Does anyone know where the war on Libya is going?

[KoKo]

Does anyone know where the war on Libya is going?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOyVHc5sp-c&feature=player_embedded


Lindsey German from Stop the War Coalition, interviewed on Russia Today TV News, spells out why the US and its allies are waging war on Libya and why the war is unpopular with the British public, just like the disastrous wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

1. Hell to recieve another handbasket labeled FUBAR.

[Amonester]

2. And prolly just like the upcoming disastrous war in Iran will be....

The next neocon Coup d'Etat is in the works, since the last one remained 'unpunished' (and will remain that way).

[On the Road]

dupe

[On the Road]

3. It's Probably Going Towards a Rebel Takeover

with air support from the West against airplanes and armored vehicles. As long as the ports and finances are not under Gaddafi's control, he is going to be gradually starved for resources and find it more difficult to control the population.

[MrTriumph]

4. And are these rebels friends of the West? We don't even know that to be true.

x

[On the Road]

5. It's Likely

but gaining an ally is not the purpose according to pretty much any viewpoint pro or con. Enough of the individuals and their viewpoints are known that it suggests this is not going to be another Iran.

[moparlunatic]

6. This is not a war.

Nothing to see here move along.

[riderinthestorm]

8. I'd love to have some links on who is believed to be in charge.

Names and facts about their viewpoints would be great. When you say "enough of the individuals" are known, how many are there? How do you know that we know "enough" of them, and more importantly how do we know that they hold any sway with the people of Libya to govern effectively if/when Gaddafi is removed?

[bobbolink]

14. Those things are being posted in the daily threads updating the struggle in Libya

[MrTriumph]

11. Not to argue, but is "likely" good enough when American lives are at risk?

Hasn't Pres. Obama put American lives in peril and committed limited US resources for a rebel leadership that may very well prove to be anti-American?

[On the Road]

18. "Likely" is from Our Point of View

We are not privy to all the administration's conversations and intelligence.

But ultimately, "likely" is all you have. If you feel the need for certainty, you'll never made any policy decisions.

[KoKo]

23. Many are very concerned about USA getting into another quaqmire in ME..causing more enemies to us...

Particularly when so much funding is being cut from all our schools, states pensioners and facilities, medical and improvements to our Infrastructure that Obama pledged to work for improving as a candidate. :-( Now, we have another possible WAR...

[TorchTheWitch]

9. like that's going to matter

There's no way on earth that the West is doing all this to just cross their fingers and hope for a friendly government... the West will intall one to their liking. BANK on it.

[bobbolink]

13. I hope that you will avail yourself of a terrific resource right here on DU.. the daily tweets from

the people themselves.

Have you read the information coming out of the Transitional team?

It might be a good idea to do so, if you are indeed wondering.

[Bucky]

16. I'd put my money on "no". But given the likelihood they'll win, it might not hurt to help them.

Once they're in power they'll have the same beef with the west that every other Arabic nation has. Oil dealings, culture clashes, and support for Israel will cause the same old frictions. But taking the right side in favor of the recent drift toward despot dumping may buy us a bit of good will.

[sad sally]

20. From the sound of things, don't think we know who's good and who's bad - yipes!

Libya: the West and al-Qaeda on the same side The Telegraph (hat tip Armaros)

Statements of support for Libya's revolution by al-Qaeda and leading Islamists have led to fears that military action by the West might be playing into the hands of its ideological enemies.

WikiLeaks cables, independent analysts and reporters have all identified supporters of Islamist causes among the opposition to Col Gaddafi's regime, particularly in the towns of Benghazi and Dernah.

An al-Qaeda leader of Libyan origin, Abu Yahya al-Libi, released a statement backing the insurrection a week ago, while Yusuf Qaradawi, the Qatar-based, Muslim Brotherhood-linked theologian issued a fatwa authorising Col Gaddafi's military entourage to assassinate him.

Col Gaddafi has pinpointed the rebels in Dernah as being led by an al-Qaeda cell that has declared the town an Islamic emirate. The regime also casts blame on hundreds of members of the Libyan Islamist Fighting Group released since the group renounced violence two years ago.

[KoKo]

24. Even the "Policy People" can't figure out who to support.

Been all over the place to the Think Tank Sites Blogs today...and it seems no one knows what to do.

Seems there's much more confusion over Libya than there was with Iraq Invasion. I'd hope that was a good thing...but it never really works out that way. It's just war, war and more war.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dkf]

10. Is our two days up?

Shouldn't we be done by now?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. Watch for the "Mission Accomplished" sign and the flight suit.

Followed by..another search for "the light at the end of the tunnel".

[sad sally]

21. Nope, remember what the Secretary of Defense said yesterday.

CAIRO - US Defence Secretary Robert Gates said on Wednesday there was no "timeline" for when UN-backed military operations in Libya would end, and that the outcome of the conflict remained unclear.

