Odyssey Dawn: a military operations in Libya thread.

He was right for the wrong reasons -- he was a Saddam quisling.

That's kind of the point - people oppose or support something for a wide variety of reasons. It's not just a handful of fellow posters who are capable of nuanced thought, or complex motives.

all im hearing from the anti crowd is wide variety of bad reasons tbf

Andrew Sullivan is screaming about We're At War, and he's technically wrong, but I'm not in the wait-and-see mode: the odds are Obama won't go to seek authorization for this as he is constitutionally bound to.

(x-post) I get that, and I have no doubt that there are loads of terrible SWP types trotting (see?) out the same nonsense. It's an interesting experience to be on the 'pro' side - I opposed and protested action in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq. Anyway, grumpy guts, we'll see what tomorrow brings, I guess.

slim pickens riding a bomb i hope

On balance, I’m anti because
a)It westernises a region-wide revolution, making said revolution less likely to succeed in the long term
b)Americans etc yet again bombing an Arab country, how can this turn out well
c)Unless the West gets lucky with a direct hit on Gaddafi it’s going to be a protracted affair anyway - a months-long or years-long civil war is probably unavoidable, western bombs or no

ps I was in favour of the Kosovo intervention and don’t think Milosevic was a sweetheart. Kosovo was about as good as it gets for this kind of intervention, and more than a decade on the situation there is still highly unstable, held together by UN troops etc.

Also, why are we doing nothing, zilch, nada to help Bahrain protesters and yet we are prepared to bomb Libya, i.e, it is actually about Western interests

fucking hell you illiterates "objectively pro-" is a pretty well established rhetorical device read a book

Adverbs are silly.

Also, why are we doing nothing, zilch, nada to help Bahrain protesters and yet we are prepared to bomb Libya

because it's easier to justify intervention when the country has already descended into near civil war, than when the government is still in full control?

"the eggs are already broken, we're just doing a bit of whisking" vs "let's start breakin' some eggs!". as it were.

because Qaddaffi is much more easily made into a target, and easier to topple.

Er, dowd, I made pretty clear my "disgusting" characterisation was a qualified generalisation and that it obviously doesn't apply to every anti but a lot of the loudest voices (in the wider debate rather than itt) appear to be on anti-war autopilot, recycling the same criticisms from conflict to conflict. The Milosevic apologists disgust me but of course I'm not saying that's everyone.

I was pro Kosovo, anti Iraq, conflicted about Afghanistan and slow to be pro this time for pretty much exactly the reasons Zelda gives but persuaded by the Arab League request, UN consensus and increasing bloodshed.

Also, why are we doing nothing, zilch, nada to help Bahrain protesters and yet we are prepared to bomb Libya

this argument is an honoured guest and we can hardly refuse him entry after so many visits, but it always sounds to me like a maverick, mccain-esque 'let's bomb saudi arabia' warcry rather than what i guess it's meant to say, which is something like 'we're bombing libya for its oil that we already get'.

a)It westernises a region-wide revolution, making said revolution less likely to succeed in the long term

not wild about this argument: most people would rather the libyans had been able to succeed in the short term, but they didn't, and now they're asking for help. well, some of them are -- i wish we knew more about all that. i'm not crazy about western/non-western as a way of looking at anything: gadaffi's libya is pretty westernized already by being a soviet client, part of opec, etc., and the protesters/revolutionaries seem to want freedoms-that-are-called-western. i think people put too much stress on authenticity, tradition, etc. those things are very resonant fictions, no doubt, but they are fictions.

b)Americans etc yet again bombing an Arab country, how can this turn out well

again, it's not ideal. but 'dictator loosing his army upon rebellious population' can't turn out well either.

c)Unless the West gets lucky with a direct hit on Gaddafi it’s going to be a protracted affair anyway - a months-long or years-long civil war is probably unavoidable, western bombs or no

i don't know enough about the logistics. feel like his army won't want to keep going on forever even if he does.

xpost
I'm not suggesting we bomb Saudi, Bahrain, or anyone. The Saudis have basically occupied Bahrain and suppressed the revolt with only the mildest protestations from the U.S. and yet bombs are being dropped on Libya. That sits poorly with the argument that the Libyan intervention is simply a humanitarian matter.

gadaffi's libya is pretty westernized already by being a soviet client, part of opec, etc., and the protesters/revolutionaries seem to want freedoms-that-are-called-western. i think people put too much stress on authenticity, tradition, etc. those things are very resonant fictions, no doubt, but they are fictions.

