - domination by western/Global Elite powers - is less loved.

Fri, 2011-04-29 18:22

#66

CMOT Dibbler

this is ridiculous.

All right,

The American intervention in Libya is a bad thing. It is motivated by corporate greed, and a desire on the part of chicken hawk politicians to appear strong, and warlike in the run-up to political contests that will ultimately decide their future.

I do not, however, believe that we can really know the true nature of the insurgency that is currently battling Gaddafi. I referred to the Libyan opposition as being "pro-democracy" there isn't evidence to support this. They use the flag of King Idris as their symbol for Christ’s sake.
Fidel, insists that there is some deep dark conspiracy to install a Bin Ladinist government in Tripoli, and that the opposition fighters are firmly affiliated with CIA backed Muslim extremists. I'm not sure about that either, and dozens of blog posts, by spoiled pastey bourgois activists who live thousands of miles from Libya, but believe their experts on the region because they read Wikileaks and have devoured every book ever written on CIA black ops, does not convince me either. Does Bob Fisk have any commentary on the Libya situation? (Besides the stuff I already posted from Al Jazeera). Has he given any credence to the idea that the opposition are made up of Al Q fighters?

Fri, 2011-04-29 23:02

#67

Fidel

CMOT Dibbler wrote:
I do not, however, believe that we can really know the true nature of the insurgency that is currently battling Gaddafi. I referred to the Libyan opposition as being "pro-democracy" there isn't evidence to support this. They use the flag of King Idris as their symbol for Christ’s sake.

You started out well. I disagree though with your suggestion that we can not know the true nature of the insurgency. We most certainly can know something about them in spite of the lamestream newz media not doing their jobs. There are independent reporters we can turn to, as in, real people interested in the truth and not hirelings loyal and obedient to the corporatocracy.

CMOT Dibbler wrote:
Fidel, insists that there is some deep dark conspiracy to install a Bin Ladinist government in Tripoli, and that the opposition fighters are firmly affiliated with CIA backed Muslim extremists.

I think that as an individual, I can not possibly know everything about world affairs. I am not so naive that I would make such a claim. I think together, though, interested babblers are capable of weaving threads of truth. I read other opinions here, I do. And I read the independent reporters opinions as well. I did not make it up that al-Qaeda are there in Libya and being aided by the west. Sometimes truth is not evident. We can, however, look for patterns and precedents in order to arrive at certain opinions. And my opinon is shared by others. They may not be in the majority of opinions, and I appreciate that fact as well.

I have merely repeated, paraphrased and parroted the opinons of others that al-Qaeda is a creation of western intelligence agencies and funded by western world taxpayers money. Whistleblowers from a very corrupt government we are all familiar with have stated for the record that this is still occurring today. That very corrupt government south of us is hiding the identities and truth concerning an entire organizational layer of al-Qaeda there in America. They funded them, trained and armed them over the years and continue to do so in various countries. This is what a vicious and corrupt empire is reduced to doing in order to maintain some semblance of an enemy. It's a lie.

Fri, 2011-04-29 23:08

#68

CMOT Dibbler

Do you believe the whole arab spring is a CIA plot?

Fri, 2011-04-29 23:24

#69

Frmrsldr

Bec.De.Corbin wrote:

Yeah but one problum with that is only governments have and control most of the weapons the rebels really need... my local gun shop dosn't carry Javlin anti-tank missles.

For example I could, in theory, go crew an M1 or M60 tank for the rebels... the problem would be where would the tank come from?

If that counsel buys or gets some tanks from the US or whomever is that interference or a business deal between "governments"?

In the end it comes down to your threshold of what constitutes interference is.

Uncle Sam, though he would like to, doesn't own the arms industry market.

Rebel leaders (People) can make deals with local small to medium, shall we say "private enterprizers or entrepreneurs or privateers" (People) arms dealers.

I realize some may see this as a little unsavory perhaps, but hey, it's an alternative. "Power to the People."

War is not the only response to this situation.

War should be the choice of last resort, if at all.

There are other options:

We the People can help the People of Libya by providing humanitarian assistance, assisting refugees who are fleeing the war and assisting the People in brokering a transition to a peaceful solution.