Speaking during a visit to Cairo, Gates said the UN Security Council resolution that authorised a no-fly zone was "not time-limited" and that it was unrealistic to expect military action to be over in a matter of weeks.

"But I think no one was under any illusions that this would be an operation that would last one week, or two weeks, or three weeks."

http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=45107?du

[KoKo]

22. Tomorrow's Friday...I think WE (USA) got in on Sunday after the first French Jet

unloaded a bomb. Today there were "rumblings" that our President wanted the Turks to lead Nato to do the "peace keeping."

We will have to see if NATO goes along with that deal. Not sure if that will work.

Other reports said that while our President said the Arab League would be part of the coaltion to support the "No Fly Zone" ...it turned out they were "No Shows" after criticizing USA's part shortly after we came in and started to Bomb.

So......lottsa work to see if Our President can pull this Rabbit outta THE HAT! We shall see...and what the consequences down the line for him are after he decided, so quickly, to get onboard with this conconcted thing by the "Usual Suspect's NeoCons" who got us into Iraq and want us into every country in the ME as a penance for us not bombing the hell out of IRAN...or maybe just their own personal interests in WAR PROFITS from WWWIII in the third Islamic Intervention ..without end. :-(

[gratuitous]

12. Crossroads up ahead

Sign says "Clusterfuck Avenue" and "Quagmire Way."

[Peace Patriot]

17. I'll tell you exactly where it's going--toward a U.S./EU/Brit-installed puppet government,

--with a smear of 'democracy' cosmetics (and I mean cosmetics--a la Honduras, Haiti, Colombia, iraq and Afghanistan)--that will re-privatize Libya's oil, transfer most of the oil profits to "western" bankster/big investor pockets, privatize and loot social programs, give up "Pan-Africanism" and unity with the "global south," and vote "western" corporate interests in OPEC.

There are pro's and con's on Gaddafi, but one of the things he did was to BALANCE these various interests in Libya's oil and to defend the SOVEREIGN interests of the Libyan people in their chief resource. He mellowed (from his Lockerbee/armed leftist rebel days), made peace with the "west" to the great benefit of his people, and strengthened Libya as a sovereign state and a force in world affairs. This is WHY a substantial portion of Libya's military remains on his side in the civil war that has broken out--which started out as peaceful democracy protests but quickly turned into an armed conflict and one in which complicated tribal rivalries are in play. The Libyan military loyal to Gaddafi without question feels that they are defending Libya's SOVEREIGNTY. Whether the rebellion was "western" instigated, or is merely "western"-infiltrated, probably cannot be known, at this point, but what seems clear to me is that this armed rebellion is very likely rife with future 'Gadaffi's' just biding their time until they can muscle their way into power, and they are counting on the "west" to accomplish that purpose for them. Who is using whom? Hard to say. But ALL past and recent history of the "west" in Middle East/North African affairs--ALL OF IT, no exceptions--is the "west" interfering from the get-go to destroy SOVEREIGNTY in these countries--to turn them into "western" chattels.

I am NOT "supporting" Gaddafi, believe me. I think he's an asshole. And I don't support war, and its mass murder and its mayhem and its horror, ever. We MUST STOP WAR. That's what the UN was for. Let's do it. LET'S STOP IT. How? You settle ALL DISPUTES PEACEFULLY. That's how you do it. You friggin REMOVE the war profiteers from the situation and you MAKE PEACE.

But that is NOT what the "west" is doing in this situation. Gaddaffi may have gone off the egoistic deep end, but the cold greed of "western" leaders is no more edifying and a lot more disgusting for its hypocrisy.

Just remember this: 'We' are not killing a 'dictator' in Libya. 'We' are killing PEOPLE--loyal military, innocent bystanders. THAT's who is DYING under our bombs and rockets and drones. 'We're' killing MORE people. MORE people are dying so that the 'side' that 'we' have chosen (or created) will WIN.

Nobody tried peace in Libya. Nobody even proposed it (except for Hugo Chavez). None of the bombing "western" powers suggested TALK. Nobody suggested ARMISTICE. Nobody suggested DISARMAMENT. (Cuz "western" war profiteers are supplying all the weapons!) They just sat back and let this civil war develop, giving the rebels encouragement, if not outright instigating the whole event. Nobody talked peace because nobody wanted peace! They wanted mayhem.

And the sad part is--besides the continued loss of life, suffering and civil disorder that the U.S. has fostered in this case, and is fostering and creating in numerous places around the world--is that we, the people of the U.S., who are paying for U.S. policy, have NO SAY in U.S. policy. None.

[KoKo]

19. +1,0000 because of the very interesting points you make in your well thought out post.

Thanks for bringing some good thoughts for discussion to this thread!