If a fiction is very resonant, then it's best to pay attention to it. An uprising completely unaided by the Americans is going to be harder to argue against than one that only succeeded with American help, which historically has fatally weakened such uprisings.

hey i haven't been paying tons of attention but uh it didn't really look like the uprising was going to succeed?

the unaided uprising foundered and asked for support

we could trade historical examples on whether that means it's doomed; you might be right, i don't know, but there isn't, unfortunately, a choice between a UN-supported successful rebellion and a successful unaided one

xpost

20th anniversary

Early on April 15, 2006 – to mark the 20th anniversary of the bombing raid – a concert involving U.S. singer Lionel Richie and Spanish tenor José Carreras was held in front of Gaddafi's bombed house in Tripoli. Diplomats, businessmen and politicians were among the audience of what Libya dubbed the "concert for peace". The BBC reported Lionel Richie as telling the audience, regarding Gaddafi's supposed adopted daughter, "Hanna will be honored tonight because of the fact that you've attached peace to her name."

ready to hate Richie for using "the fact that" for no reason tbh

Libya is probably in for a long period of violence and instability with or without Western bombs. Yes, the unaided uprising asked for support, it's very, very difficult. Similar arguments were no doubt being played out 10 years ago wrt Afghanistan which, to begin with, was a bombing campaign to help the anti-Taliban forces. I don't know. On balance I'm against this intervention, but I guess it's a fine balance.

Louis, I have made terrible sexing decisions in the past indeed. But I can make better decisions in the future - you will always be a terrible person who gives leftists a bad name.

― boots get knocked from here to czechoslovakier (milo z), Sunday, 20 March 2011 20:39 (Yesterday)

can you explain this please? when it's proved wrong I hope you are there to witness it. also be mindful that you're projecting

ShababLibya LibyanYouthMovement
BREAKING: It has been confirmed by a few sources and now also Al Manara, Khamis Gaddafi has died today, as a result of burns #Libya #Feb17
1 hour ago

since when did louis become a psychologist

when people started saying really, really needless and hurtful stuff at me despite my reduced posting volume and efforts to be inclusive. it's like what is there to still hang onto? oh wait it's because I do politics wrong, or at least frame my terms with a cartoonish abandon (n.b. this won't happen when I come to write about this stuff in a more serious and scholarly register). well sorry you live in a country where two states have just imposed fascist 'emergency' sanctions which enable elected officials to be fired on a whim. please understand that a traditionally 'far-left' but overwhelmingly holistic, naturalistic and humanistic political ideology is rapidly gaining traction around the world, and that its manifestation will occur through popular consent and not violent revolution. it is not an idiocy to claim that the capitalist paradigm is showing more cracks by the year, and that the indefinite pursuit of increased revenues is unleashing a truly fucked set of values on the world's people, which they are increasingly choosing to reject.

so when the corporate powers of state unleash lots and lots of missiles, I have to set myself firmly against the action, because it is another regrettable example of intimidation and thus mediation of superiority. no set of humans are superior; we must work together, not have some of us dandle entire countries as playthings in order to leverage positive influence among an area which we've fucked up morally and physically almost beyond repair

friendly, slightly assholish reminder: if you don't engage with that and continue to insist that I'm a terrible person who will 'give leftists a bad name' all of my life (a bad name among whom?) then you really will be projecting. if you engage with it and still insist that I'm a terrible person, c'est la vie, we haven't synchronized our perspectives yet. it'll come.

Louis, I agree you've shown a lot more posting restraint the last couple of months, and I regret sniping at you. My apologies. I'll never be able to relate to your hyperbolic style, but it's my job to get over it, not yours.

