Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

eridani

(51,907 posts)
Thu Jan 28, 2016, 07:12 AM Jan 2016

The US Intervention in Libya Was Such a Smashing Success That a Sequel Is Coming

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/34859-the-us-intervention-in-libya-was-such-a-smashing-success-that-a-sequel-is-coming

Just as there was no al Qaeda or ISIS to attack in Iraq until the U.S. bombed its government, there was no ISIS in Libya until NATO bombed it. Now the U.S. is about to seize on the effects of its own bombing campaign in Libya to justify an entirely new bombing campaign in that same country
. The New York Times editorial page, which supported the original bombing of Libya, yesterday labeled plans for the new bombing campaign “deeply troubling,” explaining: “A new military intervention in Libya would represent a significant progression of a war that could easily spread to other countries on the continent.” In particular, “this significant escalation is being planned without a meaningful debate in Congress about the merits and risks of a military campaign that is expected to include airstrikes and raids by elite American troops” (the original Libya bombing not only took place without Congressional approval, but was ordered by Obama after Congress rejected such authorization).

This was supposed to be the supreme model of Humanitarian Intervention. It achieved vanishingly few humanitarian benefits, while causing massive humanitarian suffering, because — as usual — the people who executed the “humanitarian” war (and most who cheer-led for it) were interested only when the glories of bombing and killing were flourishing but cared little for actual humanitarianism (as evidenced by their almost complete indifference to the aftermath of their bombing). As it turns out, one of the few benefits of the NATO bombing of Libya will redound to the permanent winners in the private-public axis that constitutes the machine of Endless Militarism: It provided a pretext for another new war.
16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The US Intervention in Libya Was Such a Smashing Success That a Sequel Is Coming (Original Post) eridani Jan 2016 OP
Must feed the MIC u know newfie11 Jan 2016 #1
In the SoTU address, Obama said we learned that shit doesn't work. Wilms Jan 2016 #2
Heh, silly. joshcryer Jan 2016 #3
So the US invasions didn't put ISIS in Iraq and Libya? eridani Jan 2016 #4
Iraq invasion made ISIS. joshcryer Jan 2016 #5
ISIS was not in Libya until western intervention. eridani Jan 2016 #10
Thanks, Hillary! Thanks Obama! n/t n2doc Jan 2016 #6
So we can assume there's reason to go in anyway. Hortensis Jan 2016 #7
Reluctantly? Fumesucker Jan 2016 #12
Hillary as Dr. Strangelove? Oh, Fumesucker, Hortensis Jan 2016 #14
I try not to play mind reader Fumesucker Jan 2016 #15
Yes. Obama reluctantly decided to bomb Libya. Hortensis Jan 2016 #16
Hillary Clinton is all for this "Humanitarian Intervention". Odin2005 Jan 2016 #8
Libya, extremism and the consequences of collapse pampango Jan 2016 #9
Obama will be remembered as one of the worst foreign policy presidents in history LittleBlue Jan 2016 #11
North Korea lacks significant oil reserves and Israel is on the opposite side of the world Fumesucker Jan 2016 #13

newfie11

(8,159 posts)
1. Must feed the MIC u know
Thu Jan 28, 2016, 07:23 AM
Jan 2016

War war war good for the pocketbook

Absolutely ridiculous but we keep doing this, meanwhile creating more enemies, our infrastructure is crumbling etc, but by god the weapons manufactures are getting richer👎

 

Wilms

(26,795 posts)
2. In the SoTU address, Obama said we learned that shit doesn't work.
Thu Jan 28, 2016, 07:29 AM
Jan 2016

Then he failed to mention Syria, Libya and Yemen.

