2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary's policies turned Libya into a terrorist hell hole
Hillary Clinton persuaded President Obama to destroy the Libyan government. Now it is a terrorist chaos.
Now there is a huge refugee crisis, ISIS and Al Qaeda are running rampant, horrible atrocities are being committed, and American weapons are falling into terrorist hands all over Africa which is destabilizing other countries.
From the New York Times:
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)GoldenThunder
(300 posts)The corporate oligarchy is about to find out that it's easier to put down a pack of rabid wolves with a dull butter knife than putting down the Sanders campaign. We're not fighting for a man. We're fighting for the very survival of democracy itself. This will be the biggest fight that most of us will have ever seen.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)Based on the rules in place, unless a candidate reaches the delegate threshold before the convention.
Uncle Joe
(58,112 posts)Thanks for the thread, Cheese Sandwich.
Jitter65
(3,089 posts)Uncle Joe
(58,112 posts)while other advisers were arguing against it, furthermore to my knowledge President Obama never acted like he just woke up on Christmas Morning when speaking of Gadhafi's death.
To my way of thinking there something unPresidential with that kind of reaction, it's a little too cold blooded.
I believe a President should have more sobriety about such things.
pablo_marmol
(2,375 posts)Man --- you're not kidding. Could not agree more.
Samantha
(9,314 posts)and I think this thread is a very healthy thing.
I knew this was Hillary's idea, and I thought "didn't she learn anything from Iraq?"
This is actually the primary reason I decided to support Bernie Sanders. When he was asked about foreign affairs he responded he did not think the United States should be going around the world dethroning heads of state we did not like. He specifically then mentioned the Middle East and the fact those wars never end. So while he supports being a part of a coalition when it is necessary, spearheading an attack is not something this Country should be doing. This position was my position and I never thought I would hear a candidate for President say these words. I was sure I had found my candidate for President, and I will always have the utmost respect for him, win or lose this race, because of his principles.
Sam
amborin
(16,631 posts)appalachiablue
(41,055 posts)It has to end for the sake of the planet.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)But hey, at least she is PNAC endorsed!
panader0
(25,816 posts)She messed that country up too.
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)And, don't forget Poland! (kidding)
Honestly though, if Henry Kissinger and Robert Kagan endorse her that should have us running from HRC. Sad, that we're not.
AgerolanAmerican
(1,000 posts)that "color revolution" was run right out of her State Department. Her Deputy SoS was literally handing out cookies to support a violent coup of a democratically elected government.
Now that nation is bankrupt, territorially divided, and mired in a brutal civil war while the oligarch class strips it dry of all its wealth and resources.
Their only "crime", for which this was done to them, was being friendly to Russia.
Peace Patriot
(24,010 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)We came, we saw, etc.
Yes there were emails too where she was taking credit for this.
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)Those are FACTS.
The tragedy of it all is the millions of lives destroyed by death, loss and the need to escape the horrors the decision to ruin yet another sovereign nation resulted in.
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)I meant Clinton classy as hell, as an insult because bragging on her part in that was not classy at all. I was being snarky at her.
polly7
(20,582 posts)(I need sleep. I was supposed to get some before tonight but furnace is out and I'm freezing. )
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)And I am using a tablet or cheap phone most of the time, which likes to auto correct things I don't want corrected into something I don't even understand. It makes me look even dumber than I am. Lol
polly7
(20,582 posts)Your post was spot on.
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)peacebird
(14,195 posts)polly7
(20,582 posts)2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)nichomachus
(12,754 posts)Than Trump talking about his penis.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)I shouldn't laugh but you're right
amborin
(16,631 posts)ladjf
(17,320 posts)she was laughing about the situation and her smug, arrogant comment "We, we saw, he died."
followed by mirthful laughter. To me, that spoke volumes about her philosophy and mind set.
bjo59
(1,166 posts)This about a guy who was sodomized with a bayonet before being finished off.
DiehardLiberal
(580 posts)Samantha
(9,314 posts)the trigger. I know how bad he was but either scenario is just beyond the pale.
Sam
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)andrewv1
(168 posts)Especially towards the end where Fox went into their Military Segment with the Fascist Orangutan & his two Bongo Bookends-Smirky & Little Marco.
