If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!

    Even allowing for the uneasy relationship between reporting and reality from both sides in Libya’s civil war, Muammar Gaddafi’s regime seems on its last legs. Feeling jubilant over the downfall of Libya’s tyrant wouldn’t be a hard task as a rule. A particularly loathsome specimen even by Middle East standards, Gaddafi’s departure would have felt like a net gain for humanity as well as for his own country in 1969, when he seized power; in the 1970s, when he was murdering his rivals and opponents; in the 1980s, when he was sponsoring and facilitating terrorism all over the world; and in the 1990s and 2000s, when he was merely assassinating dissidents while pretending to turn over a new leaf.

    But, except for token shows of force, no one took him on. He was virtually rehabilitated, even fussed over at the 2009 G8 summit by the very NATO leaders who spent the last few months trying to dethrone and preferably pulverize him.

    It may happen now — it probably will — but it may not do any good. The “Arab Spring,” a phenomenon that has aroused the enthusiasm of many, has aroused mainly apprehension in me.

    On February 23, I wrote that “to optimistic observers, especially to eastern seaboard liberal-democratic types, the ouster of Tunisian tyrant Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali in January amounted to lighting a long fuse to blow up all tyrannies in the Middle East. Pessimistic observers agree that the fuse has been lit, except the ensuing explosions aren’t going to herald something better, such as democracy, but worse, such as theocracy.”

    My concern only increased when I saw much of the Western media not being able to tell the difference between a popular uprising and Egypt’s military ridding itself of Hosni Mubarak. I wrote that the question to ask wasn’t “Will the protesters win?” but “Will the protesters win if they do?” The answer seemed to me very much in doubt in Egypt, and increasingly so as the Arab Spring wore on. A month later, on March 30, I wrote that for the Obama administration “going into Libya, win or lose, may dwarf all foreign policy errors of the Bush administration combined.”

    Talking not just about Libya but the region as a whole, I suggested that “toppling a number of repressive, corrupt, inefficient and bellicose dictators friendly to the West and replacing them with equally repressive, corrupt, inefficient and bellicose dictators hostile to the West is the most likely outcome of the events that began in Tunisia in 2011. For historical models, think of the Ayatollah Khomeini replacing the Shah of Iran.”

    Beginning in the 14th century, the Ottoman Sultans had a force of captive Christians, called Janissaries. In our times, incongruously, it was a role NATO was beginning to assume. History’s greatest military alliance assembled to defend democratic Christendom’s frontiers, ended up as (unpaid) mercenaries protecting Islam’s. Having acted for Muslim insurgents against Serbia in Kosovo in 1999, NATO’s Janissaries were now acting for Muslim rebels they knew next to nothing about in Libya.

    I wrote that if we were lending our top guns to people, it might be salutary to have a street address for them — and NATO didn’t for Libya’s rebels. Who were they? As I wrote five months ago, “many of the Arab Spring’s stalwarts we’re invited to cheer, far from being friendly to liberal democracy, seem implacably and permanently hostile to it.”

    Commentators sanguine about the possibility of something good emerging from all the sound and fury included several I respected, such as Fouad Ajami. While admiring their optimism, I remained a pessimist. It seemed to me it wasn’t democrats spearheading the opposition to ruling Arab strongmen in the region but military or tribal competitors — at best. At worst, they were jihadists. Replacing killer colonels and ophthalmologists with Taliban-types in the Arab world seemed no cause for celebration to me.

    I agree with the Middle East Forum’s Daniel Pipes. The noted American commentator wrote a couple of days ago that he wasn’t joining those ready to party over the political demise of the foul Libyan Colonel just yet.

    “The NATO intervention in March 2011,” Pipes wrote, “was done without due diligence as to who it is in Benghazi that it was helping. To this day, their identity is a mystery. Chances are good that Islamist forces are hiding behind more benign elements, waiting for the right moment to pounce, as roughly happened in Iran in 1978-79, when Islamists did not make clear their strength nor their program until the shah was well disposed of. Should that be the case in Libya today, then the miserable Gaddafi will prove to be better than his successors for both the Libyan subjects of tyranny and the West.”

