Odyssey Dawn: a military operations in Libya thread.

status quo is shit, oppressive etc like most/all modern top-down government but what is western capitalism if not opportunistic

quite liked 'rockin' all over the world' myself

status quo is shit, oppressive etc like most/all modern top-down government but what is western capitalism if not opportunistic

― WD-40 (acoleuthic), Sunday, March 20, 2011 5:35 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark

when you think about it, top-down governments are all pretty much the same...

lj my sympathies to some degree lie with you here but you gotta realize this is like arguing about manowar with algerian goalkeeper

opinions will remain steadfast and you just look as the guy who continues arguing with algerian goalkeeper

get on my level

lol

also 'world capitalism' is kind of a lol phrase tbh

if the kids are united they'll never be divided

you do realize I have slept 3 hours since fucking 2 days ago, taken narcotics and units of alcohol into the tens in the meantime and am now writing 27 pages for someone's fucking management studies course

not that the man can't kiss my arse when I'm sober and rested

everyone read david c korten's shit btw, he's the don

peace

you need to meet a nice girl

will do in an hour when I wake her up

god when will this fucking project end, someone make a new board again, keep me entertained

i'll go start 'i love status quo'

nah dogg you always be talking funny like this it seems. listen to a hoos

suggest 'i love dongles' for the ilx IT crowd. would hold finite possibilities for lj, tho

http://www.ilxor.com/ILX/NewAnswersControllerServlet?boardid=47

anyway the french are at it again

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12800635

there's a 'USS Barry'?

and am now writing 27 pages for someone's fucking management studies course

ooh, someones's smashing capitalism

anyway jokes but i'd probably a BIT more cautious with the neo-neo-con shtick if the objectively-pro-gafaffi crew weren't such stinkers or, like louis, incoherent

judging from newsnight the other night stwc got literally tens of mutants out to their little do

you do realize I have slept 3 hours since fucking 2 days ago, taken narcotics and units of alcohol into the tens in the meantime and am now writing 27 pages for someone's fucking management studies course

not that the man can't kiss my arse when I'm sober and rested

You are a terrible person who should probably stop using the Internet, fyi

you do realize I have slept 3 hours since fucking 2 days ago, taken narcotics and units of alcohol into the tens in the meantime and am now writing 27 pages for someone's fucking management studies course

why would anyone have any reason to "realize" this

his tumblr was pretty explicit

he's also eaten a mess of peppercorns

#jaggerblood

omg lol

milo z you are such a hardass and I am in no way pro-gadaffi

his tumblr was pretty explicit

― Kerm, Sunday, March 20, 2011 1:38 PM (3 minutes ago)

ah, the extra nugget that presumes a degree of gives-a-shit...it's always in there somewhere, like the baby in the king cake

I am in no way pro-gadaffi

― WD-40 (acoleuthic), Sunday, March 20, 2011 6:42 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark

'objectively' boo

anyway, when ppl insult others they're just mirroring insecurities they have about themselves, so I'll assure milo he's cool to keep posting by me although maybe lay off the 'god my ex is such an alcoholic slut/prise it out of my cold dead hands' posturing

WmC your inability to detect my swagalicious register is upsetting

wish I had more time to post about resource-based economies and holistic universe-energy shit, just gonna say that empirical paradigms and debt economies suck and leave it at that

wish I had more time to post about resource-based economies and holistic universe-energy shit, just gonna say that empirical paradigms and debt economies suck and leave it at that

― WD-40 (acoleuthic), Sunday, March 20, 2011 6:47 PM (22 seconds ago) Bookmark

right... ok. so, about libya.

there's a 'USS Barry'?

never gets up to full speed and very slow on the turn

Doesn't request authorization from Congressional leaders on deck getting sun tans.

lol greenwald never change:

How, then, can Obama's campaign position possibly be reconciled with his ordering military action in Libya without Congressional approval (something, it should be said, he has not yet done)?

seems like the western allies here are making a fairly conventional gamble - assist with the toppling of the current regime and the subsequent regime will be beholden to us/more likely to act in our interests. this has worked out pretty reliably in the past. real question is how long will it take to knock of Qawdawfi

I'm pretty sure that, as president, it's "no way imma wait for those dithering fuckwads to approve this!"

anyway jokes but i'd probably a BIT more cautious with the neo-neo-con shtick if the objectively-pro-gafaffi crew weren't such stinkers or, like louis, incoherent

Pretty much how I feel. Most of the people I'm reading or talking to who are in favour of intervention are cautious, conflicted and took a while to weigh up the options - most of those against are "It's all about oil, Milosevic was a sweetheart, blah". A generalisation maybe but I at least I can be sure of one thing: Neil Clark is a joke.

was kinda hoping for a 'uss dave' or a 'uss terry' or something

why does the USS Barry weigh so much?
its full of options!

that's my mark russell style political zing of the week.

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.

took a while to weigh up the options

This didn't seem to be the case with France or UK govs? They seemed pretty keen.

well, you know what the french are like, always spoiling for a fight

Esp. when they've behind the National Front in the polls.

Not sure that getting sucked into a potentially messy war in the Middle East is a sure-fire poll-rating booster.

It's interesting - there doesn't look like there's much prospect of Gaddafi being removed any time soon. In the medium term, at least, all those British, French and American corporate interests (oil, guns, etc) are going to be hugely disadvantaged.

looks like someone just blew up his house

xpost I haven't come across anyone who's put the pro-intervention case in the same kneejerk terms as some of the antis. This is costly, risky and will very quickly become unpopular if it goes wrong - the idea that this is an easy way to a fast buck or a poll boost is idiotic, as is the idea that this is just Iraq redux.