While they were trying to out do each other, all three fell flat in their answers of our continued buildup & who we should bomb.
As it when on, I kept thinking how Clinton has so much more proven experience in fermenting destabilization and crises throughout the world than anybody up there on stage.
She definitely would of been awarded best fire breather over the boys if she were there.
And nobody can argue that she does not have the best Neocon Credentials in this race.
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)For disaster.
andrewv1
(168 posts)Then I realized it was comments from a HRC Supporter.
I guess Hillary just represents an authoritarian figure that they don't question, which is very similar to the mindset of your typical Republican.
It's kinda sad & a few of them here don't remind me of what a Democrat has previously stood for....
Duval
(4,280 posts)pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)SammyWinstonJack
(44,129 posts)andrewv1
(168 posts)I think he beats him by over 10 points.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)All the polling shows Sanders does better against Republicans that Hillary does.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)Smarmie Doofus
(14,498 posts)Everything she *touches* goes kabloooowie!
Yeah. Right. Let's let her get HER finger on the button.
FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)She simply always believes the two are one and the same, until she is proven wrong, every fucking time.
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)To say Libya was all Clinton's doing is very short-sighted and betrays one's prejudices. She was not the Commander-In-Chief. Obama was.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/politics/hillary-clinton-libya.html?_r=0
In the throes of the Arab Spring, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi was facing a furious revolt by Libyans determined to end his quixotic 42-year rule. The dictator's forces were approaching Benghazi, the crucible of the rebellion, and threatening a blood bath. France and Britain were urging the United States to join them in a military campaign to halt Colonel Qaddafi's troops, and now the Arab League, too, was calling for action.
It was a very complex and violent situation but if you're reading into it that it was nothing but 'adventurism' or 'blood lust' on Clinton's part, I think you are selectively seeing what you want.
Maybe it wasn't handled well, maybe it made ISIS stronger, all good points, but, again, the international community was practically begging us to intervene. It is not as simple as Clinton simply deciding one morning she wanted to kill some people, or to bully them.
Even this NYT article, critical of her, states that much.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)polly7
(20,582 posts)Last edited Sat Apr 2, 2016, 07:08 PM - Edit history (2)
If you think Clinton - well aware of PNAC, the 'seven countries in five years' plan didn't know exactly how Libya was long planned for 'regime change', you weren't paying attention.
Start here:
Exposed: The "Humanitarian" War In Libya
Check this out - 'The Humanitarian War' = http://www.laguerrehumanitaire.fr/english It's horrifying. (Videos now here - I watched them on the original site when all of it was happening and posted these here at DU) http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article29428.htm
Must watch videos, the western trained NTC 'Prime Minister' - 'word to ear!' was the source of the 'data (all unofficial and lies, of course) that led to the UN resolution.
A bunch of LIES submitted to the ICC ..... by the UN - who got their 'numbers and crimes' from the western trained NTC Prime Minister - 'word to ear'. Pages and pages redacted.
No Evidence? No Problem!!
How the CIA Used "Libyan Expatriates" To Engineer Consent For Regime Change
One of the main sources for the claim that Qaddafi was killing his own people is the Libyan League for Human Rights (LLHR), an organization linked to the International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH). On Feb. 21, 2011, LLHR General Secretary Dr. Sliman Bouchuiguir initiated a petition in collaboration with the organization U.N. Watch and the National Endowment for Democracy. This petition was signed by more than 70 NGOs.
Then a few days later, on Feb. 25, Dr. Bouchuiguir went to the U.N. Human Rights Council in order to expose the allegations concerning the crimes of Qaddafis government. In July 2011 we went to Geneva to interview Dr. Sliman Bouchuiguir.
"How to circumvent international law and justice 101." - originally published by http://laguerrehumanitaire.fr
A film by Julien Teil
Official Website:
http://laguerrehumanitaire.fr
Official web:
http://thehumanitarianwar.com
Official TV:
http://laguerrehumanitaire-film.rutube.ru/
*************************************************************************************************
What you don't know about the Libyan crisis: (watch the timeline closely)
*************************************************************************************************
The horror of Libya - to fulfill the PNAC objective of overthrowing yet another country. "7 countries in 5 years!" This was NO "Humanitarian Intervention", and certainly not for all those migrants Qaddafi had allowed in over decades, Qaddafi loyalists and others who were raped, tortured, mutilated, hung, burned to death .... all known of by the NATO 'humanitarian team'.
