America Sanctions Libya, Gaddafi Blames LSD Coffee on Capitol Hill
Ok, Gaddafi did not say anything crazy this time. He probably just does not give a shit. We blacklisted 9 Libyan companies, which would be like telling Hitler that we banned the import of BMWs and Siemens fridges.
Really, the situation in Libya is completely the US's fault.
I understand that there are those who believe the role of the United State should not be to get involved in regional conflicts. They point to Vietnam and Iraq as examples of how the United States gets it wrong. First, I don't think that we were wrong to go into Iraq. We went in for the "wrong" reasons, and we did not handle the situation well once we were there, but fundamentally, the US should be in the business of deposing murderous dictators who slaughter their own people.
Let me give you a related example. I believe very strongly in personal rights and freedoms. I also believe that there are situations where the individual is not capable of protecting their own rights and freedoms, and that is where a government needs to step in. Whether this be because the individual is not capable on their own (children, elderly, the impaired) or because they are facing an overwhelming force (gangs etc), it is often necessary that to protect the freedom of the individual the government must act.
In the case of nation states, there is nothing above the government. No further power. The UN was meant to fill that role, but basing action upon consensus only works for fish.
The US should and has randomly and somewhat arbitrarily taken that role over the past 60 years. I believe that the US should be much more firm about it, and about why it is necessary, and why we are taking the fight to the despots of the world. Screw WMDs, the fight here is about protecting human life and moving the world towards a better future.
The people of Libya rightfully revolted against their horrendous government and its crazy leader, and in the first few weeks when the regime could easily have been toppled, the United States did... nothing. Absolutely nothing. Any why is that so critical? People have to believe that Gaddafi will fall, or they will be unwilling to turn on him. If the US had backed the rebels in the first few weeks, many more would have deserted - no one wants to be on the losing side. Instead, we waited. And those who were on the fence waited also. No, believing that there is a good change Gaddafi will remain, they are unwilling to act, because nothing is worse than being on the wrong side of a coup.
I can't say at this point that we totally blew it. But instead of a quick revolt and a move to democracy, we have a civil war, with thousands more dying than necessary. Thanks Obama, thanks.
Really, the situation in Libya is completely the US's fault.
I understand that there are those who believe the role of the United State should not be to get involved in regional conflicts. They point to Vietnam and Iraq as examples of how the United States gets it wrong. First, I don't think that we were wrong to go into Iraq. We went in for the "wrong" reasons, and we did not handle the situation well once we were there, but fundamentally, the US should be in the business of deposing murderous dictators who slaughter their own people.
Let me give you a related example. I believe very strongly in personal rights and freedoms. I also believe that there are situations where the individual is not capable of protecting their own rights and freedoms, and that is where a government needs to step in. Whether this be because the individual is not capable on their own (children, elderly, the impaired) or because they are facing an overwhelming force (gangs etc), it is often necessary that to protect the freedom of the individual the government must act.
In the case of nation states, there is nothing above the government. No further power. The UN was meant to fill that role, but basing action upon consensus only works for fish.
The US should and has randomly and somewhat arbitrarily taken that role over the past 60 years. I believe that the US should be much more firm about it, and about why it is necessary, and why we are taking the fight to the despots of the world. Screw WMDs, the fight here is about protecting human life and moving the world towards a better future.
The people of Libya rightfully revolted against their horrendous government and its crazy leader, and in the first few weeks when the regime could easily have been toppled, the United States did... nothing. Absolutely nothing. Any why is that so critical? People have to believe that Gaddafi will fall, or they will be unwilling to turn on him. If the US had backed the rebels in the first few weeks, many more would have deserted - no one wants to be on the losing side. Instead, we waited. And those who were on the fence waited also. No, believing that there is a good change Gaddafi will remain, they are unwilling to act, because nothing is worse than being on the wrong side of a coup.
I can't say at this point that we totally blew it. But instead of a quick revolt and a move to democracy, we have a civil war, with thousands more dying than necessary. Thanks Obama, thanks.
Comments
Post a Comment