    Indeed. For the West to welcome the replacement of a friendly despot with an unfriendly democrat may show altruism, but welcoming the replacement of a friendly despot with an unfriendly despot shows only naiveté. As for pursuing replacement policies without finding out who is about to replace whom — well, there’s a word for that, too. It’s called negligence.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!

    Source, please...
     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from KittyDuke. Show KittyDuke's posts

    Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!

    How to stay on topic MovingTampon !!

    Why don't you shoot the messenger a few more times just to make sure !!

    If Iran was any model The Boat is quite correct.
    I can see the regional surrounding countries both salivating and afraid at the same time. Everyone will want a piece of the pie.
     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!

    In Response to Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!:
    [QUOTE]Source, please...
    Posted by MattyScornD[/QUOTE]

    http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/08/23/george-jonas-could-libya%E2%80%99s-next-rulers-be-worse-than-gaddafi/
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!

    Look your every critic hates Obama paranoia is silly. Its a logical topic but, if, you don't feel comfortable discussing issues that could potentially cause fall back on anything left then by all means abstain from the conversation. geez!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhichOnesPink. Show WhichOnesPink's posts

    Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!

    So not agreeing with someone = hating that someone

    Gotcha....brilliant way to view things....sigh
     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!

    In Response to Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!:
    [QUOTE]The article is a crock of crappola. The author goes back 700 years and tries to equate those events with today's. Give me a break. He then goes on to try to draw similarities between the Janissaries of 700 hundred years ago with the NATO mission to stop the ethnic cleansing campaign of Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic in the 90's. His opinion is that NATO was a puppet of the Muslims being massacred. It's a stupid rewriting of history. It's telling that he doesn't mention that those two Serbs are now on trial for the crime of genocide. It's apparent that Jonas has a tenuos grip on history, has a strong aversion to democratic rule, and favors the absolute rule of dictators along with their penchant for mass murder, as long as they are not anti-Western.  It's a ridiculously dumb article with no basis in fact, unless you call a reference to events 700 yrs ago relevent.
    Posted by airborne-rgr[/QUOTE]

    History can be, and often is relevent in world events! Just because he can't see the comparissons doesn't mean they don't exist 12angry.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!

    In Response to Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya! : Wow, you really are a paranoid delusional crackpot. But the FREAKIN FUNNIEST thing is that here you are posting all day and then following my posts..... Who's spending all their time in mommy's basement? BWAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA You're a complete and utter MORON!!!! What a freakin loser. Accusing someone by following them all over the boards and then posting after them. YOU ARE SUCH A LOWLIFE LOSER IT'S PATHETIC!!!! Now I just feel sorry for you. Only an anonymous coward would accuse from the safety of behind their keyboard and by DOING EXACTLY WHAT THEY ACCUSE. Even worse, because now you're stalking me. BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA YOU HIT THE TRIFECTA!!!! A COWARD, A STALKER AND A LOSER!!!! Congrats. 
    Posted by airborne-rgr[/QUOTE]

    Are you really 12? ordo you just have the maturity of a pre-teen?
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from s0ftsquash. Show s0ftsquash's posts

    Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!

    Yobama's hipocrisy:
    2008:  "Navy Seal Team 6 is Cheney's private assassination team." 
    2011:  "I put together Seal Team 6 to take out Bin Laden." 
      
    2008:  "Bin Laden is innocent until proven guilty, and must be captured alive and given a fair trial." 
    2011:  "I authorized Seal Team 6 to kill Bin Laden." 
      
    2008:   " Guantanamo is entirely unnecessary, and the detainees should not be interrogated." 
    2011:   "Vital intelligence was obtained from Guantanamo detainees that led to our locating Bin Laden." 