It was a bullshit, self-serving, western funded and backed coup against yet another sovereign nation not yet indebted to the IMF and controlling its own resources, not to mention not allowing U.S. bases 'Africom' into all of Africa.
Some of these links don't work anymore, but read and discover just what a sham this was and why. The video at the end is particularly interesting.
The Untold Story in Libya
Posted by polly7 in General Discussion
Tue Oct 18th 2011, 10:06 AM
In May 2010, Libya was voted on to the UN Human Rights Council by a huge majority. The UN Watch's campaign to remove Libya from the Human Rights Council began immediately.
In March, 2011, a report, containing positive quotes from UN diplomatic delegations in many countries, was due to be presented by the UN Human Rights Council, leading to a Resolution commending Libya's progress in a wide aspect of human rights (listed in the article). March 19, 2011, the attack on Libya began.
Libya was one of only five countries without a Rothschild model central bank, Quaddafi openly discussed, in 2009, the nationalization of US, UK, Germany, Spain, Norway, Canada and Italy's oil companies, switching to the gold dinar - a single African currency that would serve as an alternative to the U.S. dollar and allow African nations to share the wealth. Libya has an abundance of water - Gaddafis Great Man-Made River Project project offers limitless amounts of water for Libyans and would allow them to be totally self-sufficient. In the near-future, water will be the next resource equated with money and power, other countries may be dependent on its reserves. A self-sufficient, dictator-ruled nation with control over some of the worlds most precious resource waves a big red warning flag.
In 2010 Gaddafi made a motion to the UN General Assembly to investigate the circumstances of the invasion of Iraq. He was also wasting the west's ....... 'libya's' oil on free education, housing, tolerance of immigrants, raising the standard of living in Africa, lowering infant mortality while raising life expectancy.
Many of these things are completely similar to what we learned of Iraq.
*************************************************************************************************
Global Civilians For Peace In Libya
Posted on November 9, 2011 by globalciviliansforpeace
When analysing the standard of living in Libya it is important to put the achievements into context. During the 1950s under the leadership of King Idris, Libya was among the poorest nations in the world with some of the lowest living standards. From the early 1980s until 2003 Libya were placed under crippling sanctions by the US and UN which had the result of strangling Libyas growing economy leading to an inevitable smothering of development projects and social welfare schemes. Despite this The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya had achieved the highest living standard in Africa. Libya has also invested heavily in African development initiatives. The funding of infrastructure projects as well as African political and financial institutions was aimed at developing Africa independently and combating the economic exploitation of African resources and labour by outside powers. On January 4th, 2011 just weeks before the conflict in Libya started UN members praised Libyas continued welfare provision and commitment to upholding human rights.
Public Health Care
Public Health Care in Libya prior to NATOs Humanitarian Intervention was the best in Africa. Health care is [was] available to all citizens free of charge by the public sector. The country boasts the highest literacy and educational enrolment rates in North Africa. The Government is [was] substantially increasing the development budget for health services . (WHO Libya Country Brief )
According to the World Health Organization (WHO): Life expectancy at birth was 72.3 years (2009), among the highest in the developing World.
Under 5 mortality rate per 1000 live births declined from 71 in 1991 to 14 in 2009
(http://www.who.int/countryfocus/cooperation_strategy/ccsbrief_lby_en.pdf)
Education
The adult literacy rate was of the order of 89%, (2009), (94% for males and 83% for females). 99.9% of youth are literate (UNESCO 2009 figures, See UNESCO, Libya Country Report)
Gross primary school enrolment ratio was 97% for boys and 97% for girls (2009) .
(see UNESCO tables at http://stats.uis.unesco.org/unesco/TableViewer/document.aspx?ReportId=121&IF_Language=eng&BR_Country=4340&BR_Region=40525
[Extract]
21 February 2011
During Muammar Gaddafis 42-year rule, Libya has made great strides socially and economically thanks to its vast oil income, but tribes and clans continue to be part of the demographic landscape.
