Odyssey Dawn: a military operations in Libya thread.

no this was gonna be quick, obama said so

Or just US lead role was gonna be over quick

Although NATO heavily relies on US

that's one way of putting it!

kinda interested that the_left is gearing up to gloat over dead arabs rather than dead jews for a change

my conspiracy theory goes as follows:

- tunisia then egypt see broad-based, secular uprisings that result in long-time dictators being shown the door

- state department, cia and diplomat types look at the map and are like, wtf. we've got the NFSL and all sorts of other exile opposition groups, we've been funding opposition malcontents in libya for decades, this is their fucking moment! what the hell are they doing?? let's sow some liberty, team. send a telegram: go go go go go

- "day of rage" organized by NFSL and LIFG (whose main branch disavows the action: "rage" signifies violence and the LIFG formally renounced violence four months earlier in exchange for the release of more than a hundred prisoners)

- protestors are (predictably) killed

- but the country really does want change, and thousands of youths clamor both with placards and with AKs

- they fail miserably

- the NSLF and LIFG are like hey USA - you really gonna hang us out to dry?

given that probably about half the factions of the National Transitional Council (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Transitional_Council ) were either created directly by western powers or funded by them over the past thirty years, could the United States (and the UK, and France, etc) not only feel a special responsibility here, but actually bear a direct responsibility?

― 40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Monday, March 28, 2011 2:10 PM (53 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

is it so so crazy to see this as yet another western-backed failed coup of gaddafi's regime, this time with the heartbreaking add-on of peaceful young demonstrators?

― 40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Monday, March 28, 2011 2:21 PM (42 minutes ago) Bookmark

"probably about half the factions of the National Transitional Council" "were either created directly by western powers or funded by them over the past thirty years, could the United States (and the UK, and France, etc)" -- to you this adds up to western-backed coup, in which the thousands or protesters were dupes? were the other about-half of the factions backed by outside states? would be interested to know. pretty sure, for example, that the palestinians get overseas assistance.

btw "heartbreaking add-on of peaceful young demonstrators" -- really classy.

xpost

lol at you

either created directly by western powers or funded by them over the past thirty years

Sounds a bit like that stuff about how every single Shia political organisation in the Middle East, no matter how large or small, is funded by the Iranians

well, look it up. a large part of the organized opposition groups are either western backed or want a return to the monarchy.

you don't have to buy my conspiracy theory to have a lot of trouble with the USA, UK and France raining bombs down on libya to support them.

Ha, no doubt Iran is at least a little bit why everyone's so mum about Syria, which is just about as egregious a situation as Libya.

The problem with any US involvement is that, frankly, the the_west can't do much without our support/weapons. So hand it to NATO, hand it to the UN, hand it to France, but we're footing the bill and unloading the bombs.

juan cole's open letter to the left, which disagrees with everything i've said:

http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/an-open-letter-to-the-left-on-libya.html

Misread that as John Cale there!

that reminds me, the world hasn't heard from moe tucker about foreigners in awhile

Is she beating the drum to invade Iran? Get it?

Ha, I was just about to post that Juan Cole piece.

well, look it up. a large part of the organized opposition groups are either western backed or want a return to the monarchy.

you don't have to buy my conspiracy theory to have a lot of trouble with the USA, UK and France raining bombs down on libya to support them.

― 40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Monday, March 28, 2011 3:39 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark

do the other organized opposition groups get outside help? genuine question, it's just that your whole thing seems to be based on the idea of the US as a uniquely evil agent in the world. you're going to have to go further in your denunciation of the transitional council than saying they have had support from the west, which in itself isn't a lot. especially given that ten days ago your line was that the US was not getting involved because it liked gadaffi being in power. now we learn that the_west was conspiring to get rid of gadaffi! for shame, the_west. for shame.

The problem with any US involvement is that, frankly, the the_west can't do much without our support/weapons. So hand it to NATO, hand it to the UN, hand it to France, but we're footing the bill and unloading the bombs.

― Josh in Chicago, Monday, March 28, 2011 3:40 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark

that's also a problem with egyptian involvement. or, hell, saudi involvement, if it comes to that. (im pretty sure the french don't get much US help or use US weapons but ehh.)

This is one thing that puzzles me about certain proponents of the anti-war case. On the one hand the_west have been shamelessly colluding with Gaddafi for the past x years and on the other they've been plotting his downfall for x years and just waiting for their chance. Which is it? I know the usual argument is "aha, he's outlived his usefulness." Well, what usefulness and why has he only outlived it now?

ten days ago your line was that the US was not getting involved because it liked gadaffi being in power

well, i think i was obviously pretty wrong about that. i was talking, how do you say, out of my ass. in the meantime i've had the benefit of a few days off work and i've been trying to catch up.