But he touted efforts in Ukraine that have, in fact, destabilized the country and reset the Cold War.

joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
3. Heh, silly.
Thu Jan 28, 2016, 07:37 AM
Jan 2016

This article is full of shit. But what to expect from Greenwald. It's not even a couple of paragraphs more than your quote. Unsubstantiated bullshit.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
4. So the US invasions didn't put ISIS in Iraq and Libya?
Thu Jan 28, 2016, 07:38 AM
Jan 2016

Lots of people besides Greenwald say otherwise.

joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
5. Iraq invasion made ISIS.
Thu Jan 28, 2016, 07:53 AM
Jan 2016

ISIS in Libya is no bigger than the militia in the US. It does more damage because Libya is post-revolution with uncertainty. But Libya isn't falling into Iraq or even Syria style destruction. Libya is doing better than most Latin American states. Without that recognition it's a shallow observation.

The Libya R2P action did not "create" ISIS nor did it "empower" ISIS. ISIS would be doing this shit regardless, in every state that had the Arab Spring. See: Tunisia, the state best off in the Arab Spring.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
10. ISIS was not in Libya until western intervention.
Fri Jan 29, 2016, 06:01 AM
Jan 2016

Attempting to dominate the world with military force always backfires.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
7. So we can assume there's reason to go in anyway.
Thu Jan 28, 2016, 08:20 AM
Jan 2016

Undoubtedly another least bad of several bad choices situation.

We reluctantly bombed Libya originally to stop genocide, hoping rather than expecting that things would stabilize on a better footing afterward. Somehow I doubt the many, many thousands whose lives we saved think the only gain was to war profiteers.

As for the rest, Josh is right. And IMO, imagining that President Obama is in thrall to war profiteers, enormously powerful though they are, and that that is really why this is happening, is definitely very silly.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
14. Hillary as Dr. Strangelove? Oh, Fumesucker,
Fri Jan 29, 2016, 07:08 AM
Jan 2016

you silly thing.

Yes. Obama made that decision reluctantly. As all informed people know.

Fumesucker

(45,851 posts)
15. I try not to play mind reader
Fri Jan 29, 2016, 07:18 AM
Jan 2016

But reluctance doesn't seem to have much to do with that video, it sounds much more like someone giddy with victory, natural and unaffected pleasure.

pampango

(24,692 posts)
9. Libya, extremism and the consequences of collapse
Thu Jan 28, 2016, 09:47 AM
Jan 2016
If the two rival governments are not reconciled, ISIL and al-Qaeda will strengthen their hold in Libya.

When former Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi was dragged from a drainage pipe in his hometown of Sirte and summarily executed by rebel forces in October 2011, much of the world looked at the event optimistically as the end of a 42-year dictatorship and a chance for the country to move forward.

In reality, however, the power vacuum left by the fall of Gaddafi's regime, along with his failure to create a civil society and infrastructure to succeed him and the vast stockpiles of unguarded weapons free for the taking, created a security nightmare that not only continues to threaten the region to this day, but also has broader implications for the long-term global struggle against violent extremism. Life in Libya under Gaddafi was bad; life in Libya today may arguably be worse.

Libya has collapsed, and without a general reconciliation between the rival governments, ISIL and al-Qaeda will only further strengthen their hold there. The December 2015 UN-brokered agreement was a starting point that proved too contentious for both parties to agree on.

Now is the time for the international community to work with both parties to resolve their political differences. As we have seen elsewhere, the consequences for Libya, for the region and beyond are too great.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/01/libya-extremism-consequences-collapse-160128054629594.html

Installing a new repressive dictator is not a viable (nor a liberal) option. Uniting the rival 'governments' as the UN has been trying to do seems more likely to work unless the world washes its hands and sits back and watches another civil war.
 

LittleBlue

(10,362 posts)
11. Obama will be remembered as one of the worst foreign policy presidents in history
Fri Jan 29, 2016, 06:39 AM
Jan 2016

Libya-Syria-Ukraine. The axis of US scheming failure.

And while we obsessed over and "solved" the Netanyahu-concocted "crisis" of Iran (which never had bombs and wasn't developing any), North Korea has created multiple atomic bombs for a regime 100x crazier than the ayatollahs.

Fail!

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The US Intervention in Li...