Women in Libya are free to work and to dress as they like, subject to family constraints. Life expectancy is in the seventies. And per capita income while not as high as could be expected given Libyas oil wealth and relatively small population of 6.5m is estimated at $12,000 (£9,000), according to the World Bank.
Illiteracy has been almost wiped out, as has homelessness a chronic problem in the pre-Gaddafi era, where corrugated iron shacks dotted many urban centres around the country.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-middle-east-12528996
Proud nation
In August 1984, Muammar Al Qadhafi laid the foundation stone for the pipe production plant at Brega. The Great Man-Made River Project had begun.
Click here to see a map of the pipeline network
Libya had oil money to pay for the project, but it did not have the technical or engineering expertise for such a massive undertaking.
Foreign companies from South Korea, Turkey, Germany, Japan, the Philippines and the UK were invited to help.
Water is seen as key to the countrys future prosperity
It is hard to fault the Libyans on their commitment. They estimate that when the Great Man-Made River is completed, they will have spent almost $20bn. So far, that money has bought 5,000km of pipeline that can transport 6.5 million cubic metres of water a day from over 1,000 desert wells.
As a result, Libya is now a world leader in hydrological engineering, and it wants to export its expertise to other African and Middle-Eastern countries facing the same problems with their water.
Through its agriculture, Libya hopes to gain a foothold in Europes consumer market.
But the Great Man-Made River Project is much more than an extraordinary piece of engineering.
Adam Kuwairi argues that the success of the Great Man-Made River Project has increased Libyas standing in the world: Its another addition to our independence; it gives us the confidence to survive.
https://globalciviliansforpeace.wordpress.com/2011/11/09/the-standard-of-living-in-libya/
*************************************************************************************************
Yes, simply put, Nato's member nations are trying to steer back Libya Central Bank into the mainstream financial structure, under the watching eyes of the World Bank and the International Monetary Funds, to provide (reconstruction) funds to Libya with hefty interests payments - and transform a country which was free of debts into a heavily indebted country - as done everywhere else in sub-Saharan African countries.
http://businessafrica.net/africabiz/graphs...
http://businessafrica.net/africabiz/arcvol...
*************************************************************************************************
From a 'no fly zone to all out bombing of targets called out by rebels'. NATO's high-precision bombing preceeded 'rebel' incursions.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MH27Ak03.html
"It's now common knowledge that British SAS, French intelligence, US Central Intelligence Agency assets, Qatar special forces and mercenaries of all stripes were parachuted as boots on the ground for months, planning and training the "rebels" and in close coordination with that philanthropic prodigy, NATO.
That was never the UN mandate - but who cares? NATO/GCC paid the bills, NATO conducted the bombing and NATO/GCC will "stabilize" the mess, according to a 70-page plan leaked by the British to Rupert Murdoch'sz Times of London."
"Expect local - and global - fireworks as far as grabbing the loot is concerned. Without even considering the (still unexplored) oil and gas wealth, Libya's foreign assets are worth at least $150 billion. Libya's central bank, now about to be privatized, has no less than 143.8 tons of gold. Then there's at least a millennium supply of fresh water, which had started to be harnessed by Gaddafi via the spectacular, multibillion dollar Great Man-Made River (GMR) project."
Middle East
Aug 27, 2011
THE ROVING EYE
R2P is now Right 2 Plunder
By Pepe Escobar
*************************************************************************************************
"Oil-rich but with a relatively small population of 6.6. million, Gadhafi's Libya welcomed hundreds of thousands of black Africans looking for work in recent decades. "
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/01/l...
*************************************************************************************************
NATOs War on Libya is an Attack on African DevelopmentDan Glazebrook
6 09 2011
http://globalciviliansforpeace.com/tag/afr... /
To prevent this threat of African development, the Europeans and the USA have responded in the only way they know how militarily. Four years ago, the US set up a new command and control centre for the military subjugation of the Africa, called AFRICOM. The problem for the US was that no African country wanted to host them; indeed, until very recently, Africa was unique in being the only continent in the world without a US military base. And this fact is in no small part, thanks to the efforts of the Libyan government.