Fri, 2011-04-29 23:46

#70

Fidel

No, but I think there has been a lot of damage control from the CIA and their western world friends. The CIA have private connections to corporate interests. It was decided decades ago that what's good for the corporate world is good for America. This is not a new theme. During the time of the British empire, there was the British East India Company which handled much of England's foreign affairs. French corporations also have interests in Libya today.

There is a holocaust happening in the Congo today and since the late 1990s. We would never know it if relying on Canadian news agencies. They won't tell us much about it because the trail of over 5 million corpses leads to the cell phones we use and fine furniture made from old growth forest strip-mined from forests in the Congo by foreign lumber companies. Corporate greed and the extents they go to in re-colonizing Africa is not something they want us to dwell on. We are supposed to be happy with our shiny new phones and PDAs and the hardwood flooring that was once a number of trees in some country they've used and abused. Something has to happen in between the plunder and the coveting of resources by foreign corporations. This is it. What's happening in Libya today is that bit of piracy and crooking and robbing and even what Marx described as original accumulation and even primitive accumulation in the form of plunder and theft. The corporatocracy has no plan to share Libya's oil wealth with ordinary Libyans. They will setup another corrupt stoogeaucracy in Tripoli after they murder Gadhafi and key members of his government.

Sun, 2011-05-01 01:11

#71

Frmrsldr

Snert wrote:

Also for the record, I'm not at all thrilled by the involvement of other nations in this. But without the help, the Libyan rebels might as well just kill themselves and save Gadaffi's forces the trouble. Without assistance, they're kind of outgunned, it seems. So for so long as they welcome assistance, I'm not going to go to great lengths to criticize that assistance, or where it's from. I do note that Zimbabwe was kind enough to help Gadaffi with some extra troops. What else has any other African country done for the people (not the dictator) of Libya?

The governments of the U.S.A., the U.K., France and Canada assisted the Transitional National Council (i.e., "governing representative body" or "government") of the rebels, with their militaries.

The government of Zimbabwe assisted Gadhafi by sending troops.

If what's happening in Libya is to be a Revolucion Libertaria - a Liberated Peoples' Revolution and if the Peope of Libya are to be assisted, then We the People of the U.S., Canada, etc., should provide the assistance to the People of Libya. Not our governments. If We the People (People like you and I) wish to assist the the Libyan People, then we can go to Libya, grab a gun and join them. Or provide aid for the victims of the war. Or assist the refugees fleeing the war. Or work together for a peaceful and negotiated settlement. Otherwise our governments shouldn't militarily interfere into other peoples' business where they don't belong.

See the difference between government (often military) interference and assistance provided by People to People on a basis of freedom and equality?

Sun, 2011-05-01 17:00

#72

CMOT Dibbler

I did not make it up that al-Qaeda are there in Libya and being aided by the west.

Who provided you with this info? Do they live in Libya? Do they speak Arabic, or more to the point, do they speak arabic well?

Mon, 2011-05-02 01:45

#73

Fidel

[url=http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/29/us-libya-usa-intelligence-idUS... NATO Commander Admits Al-Qaeda Linked to Libyan Rebels[/color][/url] Reuters

[url=http://abcnews.go.com/International/president-obama-authorizes-covert-li... Obama Authorizes Covert Help for Libyan Rebels[/url] ABC Newz

Who are Gadhafi's political opposition and Libya's rebels?

They are the NED(CIA)-funded NFSL, and they are a few of Libya's miltary commanders propped-up by European governments and U.S.

[url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/840... rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links[/url] Telegraph

[url=http://articles.latimes.com/print/2011/apr/17/world/la-fg-libya-qaeda-20... rebel's story shows links to Taliban, Al Qaeda, NATO[/color][/url] LA Times

What kind of rebels are into [url=http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24308][color=green... Banking and privatization of Libya's highly profitable oil reserves?[/color][/url] Globalresearch

Thu, 2011-05-05 18:31

#74

CMOT Dibbler

Oh...