DL i don't think there's a real contradiction there. the usefulness of New Gaddafi had mainly to do with oil and some to do with sharing anti-islamicist intelligence, but all along he's been volatile, unpredictable, and has a history of alarmingly pro-pan-Arabist sentiments and statist policies (full-on nationalisation of industry, etc). both neighbors dumping their leaders has to be the best chance the USA will get for some time.

honestly i think the US and french administrations and all the rest of the world around them are just bumbling through this. i don't think anyone has any clear idea. the interests and moral imperatives kind of halfway add up to a reason for this to be done at all and that was good enough at the time, a couple weeks ago, so here we are

also i read that bernard henri-levi basically talked sarkozy into this himself?

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2011/0328/How-a-philosopher-swayed-France-s-response-on-Libya

alarmingly pro-pan-Arabist sentiments and statist policies

Why are these relevant? No point being pan-Arabist when the rest of the Arab countries think you're a liability. And statist - so?

I prefer the "bumbling" theory.

he hasn't nationalized the only industry that anyone outside of libya gives a fuck about. i know america hates nationalized industry, but not that much. they're still allies with a bunch of western european countries last i heard. im not sure if his pan-arabist stance is that alarming, given how much other arab states hate him.

but yes, the US has made no bones about basically hating gadaffi, apart from the slight rapprochement in the last decade. i wouldn't be surprised if opposition groups there had some links with the US, but it seems to have been pretty low-level stuff and it doesn't bother me too much.

from where should the underground pro-democracy opposition have got support? in the region of you have US-backed dictatorship egypt, or -- who?

xposts

goole otm but it is always really hard to convince people that "bumbling" is how things work, like, 99.billion% of the time.

i keep saying this, but Q's main 'chit' with the west was not his anti-islamist bonafides or whatever, it's deciding to suddenly break open the world's most dangerous nuclear proliferation ring

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Qadeer_Khan#Iran_and_Libya

...for reasons i still don't quite get. he's a wild man.

also i read that bernard henri-levi basically talked sarkozy into this himself?

well he's certainly been bashfully telling every reporter within earshot that he did..

the underground pro-democracy opposition

who dat? not snarky, just want to know. i've been trying to learn about the opposition in libya and this is tough info to dig out.

for the record i am totally, 100% in agreement with the notion that the_west is bumbling into this without much of a plan, my conspiracy theory notwithstanding. which is a big part of why i don't like it.

(also note that my conspiracy theory also depends on massive amounts of bumbling)

I can’t tell you how annoyed I am by the fringe left adulation for Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, on the grounds that he is ‘anti-imperialist,’ and with an assumption that he is somehow on the Left.

Wait -- who's done this?

'They have elected a ­Labour government," a Savoy diner famously declared on the night of Britain's election landslide in 1945. "The country will never stand for it." From the evidence so far coming out of Iran, something similar seems to be ­happening on the streets of Tehran – and in the western capitals just as desperate to see the back of Iranian president ­Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jun/18/iran-elections-us-foreign-policy

guys like george galloway are pro-ahmadinejad

xpost

oh i misspoke i guess. the transitional council seems to be pro-democracy, yes? and about half of them were CIA-backed by your reckoning? i put two and two together and figured some of them knew each other before this year.

there are no "guys like george galloway" besides george galloway

for the record yes i am also 100% trying to rain on the feel-good parade of American bombs blasting a glorious rescue in yet another war in the Middle East at the same time that states are attempting to plug the holes in their budgets with the most cynical attacks on the working class in memory, firing entire professions and attempting to demolish the last vestiges of union power. ooh that's unfair! is it? national finance is a zero-sum game in 2011. should that play a part in my opinions on this war, on its morality? maybe not. but it does.

another question:

- where are the vaunted arab "partners" in this military effort?

such a debbie downer! i know!

well if any of them had militaries that were really worth anything they wouldn't be 'partners' with us probably

im not having a feel-good parade about this! it could go incredibly badly. and you know, like most people, im very much affected by the cuts, but again, your rhetoric is a bit ott. (not sure what you mean by "national finance is a zero-sum game". the economy is fucked and the governing class, on both sides, are ideologically opposed to doing much about it. but the level of state spending is still historically very high, how is it "zero-sum"?)

- where are the vaunted arab "partners" in this military effort?

they're sending like 12 planes by the end of the week or something. most of the arab governments are fucking nasty dictatorships so. and also what does it have to do with them?

er, also, didn't you JUST SAY that egypt was arming the rebels??

secretly

("secretly")

well there's your arab support. or de-legitimizing US support, i guess, given who funds the egyptian military. whichever way you want it.

dude it is so annoying talking to you! are you trying to say anything?

im generally responding to your points, p well i think

there are no "guys like george galloway" besides george galloway

― 40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Monday, March 28, 2011 5:44 PM

ken livingstone
jeremy corbyn

ok, fair

Not fair on Livingstone and Corbyn TBH - Galloway's uniquely repellent and self-serving.

perfectly fair, and at least galloway confines himself to the anti-semite after dinner circuit; looking forward to the mayoral elections next year

pep talk from the president tonight!

welllll it's not fair in that i LIKE red ken but in certain respects i.e. shameless opportunism and a certain stunt mentality towards political alliances I can see the comparison

they're also all press tv bros, which is kinda what started this tangent

Do any others have a problem, with corbyn - just out of interest