Before Gaddafis revolution deposed the British-backed King Idris in 1969, Libya had hosted one of the worlds biggest US airbases, the Wheelus Air Base; but within a year of the revolution, it had been closed down and all foreign military personnel expelled.
More recently, Gaddafi had been actively working to scupper AFRICOM. African governments that were offered money by the US to host a base were typically offered double by Gaddafi to refuse it, and in 2008 this ad-hoc opposition crystallised into a formal rejection of AFRICOM by the African Union.
*************************************************************************************************
The force used by the occupier to displace the old regime always makes sure the new regime is supine and complaint. The National Transitional Council, made up of former Gadhafi loyalists, Islamists and tribal leaders, many of whom detest each other, will be the Wests vehicle for the reconfiguration of Libya. Libya will return to being the colony it was before Gadhafi and the other young officers in 1969 ousted King Idris, who among other concessions had let Standard Oil write Libyas petroleum laws. Gadhafis defiance of Western commercial interests, which saw the nationalization of foreign banks and foreign companies, along with the oil industry, as well as the closure of U.S. and British air bases, will be reversed. The despotic and collapsed or collapsing regimes in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt and Syria once found their revolutionary legitimacy in the pan-Arabism of Egypts Gamal Abdel Nasser. But these regimes fell victim to their own corruption, decay and brutality. None were worth defending. Their disintegration, however, heralds a return of the corporate and imperial power that spawned figures like Nasser and will spawn his radical 21st century counterparts.
Libya: Here We Go Again
Monday 5 September 2011
by: Chris Hedges, Truthdig | Op-Ed
http://www.truthout.com/libya-here-we-go-a...
*************************************************************************************************
LIBYA: Rebels execute black immigrants while forces kidnap others
http://somalilandpress.com/libya-rebels-ex...
"Many Africans have virtually nothing after years in Libya, many have been looted, robbed, while others saw their living quarters and apartments go in flames. Now they are praying to God to send them home.
While the international leaders are busy drafting resolutions to dismantle Muammar Gaddafi, the African Union has not yet commented on the situation in Libya.
Meanwhile, the International Criminal Court is said to have started a formal inquiry into possible crimes against humanity in Libya that will investigate the Libyan regime."
*************************************************************************************************
JohnPilger.com
8 September 2011
http://johnpilger.com/articles/hail-to-the...
..."I quote that not so much for its Orwellian quality but as a model of journalism's role in justifying "our" bloodbaths in advance.
This is Rupert's Revolution, after all. Gone from the Murdoch press are pejorative "insurgents". The action in Libya, says The Times, is "a revolution... as revolutions used to be". That it is a coup by a gang of Muammar Gaddafi's ex cronies and spooks in collusion with Nato is hardly news.
The self-appointed "rebel leader", Mustafa Abdul Jalil, was Gaddafi's feared justice minister. The CIA runs or bankrolls most of the rest, including America's old friends, the Mujadeen Islamists who spawned al-Qaeda.
They told journalists what they needed to know: that Gaddafi was about to commit "genocide", of which there was no evidence, unlike the abundant evidence of "rebel" massacres of black African workers falsely accused of being mercenaries. European bankers' secret transfer of the Central Bank of Libya from Tripoli to "rebel" Benghazi by European bankers in order to control the country's oil billions was an epic heist of little .
*************************************************************************************************
Sirte a 'living hell,' says aid group
http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news/co...
Tuesday 04 October 2011 by Our Foreign Desk Printable Email
A Red Cross team finally entered the besieged Libyan town of Sirte yesterday and delivered urgently needed surgical supplies to treat about 200 wounded people.
Nato has repeatedly targeted Sirte in its seven-month bombing campaign that enabled armed rebels to topple the government of Muammar Gadaffi and gain control of most of the oil-rich state.
*************************************************************************************************
Absolutely horrible to use rape as a propaganda weapon for war, while ignoring the reality of it for all those brutalized, raped and some, murdered by the NATO supported 'rebels' - just one example of their many atrocities.
********* http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2174087 **********
http://andrewgavinmarshall.com/2011/08/26/lies-war-and-empire-natos-humanitarian-imperialism-in-libya
In early March of 2011, news headlines in Western nations reported that Gaddafi would kill half a million people.