Thanks, dude. There are some topics where I'm more liable to play the fool and ramp up the manic pixie quotient - completely baffling airstrikes by NATO are pretty high on that list

also can I gently suggest getting a good night's sleep will help this whole conversation, LJ...

i feel like generally speaking if being tired or drunk turns you into a raging asshole, you prob should know this & not post under such circumstances

anyway, this seems level headed and considered http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2011/03/at_the_end_of_last.php

feel like that article outlines a lot of the reasons why this is bad but god damn do i hate the alternative.

yeah I'm with that. On principles I think this is terrible and am against it, in the real world equation it's more of a tossup. Too early to begin following the money but I really can't figure out what US/EU interests are here beyond saving a little humanitarian face - unless they're rolling the dice to try and get a more amenable spigot-warden as Tracer said on the other thread.

this is all really pretty bizarre, out of all the barking mad dictators still in control i figured gaddafi would be the last one standing and the only one w/a grudging level of acceptance by the UN.

FASCISM is comin' back!

careful soto, round here we save humanitarian face with airstrikes!

life's a bitch

dont know why so many of you have opinions about this, seems a lot easier to sit back and form an opinion later after its clear whos right

The ironic thing is that Qaddafi is the ultimate "wrong," and yet he appears to be in the strongest position (from a maniacal despot standpoint, but still - he and Mugabe can hi-five).

Amazing how waiting/dithering/delaying/postponing the no-fly zone a mere week may have made all the difference between this being a good idea and a bad idea. History hurtling forward.

so when the corporate powers of state unleash lots and lots of missiles, I have to set myself firmly against the action, because it is another regrettable example of intimidation

I am terribly ambivalent about US military interventionism in all its forms (including Libya) - but responses such as this are just as useless as kneejerk western nationalism, and despite your claims otherwise, do amount to support for scum like Qaddafi because he is the opposition you support. I'll take my leftism in the "the only good fascist is a dead fascist" vein, thanks.

well sorry you live in a country where two states have just imposed fascist 'emergency' sanctions which enable elected officials to be fired on a whim.

shoulda been called delta dawn because awesome theme song already exists

xp

You can call him insensitive, unfair, passive-aggressive, wrong, or whatever, but you don't have to call him a terrible person. It's really not hard to stay on lj's good side because he genuinely wants to do the right thing. And I know "the road to hell is paved with good intentions," but lj is so harmless, even when he's supposedly being a dick, that I find it hard to believe that people take what he says personally.

^^^^

out of all the barking mad dictators still in control i figured gaddafi would be the last one standing

He kind of is, though, isn't he? Is there any world leader who has been around as long as him? It blows my mind that when he first became leader, the Beatles hadn't broken up yet.

Kinda amazing story (edited from Libya 17 Feb blog:

15 March:

20:03 BREAKING – Almanara Media confirms the following: Shooting and explosions have happened in Baab Al Aziziyah (a military barracks/compound with the Gaddafi family compund in Tripoli). A big fire has erupted inside Baab Al Aziziyah

16 March:

00:33 @ShababLibya tweet: The Pilot who flew his jet into Bab Azizia was the martyr Muhammad Mokhtar Osman from Benghazi. May God have mercy on your soul dear brother, your sacrifice has not gone in vain and we will continue with this till our country is free.

01:14 Almanara Media reports that two people of “importance” have been badly injured as a result of the fighter jet crash into Baab Al Aziziyah earlier and have been taken to Tripoli’s Burns and Reconstruction hospital.

23:16 Update: A trusted source has confirmed to us this story: The pilot who flew his plane into Baab Al Aziziyah took off as part of a 2 plane team with the mission of bombing strategic points in Al Guradibya base in Sirte. Their orders were to return immedietly after completing the mission. One pilot followed orders while the other flew to Tripoli where he emptied what he had left of ammunition on Baab Al Aziziyah and then crashed his plane into it.

21 March:

2:13 Almanara Media is confirming from trusted sources that Khamis Al Gaddafi has passed away on Sunday due to severe burn injuries he sustained a few days ago. The burns were caused when a fighter jet pilot performed a martyr mission and crashed his fighter jet into Gaddafi’s compound Baab Al Aziziyah.

The brigade commanded by Khamis Al Gaddafi was the spearpoint for pro-Gaddafi forces in the East, retaking Azzawiya and Zwara, and presently investing Musurata.

whoa

Er, that should be in the West rather than East.