Fri, 2011-05-06 00:03

#75

CMOT Dibbler

Are there any members of the opposition who aren't intervention friendly?

Fri, 2011-05-06 19:06

#76

CMOT Dibbler

No. No. No. No!

What the Americans are presenting is an oversimplification. They say that they are the heroes riding in on their steel clad white horses to dispense frontier justice with six shooters blazing, ready to deal with a man who was supposedly about to commit genocide, but in fact has yet to do so)

Babblers are presenting an oversimplification as well. The American government is saying that they are backing the rebels. What reason would they have to lie? It's good PR. Why pass up a chance to look like Steve McQueen in The Magnificent Seven?
However, this idea that Gadhafi put forward that every single one of the opposition fighters are Muslim extremists, bandits and drug addicts, serpents in the what Moe considers to be a paradise of his making, is a huge steaming pile of horse manure. Yes, there probably are racist fundamentalist bastards working within the opposition, but there must be good people as well, just as they were many good people who joined the Stalinist international brigades during the Spanish Civil War.
Again, I ask the question, what happened to all the people who initially started the uprising against the Gadhafi? They can't all have taken up arms, so where are they?
I'm really really ashamed of Babble at this juncture. Instead of discussing peacemakers we are discussing warmongers. What is happening to Libya's peaceniks and pacifists? Can we discuss this, or do we have to keep treating this conflict as if it were a Sgt. rock graphic novel.

Fri, 2011-05-06 19:48

#77

NDPP

Hey CMOT, I post pretty much anything and everything I come across and there's not much on 'peaceniks and pacifists' in Libya. If you want to keep looking for this particular item please do and post whatever you find. The more the merrier. As for me, I am satisfied that this is a western instigated regime change operation from start to finish, designed not to deliver democracy to Libyans but to deliver Libya to Westerners, especially oil interests and imperial strategists. Wish it wasn't, but sure looks like it to me. Invasion, occupation, despoilation is the most likely scenario. Cheered on by our citizenry befuddled by propaganda and sold out lib-left collaborators selling this as a 'revolution' and 'humanitarian intervention'.

Perhaps, as Canadians, we should be concerning ourselves with the fact it is a Canadian General overseeing NATO's Libyan campaign and that his war crimes and murder-the-leader strategies are being supported across the Canadian political spectrum. Where's the outrage? Why the complete lack of an effective anti-war movement? The Great Gamers appear to have the field virtually unopposed here.

Fri, 2011-05-06 20:41

#78

CMOT Dibbler

But the uprising began peacefully enough. You're saying all of that was staged. That there are no people who wanted to end Moe's rule in a peaceful way?

Fri, 2011-05-06 20:54

#79

CMOT Dibbler

Do you, NDPP believe that the whole arab spring is a CIA plot?

Fri, 2011-05-06 21:01

#80

NDPP

It looks like most of what we saw was pretty much set up and planned ahead of time and the guns came out virtually immediately along with the exaggerted claims of regime atrocities, hugely inflated casualty figures and then the high level ministerial defections to the CIA contra camp and we were away to the races. The rest you know and is as they say history.

I'm sure there were those unhappy with Mo aside from the Benghazi CIA contras, but like Iraqis with Saddam, what came down the pipe sold as 'liberation' was anything but. I'll post up anything I find along the lines you suggest but so far I've seen hardly anything. Understandable - once the shooting war starts, those you cite often disappear or are forced to keep their heads down and await better days.

Fri, 2011-05-06 21:03

#81

NDPP

CMOT Dibbler wrote:
Do you, NDPP believe that the whole arab spring is a CIA plot?

NDPP

No, but once they knew there was such a horse, they sure did everything they could to steer it in directions they preferred...

Fri, 2011-05-06 21:23

#82

CMOT Dibbler

You are saying it has failed?

Fri, 2011-05-06 21:27

#83

CMOT Dibbler

"hugely inflated casualty figures"

Mo didn't crack down?

Fri, 2011-05-06 21:45

#84

CMOT Dibbler

Should Al Jazeera be trusted when it comes to coverage of the Libyan conflict?