<1> On March 18, as the UN agreed to launch air strikes on Libya, it was reported that Gaddafi had begun an assault against the rebel-held town of Benghazi. The Daily Mail reported that Gaddafi had threatened to send in his African mercenaries to crush the rebellion.<2> Reports of Libyan government tanks sitting outside Benghazi poised for an invasion were propagated in the Western media.<3> In the lead-up to the United Nations imposing a no-fly zone, reports spread rapidly through the media of Libyan government jets bombing the rebels.<4> Even in February, the New York Times the sacred temple for the stenographers of power we call journalists reported that Gaddafi was amassing thousands of mercenaries to defend Tripoli and crush the rebels.<5>
Italys Foreign Minister declared that over 1,000 people were killed in the fighting in February, citing the number as credible.<6> Even a top official with Human Rights Watch declared the rebels to be peaceful protesters who are nice, sincere people who want a better future for Libya.<7> The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights declared that thousands of people were likely killed by Gaddafi, and called for international intervention to protect civilians.<8> In April, reports spread near and far at lightning speed of Gaddafis forces using rape as a weapon of war, with the first sentence in a Daily Mail article declaring, Children as young as eight are being raped in front of their families by Gaddafis forces in Libya, with Gaddafi handing out Viagra to his troops in a planned and organized effort to promote rape.<9>
As it turned out, these claims as posterity notes turned out to be largely false and contrived. Doctors Without Borders and Amnesty International both investigated the claims of rape, and have found no first-hand evidence in Libya that rapes are systematic and being used as part of war strategy, and their investigations in Eastern Libya have not turned up significant hard evidence supporting allegations of rapes by Qaddafis forces. Yet, just as these reports came out, Hillary Clinton declared that the U.S. is deeply concerned by reports of wide-scale rape in Libya.<10> Even U.S. military and intelligence officials had to admit that, there is no evidence that Libyan military forces are being given Viagra and engaging in systematic rape against women in rebel areas; at the same time Susan Rice, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, told a closed-door meeting of officials at the UN that the Libyan military is using rape as a weapon in the war with the rebels and some had been issued the anti-impotency drug. She reportedly offered no evidence to backup the claim.<
Untrue, says US
US says Gadhafi troops issued Viagra, raping victims
Allegation suggests troops encouraged to turn to sexual violence, envoys say
By Louis Charbonneau
updated 4/28/2011 9:31:26 PM ET
UNITED NATIONS The U.S. envoy to the United Nations told the Security Council Thursday that troops loyal to Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi were increasingly engaging in sexual violence and some had been issued the impotency drug Viagra, diplomats said.
Several U.N. diplomats who attended a closed-door Security Council meeting on Libya told Reuters that U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice raised the Viagra issue in the context of increasing reports of sexual violence by Gadhafi's troops.
"Rice raised that in the meeting but no one responded," a diplomat said on condition of anonymity. The allegation was first reported by a British newspaper.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42809612/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa#.TqXeG96ImU8
US intel: No evidence of Viagra as weapon in Libya
http://www.msnbc .msn.com/id/42824884/ns/world_news-mide...
UN Ambassador Rice reportedly had said drug was being used in systematic rapes
NBC News and news services updated 4/29/2011 1:52:00 PM ET
UNITED NATIONS There is no evidence that Libyan military forces are being given Viagra and engaging in systematic rape against women in rebel areas, US military and intelligence officials told NBC News on Friday.
Diplomats said Thursday that US Ambassador Susan Rice told a closed-door meeting of officials at the UN that the Libyan military is using rape as a weapon in the war with the rebels and some had been issued the anti- impotency drug. She reportedly offered no evidence to backup the claim.
While rape has been a weapon of choice in many other African conflicts, the US officials say they've seen no such reports out of Libya.
[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]
The gap between Hillary Rodham Clinton's rhetoric warning of a Rwanda-like slaughter of civilians in Libya and the facts gathered by career intelligence staff is taking on significance as the former secretary of state prepares another bid for the White House and her national security credentials are re-examined. (Associated Press)
*************************************************************************************************
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...
bvar22:
The Untold Story in Libya:
How The West Cooked Up The People's Uprising
http://whowhatwhy.com/2011/08/31/now-that-... ... /
The Global Disaster Capitalists never let a good disaster go to waste.
