dagblog - Comments for "Does Obama Deserve Credit for the Death of Qaddafi?"

Actually, he didn't say it

Verified Atheist — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 13:54:10 +0000

In reply to 'There are very few black and

Actually, he didn't say it was "entirely justified", but was "far more justified than teaching children about the merits of suicide attacks against innocent civilians." In the context of pointing out that the "geriatric paraplegic in [a wheelchair]" was a "spiritual murderer of innocents", one might infer that he felt it was justified, but that's not what he said. I think primarily he was upset that you seemed to be completely dismissing this geriatric's guilt.

Edit to add: It's as if one were to criticize Cheney's critics by accusing them of picking on a "geriatric in a wheelchair".

'There are very few black and

NCD — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 01:32:31 +0000

In reply to I find this blogpost

'There are very few black and white issues in the Middle East...'

Except, apparently, when it comes to Israel knocking off geriatric paraplegics in wheelchairs with missiles, which Bruce recently said was entirely justified.

I completely agree. Why can't

Haseo — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 14:01:55 +0000

In reply to I think part of our problem

I completely agree. Why can't people understand?

I suspect that the mount most

Michael Maiello — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 17:13:17 +0000

In reply to in both cases - the Rwanda

I suspect that the mount most Americans are willing to sacrifice for any foreign intervention old be very small. Along the lines of "well, okay. But you'll have to cut my taxes to pay for it."

in both cases - the Rwanda

Elusive Trope — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 16:47:19 +0000

In reply to I guess I've never been

in both cases - the Rwanda scenario and the war for oil scenario - i just don't think we've been able to have a serious debate as a society. Regarding the latter one, the current OWS phenomenon, like its Tea Party cousin, has been driven in large part because of the standard of living situation of current Americans, yet we are compelled politically to talk about only the high ideals of freedom, liberty et al. We don't want to kill for oil, but when a gallon of gas goes over $5 politicians get kicked out of office while the economy stalls. Maybe if it was clear that the prices and economic sacrifices we were willing to make by not going into intervention mode, things might be different.

I guess I've never been

Michael Maiello — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 16:33:29 +0000

In reply to From just the purely academic

I guess I've never been convinced that we should have gotten involved in Rwanda either. That could have turned into a quagmire. If we are going to sign onto UN sponsored responsibility to protect interventions, we should probably raise a volunteer army for that purpose. Our current volunteers signed up to protect us against direct threats. As for Libya and oil... The US tolerated Qaddafi for decades. Also, of we do fight another war for oil, I'd like to be told upfront that's what we're doing.

Juan Cole, a supporter of the

artappraiser — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 15:44:02 +0000

In reply to Does Obama Deserve Credit for the Death of Qaddafi?

Juan Cole, a supporter of the UN/NATO action, made an interesting reply to a commenter, one that stood out for me, which I think might serve as a thought provoker to both pro-interventionists and anti-interventionists on this:

Qaddafi’s People’s Temple

Posted on 10/21/2011 by Juan

[.....]

§ 61 Responses to “Qaddafi’s People’s Temple”

[.....]

Jules says:

10/21/2011 at 12:43 pm

The lesson in all this is never make peace with the Americans. They will stab you in the back. It wasn’t the ‘rebels’ who overthrew Qaddafi but NATO. (According the NY Times it was a French warplane and one of those famous American predator drones that hit his convoy thus allowing for the lynching to take place). This was regime change.

Will the natural resources of Libya (ie. OIL) be distributed to the Libyans or will some other players step in and “make a buck”?

The French have been promised a lot of it. It’s been widely reported in the French media and one of Sarko’s ministers has already bragged about it. Whether this will come to pass is another matter.

Juan says:

10/21/2011 at 5:02 pm

Orientalist erasure of the agency of the Libyan people

I do think your post, in making it all about U.S. politics, ill serves the issue. However, if you are going to do that, one thing you seem to miss is that, unlike the raid into Pakistan to get Osama bin Laden, this action was not something conservative unilateralists would ever praise, as it was defined by Obama himself from the getgo as an effort where the U.S. alone was not going to lead, and as U.N. approved. That's like a poke in the eye to most conservative foreign policy ideology. (Yes, I realize that many on the left side of the aisle don't believe the U.S. wasn't leading, but if you are going to talk the U.S. political vein, those kind of realities don't really matter, only the presentation.)

From just the purely academic

Elusive Trope — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 15:32:23 +0000

In reply to I was against the Libya

From just the purely academic debate point of view - the Rwanda genocide was a "completely foreign conflict." And so going along these lines, the US has no business (pun intended) getting involved in such global events. But let's also be honest and say there is a lot of oil involved in the conflict over Libya. And as much as we hate it, oil prices influence the global economy which influences the US economy which influences the unemployment rate, etc. So was the conflict in Libya really a "completely foreign conflict"? And some may not believe oil is a justification for any level of military intervention are also the same people who are very upset about the current level of employment in this country.

What Kim Jong-Il Learned from

Donal — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 15:23:58 +0000

In reply to Does Obama Deserve Credit for the Death of Qaddafi?

What Kim Jong-Il Learned from Qaddafi's Fall: Never Disarm

The world watched in awe this Thursday as photos of Mummar Qaddafi's bludgeoned corpse marked the end of the Libyan dictator's 42-year rule. Libyans filled the streets in jubilation and leaders worldwide issued impassioned statements as the brutal regime came to an end. But 6,000 miles away in Pyongyang, North Korea, one leader was probably not celebrating. This gruesome end to Qaddafi's rule has likely confirmed what Kim Jong Il must have long been aware -- a dictator who wants to hold on to power should also hold onto his nuclear weapons.
...
The North Korean dictator has taken a very different nuclear path. No doubt understanding that his regime and his own survival are under constant threat, Kim has been quite unwilling to disarm. The last two decades have provided him with numerous cautionary tales of dictatorships defeated -- the Iraqi army was trounced in 1991, NATO triumphed over Milosevic in 1999, and the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003. And just this March, as NATO operations in Libya began, a North Korean spokesperson announced the lesson that Kim's regime had learned: "It has been shown to the corners of the earth that Libya's giving up its nuclear arms. ... was used as an invasion tactic to disarm the country by sugarcoating it with words like 'the guaranteeing of security' and the 'bettering of relations.' Having one's own strength," the official continued, "was the only way to keep the peace."

I think part of our problem

Elusive Trope — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 14:47:39 +0000

In reply to I have no expectations Trope.

I think part of our problem is that we are inclined (and I include myself in this) to seek those events which we can cheer from the beginning. Unfortunately in the messy international political world, especially in the post-colonial world of Africa, there are few actions of intervention where we can even remotely be guaranteed that things will turn out well. If we wait for those only situations where things are likely to turn out well, we will be waiting for a long long time. In other words, we would have a standard policy to never intervene in this region of the world because we cannot say how things will turn out. There is a risk indeed, and this risk increases the longer we support a regime in Libya that clearly shows itself to be as bad or worse than the previous one.

But an opportunity presented itself and I think given what is known (which is little), it was and is worth the roll of dice. It is unlikely to become a democracy, but it may turn out to be the first step towards the conditions that will lead to a democracy in the sense that we understand it (freedom of the press, value of individual rights, etc).