Fri, 2011-05-06 21:52

#85

Frmrsldr

CMOT Dibbler wrote:

I'm really really ashamed of Babble at this juncture. Instead of discussing peacemakers we are discussing warmongers. What is happening to Libya's peaceniks and pacifists? Can we discuss this, or do we have to keep treating this conflict as if it were a Sgt. rock graphic novel.

Generally speaking, there seems to be an underlying assumption that the U.S.A. and the E.U. (with some Arab League countries thrown in for good measure) have the right to take it upon themselves to militarily (or otherwise) interfere in the affairs of Libya.

Not all babblers hold these views.

Some of them have argued expressly against this.

Who are the babblers who have spoken out against foreign wars and intervention?

Fri, 2011-05-06 21:55

#86

CMOT Dibbler

NDPP wrote:

CMOT Dibbler wrote:
Do you, NDPP believe that the whole arab spring is a CIA plot?
NDPP

No, but once they knew there was such a horse, they sure did everything they could to steer it in directions they preferred...

How much CIA interference was their in egypt, for example Do you think the yanks wanted Mubarak out?

Fri, 2011-05-06 22:18

#87

CMOT Dibbler

Who are the babblers who have spoken out against foreign wars and intervention?

Wha...?

Most of the people in this thread have. What point are you trying to make?

Fri, 2011-05-06 22:35

#88

Frmrsldr

CMOT Dibbler wrote:

Who are the babblers who have spoken out against foreign wars and intervention? Wha...? Most of the people in this thread have. What point are you trying to make?

Then why is the pinata you are blindly stiking at this urge to militarily interfere in the affairs of Libya?

We have no such right.

Who among us cares (or even knows) who the Libyan Libertarias/rebels are or what they want?

What goes on in Libya is nobody's business but the Libyans.

Fri, 2011-05-06 22:43

#89

CMOT Dibbler

"Who among us cares (or even knows) who the Libyan Libertarias/rebels are or what they want?"

What about all the links that Fidel provided? Surely that gives us some indication.

Fri, 2011-05-06 22:45

#90

CMOT Dibbler

Oops!

Fri, 2011-05-06 22:46

#91

CMOT Dibbler

Oops!

Fri, 2011-05-06 22:54

#92

Frmrsldr

Frmrsldr wrote:

Who among us cares (or even knows) who the Libyan Libertarias/rebels are or what they want?

CMOT Dibbler wrote:

What about all the links that Fidel provided? Surely that gives us some indication.

Indication of what?

That Fidel advocates our foreign military interference in Libya?

Fri, 2011-05-06 23:13

#93

NDPP

CMOT Dibbler wrote:
You are saying it has failed?

NDPP

sorry, I had some comp problems.

re: your questions - on Egypt: If the Gaza blockade is lifted by Egypt, it will signal something of importance has definitely happened there. If not, clearly nothing worthy of the name 'revolution' has happened there, in my view. As for CIA involvement in Egypt, it would appear there was involvement and 'steering' as previously mentioned.

As for Libya, the numbers of the casualties ascribed to Gaddafi forces were grotequely inflated without substantiation or corroboration but this outrageous steady escalation seems to have abated - presumably because the sums were insupportably and unbelievably huge.

Al Jazeera English definitely has an agenda, especially on Libya reporting, but as bad as the commentators can be, the on the ground reporting and video footage is still better than anything CBC ever runs. I have been a subscriber since it was available here. I cannot for the life of me figure out what Farber or other zios were afraid of - AJE doesn't gore Israel's ox very much at all as far as I can see. As bad as it is it is still head and shoulders above the dismal rightist wasteland of Canadian domestic sources.

Hope this is useful, I try and post anything that looks halfway informative from across the spectrum as do others and if you peruse the links on, for instance, Libya or Egypt, you will have a pretty good basis for forming some opinions on what's happening. Especially when compared to an exclusive diet of CBC, Globe, Star, NP, CTV etc. Hope so anyway.