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from KittyDuke. Show KittyDuke's posts

    Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!

    We had three options:

    1. Intervene.
    2. Do nothing as tens of thousands are slaughtered in the street.
    (If the answer is "because it's not our problem", when do you step in?  A hundred thousand? A million? Never? Recall the last century's horrors).
    3. Support Gadaffi.

    The scenario and the options sounds just like Iraq now doesn't it?
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!

    How many are dead now in Libya?
    Do you think the rebels will say "we won so, now we need to invite ALL Libyans into the process?

    Or is there a good chance we will now see a civil war start to fill the vacuum?

    How much should we stay involved (spend money) now?

    I'm honestly not sure how it will go but, I know it's a long way from over.

    Now it's nation building or let them have at it. What do we do?

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!

    In Response to Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya! : Well, apart from being a different country with a different population, and an active rebellion.... Apart from the fact that the reason for intervention in Iraq we were told is that they have WMDs and pose a direct immediate threat to our national security. (They didn't, just ask Bush now). And apart from the fact that the intervention in this case was very narrowly limited to guns, money, advisers, and telling NATO to take the lead vs. Iraq, which was to send in 300,000 troops, ignore OBL and the Taliban in Afghanistan, on the brainddead assumption the populace would immediately form a "USA! USA! USA!" Democracy....    incurring a total cost of a trillion+ dollars, hundred thousand+ civilian casualties, thousands of our casualties, etc etc etc.... So yeah, ignoring all the massive vast and utter differences they are the same. Same in the sense that Mercury is just like Earth.
    Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow[/QUOTE]

    Now, now, they are both Muslim countries where miltary force was used. So the situations are "exactly" the same.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from KittyDuke. Show KittyDuke's posts

    Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!

    The radicals will go underground just like Vietnam and wait.

    When Americans are pulling out, the factions will surface.

    Throw in the element of other countrys and greed.. the entire region could destabilize in weeks.

    I don't see our commitment disappearing any time soon. I do share concern about NATOs patience.. vested interests. Surely the economic conditions do not support any country supporting a war or it's various costs (lives and dollars) for very long.
     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!

    In Response to Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya! : Wars are not comprable by the number of dead. This had no relation to Iraq. It was a popular revolution. We will try to influence and educate the Libyans as they move towards a country without Qaddafi. We'll spend some money but nowhere near the sum we wasted in Iraq. The Libyans have billions of dollars in unfrozen assets with which to rebuild.
    Posted by airborne-rgr[/QUOTE]

    The truth is we have no idea what it will take in Libya nor do we have any idea of who will emerge as the leader or what type of govt. We just expect it to be better than Qadaffi.

    What do you think spurred the rise for liberty in Iran. Syria, Egypt, Bahrain, etc??

    Iraq and the example the Iraquis set by voting under death threats and bombings!!

    Bush said it many times that we just need to show the people of the middle east and in other countries oppressed by dictators that liberty is achievable and the desire in the human spirit for freedom will do the rest!!
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!

    In Response to Re: If history holds true the next Libya may not be a better more friendly Libya!:
    [QUOTE] What do you think spurred the rise for liberty in Iran. Syria, Egypt, Bahrain, etc?? Iraq and the example the Iraquis set by voting under death threats and bombings!!
    Posted by sk8ter2008[/QUOTE]

    That's an enormous assumption that does not account for the many differences between these nations and their people.

    So basically, it's not true, no matter how much the neo-cons want to believe it.

    One could just as well say that Obama's Cairo speech empowered young people in these nations to throw off the yoke, etc., etc....and it would be just as much an exercise in dart throwing.

    You had it partly right the first time.  There's a long way to go, and a lot could happen between now and the libyan peoples' determination of independence as they see fit to establish it.

    Sorry, but democracy (much less our own dysfunctional version of it) does not arrive on the doorstep via fedex with a pictograph instruction manual and pre-sorted parts.
     

Share