3/16 Never Forget?

This is why you're give leftism a bad name, btw. An inability to assess situations on their own merits, rather than through a rigid ideology.

I am terribly ambivalent about US military interventionism in all its forms (including Libya) - but responses such as this are just as useless as kneejerk western nationalism, and despite your claims otherwise, do amount to support for scum like Qaddafi because he is the opposition you support. I'll take my leftism in the "the only good fascist is a dead fascist" vein, thanks.

I've assessed plenty of situations on their own merits, and I'm increasingly finding the need for a different paradigm of good actions vs bad actions. Good actions are no longer actions which militaristically depose unwanted state organs, even if the deposition is efficient and permanent. The very presence of an all-powerful interventionist military is in itself a bad action, because it perpetuates the elitist slide of resources, power and influence towards the few. Are they bombing Libya for the people? Organized campaigns of state bombing are never for the people. If the USA or the UK had an iota of compassion towards the people oppressed by Gaddafi, they'd have already used their vast wealth to organize free food, shelter and education for every Libyan. But they can't even do that for their own people, so why say it any other way than with bombs? Sure, the bombs may oust Gaddafi and sure, the people may get a more generous individual in charge. There will still be massive poverty problems and sentiments of hatred stirred by the military climate installed not only by Gaddafi but by the countries teaching Libya that international diplomacy is not a matter of engaging on a human level and helping the people, but a matter of killing humans and destroying buildings. So while of course there are nuances to this intervention and while the intentions might not be entirely greedy, the medium of the message is completely fucked. If you're so blind to it that you can't see any other way of conducting an improvement in Libya, then your version of leftism isn't the one I see growing and growing in every nation on this planet. You're stuck in a militaristic 20th century leftist paradigm; you need to realize that the different left factions need to pull together not as a movement but as a holistic way of life, supporting each other away from a crippling debt-based financial system which makes money for money's sake. It may be a cliche but we really need to concentrate on imagining the world without borders, and any military action taken upon any part of the world as a dagger to our own breast. A situation where I really do feel ambiguities, for instance, is a state-organized profit-making charitable aid initiative, for instance, or a crackdown upon religious extremism (which only ever comes from there being a corresponding extremism elsewhere). I need to read more about Buddhism and energy and stuff which a hard-nosed militaristic Western corporate capitalist paradigm doesn't think exists along with happiness, meaning or equality, but these are my current thoughts about the notion that the role of certain countries is to dominate over others with the force of arms. We need to get away from short-termist, goal-oriented analyses of success and realize that the bad action here is playing Gaddafi at his own adversarial game. I don't support his actions at all, btw; I support his individual humanity and deplore how he has abused it by seeking despotic power. But he is not the only oppressive element at play here. He's just oppressing a people who have to represent themselves in the world media. Youtube is a wonderful thing. The only good fascist, of course, is one who has discovered that their principles are not making them or their community happy or fulfilled; the abandonment of such principles will require a revolution of the mind, but killing people for their beliefs? You're the fascist. As I said before, to oppose rather than to show compassion is to mirror.

And these cheap attempts are what make you a terrible person. You're essentially a hypocrite when it comes to attacking the US vs. other states. Every American posting to ILX opposes what the far right is doing to our state.

I said that partially to explain why you might be so gung-ho at the moment (hell if I lived in either of those two states I'd be on the streets every day) and also to show you that Gaddafi is not the only person inflicting unspeakable things on his people; in fact, those bombing him are doing similar. Do you think a quarter of Libya's black male population are in jail? Does illegalization of drugs make any moral sense whatsoever or is it a clumsy means of population control? I make these points because while ILX's Americans rightfully despair at much of the shit occurring in their country, they don't all get so worked up when America takes it overseas and exercises its responsibility. The UK and in fact every developed country is perpetuating horrible, horrible things upon the world (ever read the UK politics thread?). America is just where most of the big corporations and the debt happen to be, so it's got a lot of my attention. I don't think that's unfair. In order to make the world an equal place, America has a lot to front up to, and a lot to give. Nothing personal against you as a citizen of the world but you rather jumped on Washington's dick there for a second.