Been reading Andrew Rawnsley's account of New Labour, with a big detailed chunk on Iraq, which has reminded me that you can make dumb foreign policy decisions (and lie to justify them) for moral reasons. It's a misunderstanding of Blair's ego and moral zealotry to say that it was all about oil and business interests. It also shows how close Britain came to not going to war, and all the different personalities, calculations, decisions and mistakes that led to it - another thing that tends to get left out of the Pilger/Neil Clark/etc view that all wars are part of the same imperialist masterplan.

xp: Gaddafi was buying his weapons from the Russians and the major oil producers were Italy's ENI, France's Total and China's CNPC. The U.S. and Britain had rather little economic interest here.

I do like how the Chinese and Russians abstained from vetoing another engagement that will divert U.S. attention away from Europe and East Asia. Someone read their Machiavelli/Sun Tzu.

This is costly, risky and will very quickly become unpopular if it goes wrong - the idea that this is an easy way to a fast buck or a poll boost is idiotic, as is the idea that this is just Iraq redux.

Exactly...which is why I've decided not to have an opinion.

81. Unpublished House of Commons Library research found that the UK spent some £320 million on bombing Libya and approximately £25 million on reconstruction programmes. However, those figures do not include the UK’s contribution to multilateral reconstruction projects, such as those run by the United Nations. In addition, Dr Adrian Gallagher, University of Leeds, pointed out that the Government reduced its estimate of the cost of the military intervention from £320 million to £234 million. Taking into account UK contributions to programmes run by the United Nations, which had overall responsibility for co-ordinating reconstruction, and the European Union, Dr Gallagher concluded that the UK “spent just under half as much (48.72%) on rebuild than on intervention.”

value for money much, UK?

ican we call this a success now

― unorthodox economic revenge (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 20 October 2011 15:26 (seven years ago) bookmarkflaglink

:/

Migrants stranded in Libya endure sewage, maggots, disease

By intent, and certainly a politically more palatable solution to the migrant problem than hosting the concentration camps in Italy.

Backed by Italy, Libya enlists militias to stop migrants

I anticipate this model to stop refugees fleeing overpopulation, resource scarcity, and the climate crisis will promoted in other nations of the Maghreb and West Asia (and maybe even Mexico).

I got handed a lot of shit for saying this over and over.

I am totally unconvinced that the people of Libya are going to benefit from this war, however much this is invoked as the sole purpose of our bombing.

― Aimless, Wednesday, May 25, 2011 11:58 AM (eight years ago)

Post WWII, the populations that have benefited from foreign military/intelligence agency intervention (South Korea, Kosovo) are utterly dwarfed by those that have been harmed. We're batting well under 0.1.

I am totally unconvinced that the people of Libya are going to benefit from this war, however much this is invoked as the sole purpose of our bombing.

idk what yr crowing about, you think they would have been better off getting massacred by Khadhafee? yeah ok whatever, this is an unprovable hypothesis.

There would have been a crackdown on regime change plotters in Benghazi (who had been collaborating with French military intelligence since late 2010), and least those who didn't obtain asylum. However, it wouldn't have thrown the nation into regional (and tribal) conflict for a decade.

Often, dictatorial rule is preferable to civil conflict.

Ah, yes, Οὖτις, you were the one who looked at my stated misgivings about our participation in the Libyan war and concluded that I thought "colonialism was worse than genocide". How genocide crept into the discussion is a mystery only you can solve.

"humanitarian intervention" is a bad idea that otherwise sensible ppl keep falling for

obama said in some interview late in his term that intervening in libya was his worst mistake as president, and it's hard not to agree

piracy on the Mediterranean, seems a little unlikely

― goole, Thursday, 25 August 2011 16:58 (seven years ago) bookmarkflaglink

does anyone want to intervene to topple haftar/the army? terrorising the south, indiscriminately or at least inaccurately shelling tripoli, how many dead civilians would it take?

are open air slave markets not a big issue in libya now too?

Often, dictatorial rule is preferable to civil conflict.

― despondently sipping tomato soup (Sanpaku), 3. juli 2019 20:28 (yesterday) bookmarkflaglink

My main problem with this is that dictatorial rule is pretty inherently unstable, and most often ends in civil conflict anyway.

Both Haftar and Jarvanka are UAE clients. There won't be a US led intervention.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/dec/24/mercenaries-flock-to-libya-raising-fears-of-prolonged-war

Of course. Saudi Arabia has been using the same janjaweed to guard their own border with Yemen for several years, having learned how useless their own National Guard (ie, army) is.

Interesting article but doesn't say that NATO bombed Libya's Great ManMade River & destroyed a pipe factory, causing water scarcity since 2011. Now 4 out of abt 7 million Libyans could “face imminent water problems,” a potential “humanitarian disaster.” https://t.co/je5ASKbfGq

— Lucia Pradella (@LuGuangMing) August 18, 2021

Up to 20,000 are now believed dead in Libya. This tragedy hasn't just been caused by floods, but by NATO's 2011 military aggression and ongoing sanctions that have decimated the country and undermined its ability to prepare for extreme weather events. https://t.co/mUekVkd5Vw 1/2

— Kai Heron (@KaiHeron) September 14, 2023

Community notes does its job again

Libya was once one of Africa's most prosperous countries, but years of lawlessness have left it a fragile, divided state - ill-prepared to cope with the forces unleashed by a natural disaster. https://t.co/aFGO37ettU

— BBC News Africa (@BBCAfrica) September 13, 2023