Sat, 2011-05-07 22:06

#94

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

CMOT

I'd like to read those as well so please post some for us. I haven't really found any links myself. I suspect that Gaddafi is probably as well liked as Harper. I hate Harper and I suspect if I lived in Libya I wouldn't have mush use for Gaddafi either. Do you have any knowledge of an anti-Gaddfi socialist movement or is that wishful thinking?

Sat, 2011-05-07 23:00

#95

Frmrsldr

I'll post these:

Tell me what you think.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2011/0506/Libya-s-western-reb...

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-libya-hero-20110506,...

Sun, 2011-05-08 00:39

#96

Fidel

CMOT Dibbler wrote:
I'm disappointed that board members aren't posting articles by moderate anti-imperialist Libyans.

Like Afghans and Iraqis, they could be pre-occupied with other things, like trying to put food on the table and stay alive even.

During the Vietnam war, for instance, there were only a handful of English lang. independent news reporters allowed into the country. One of them was Conrad Black, Another was a person named Hunt from Texas. There was Pilger, for sure and a few others, but he went there to report on the facts. But all in all the people of Vietnam had little time for news reporting. Today the right has made efforts for news media blackouts in countries where their covert and military operations take place. Panama was an example of that. Pinochet's Chile was another example. The idea today is to cover-up the activities of their right wing death squads and war crimes committed.

CMOT Dibbler wrote:
We've fallen into the same trap that the mainstream media has, in that we have been tricked into believing that their are only two factions in this conflict. The pro-Gadhafi fascists, and the pro-American fascists.

Either way the Canadians and Americans and Brits and France and Egypt have no business interfering in the affairs of a sovereign country. If it's a civil war, there is still no justification for foreign interference except for maybe aid and relief. But any military assistance or similar interference is against international law since Nuremberg. Why is this so difficult to understand? Do we need a redo of WW II as a reminder as to why it's wrong? 50-83 million dead? No thnx.

Sun, 2011-05-08 14:03

#97

CMOT Dibbler

No, ye daft man! It's an indication of where the Libyan opposition stands!

To be clear, I am not disappointed in Babblers because they unflaggingly support American imperialism. They do not.
I'm disappointed that board members aren't posting articles by moderate anti-imperialist Libyans.
We've fallen into the same trap that the mainstream media has, in that we have been tricked into believing that their are only two factions in this conflict. The pro-Gadhafi fascists, and the pro-American fascists. By sidelining the peaceful anti-imperialist, anti-Gadhafi socialists, we are in fact turning Gadhafi into a good guy by default. This is not a good thing.
The man is no friend of the left.

*More to come…

"Indication of what?

That Fidel advocates our foreign military interference in Libya?"

Sun, 2011-05-08 21:29

#98

Frmrsldr

CMOT Dibbler wrote:

It's an indication of where the Libyan opposition stands!

I'm confused:

What is an indication of where the Libyan opposition stands?

Which Libyan opposition?

Where does which Libyan "opposition" stand?

What do they stand for?

Who is "they"?

Do "they" stand for anything?

Do you know what "they" stand for?

Do you know who "they" are?

Mon, 2011-05-09 00:28

#99

CMOT Dibbler

Don't those articles give some credence to Fidel's assertion that the Libyan opposition is essentially a right-wing group which is being supported by the US?

Mon, 2011-05-09 01:02

#100

CMOT Dibbler

Oops! I guess I should say the most visible faction within the entity anti Gaddafi resistance, since I'm fairly certain that there are other more moderate people out there, fighting the good fight against Mo, people who also oppose American Imperialism.

Mon, 2011-05-09 01:22

#101

Frmrsldr

CMOT Dibbler wrote:

Oops! I guess I should say the most visible faction within the entity anti Gaddafi resistance,...

Our friend Fidel has made his claims and backed them up with links.

CMOT Dibbler wrote:

... since I'm fairly certain that there are other more moderate people out there, fighting the good fight against Mo, people who also oppose American Imperialism.

CMOT my friend, you are expressing your beliefs by 'thinking aloud' but you have not provided links to back them up.

I'm confused:

You expect your friends at babble to supply you with links to back up your beliefs and arguments?

The Christian Science Monitor link I provided wasn't what you were looking for?

Pages

Topic locked