In the case of Libya, they used their Enforcement Arm (NATO & The US Military) to CREATE a disaster where there was none.
For all his dictatorial megalomania, Gaddafi is a committed pan-African - a fierce defender of African unity. Libya was not in debt to international bankers. It did not borrow cash from the International Monetary Fund for any "structural adjustment". It used oil money for social services - including the Great Man Made River project, and investment/aid to sub-Saharan countries. Its independent central bank was not manipulated by the Western financial system. All in all a very bad example for the developing world.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/M...
*************************************************************************************************
Libya: Oil, Banks, Water, the United Nations, and Americas Holy Crusade by Felicity Arbuthnot
Posted on April 5, 2011 by dandelionsalad
.."The country was commended: for the progress made in the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals, namely universal primary education (and) firm commitment (to) health care. There was praise for cooperation with international organizations in combating human trafficking and corruption .. and for cooperation with the International Organization for Migration.
Progress in enjoyment of economic and social rights, including in the areas of education, health care, poverty reduction and social welfare with measures taken to promote transparency, were also cited. Malaysia: Commended the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya for being party to a significant number of international and regional human rights instruments. Promotion: of the rights of persons with disabilities and praise for measures taken with regard to low income families, were cited...
.."So how does the all tie together? Libya, in March being praised by the Majority of the UN., for human rights progress across the board, to being the latest, bombarded international pariah? A nations destruction enshrined in a UN., Resolution?
The answer lies in part with the Geneva based UN Watch.(vii) UN Watch is : a non-governmental organization whose mandate is to monitor the performance of the United Nations. With Consultative Status to the UN Economic and Social Council, with ties to the UN Department of Public Information, UN Watch is affiliated with the American Jewish Committee. (AJC.)"
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2011/0... /
Interesting ..... the involvement in HR Watch of persons whose core values include securing energy resources.
************************************************************************************************
Two Nato missiles forced the group to leave the cars and escape on foot, seeking shelter in a drainage ditch. A bodyguard hurled grenades at approaching militiamen but one grenade "hit the concrete wall and bounced back to fall between Muammar Gaddafi and Abu Bakr Younis", Younis junior said.
"The shrapnel hit my father and he fell down to the ground. Muammar Gaddafi was also injured by the grenade, on the left side of his head," he said.
New York-based Human Rights Watch said Gaddafi was already bleeding from head wounds caused by blast shrapnel as he tried to flee Sirte, his hometown.
The charity obtained unedited mobile footage that showed militia fighters abusing Gaddafi as they took him into custody in October 2011.
"As he was being led on to the main road, a militiaman stabbed him in his anus with what appears to have been a bayonet, causing another rapidly bleeding wound," the report said.
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/gaddafi-killed-bayonet-stab-anus-libya-395224
The Grand finale - sodomized with a bayonet, beaten, tortured and murdered in the street - "We came, we saw ....... he died, lol".
**************************************************************************************************
Horace Campbell and Maximilian Forte have written two solid accounts describing the reality versus myths of regime change in Libya. Clintons characterization of accelerating the fall of Qaddafi is a cynical understatement, like her self congratulatory comment that we came, we saw, he died after rebels killed Qaddafi on the street. Many of the refugees drowning in the Mediterannean Sea or reaching the shores of Italy today are a direct consequence of that operation. Yet who has been held to account?
Full article: http://dissidentvoice.org/2015/09/the-wicked-war-on-syria/
************************************************************************************************
Britain, Libya and the Mediterranean - The Creation of a Humanitarian Emergency
by Dan Glazebrook / May 1st, 2015
NATOs war of aggression against Libya in 2011 turned the country over to racist death squads, with hundreds of sub-Saharan migrant workers and black Libyans beaten and burnt to death by the revolutionaries and tens of thousands illegally detained and tortured by the militias. Tawergha, the only black African town on the Mediterranean, and formerly home to around 30,000 people, is now a ghost town after NATOs shock troops militias with names like the Brigades for the purging of black skins ethnically cleansed the region. Last weeks butchering of 30 Ethiopian workers by ISIS is but the latest chapter in the anti-African pogroms that have characterised the Libyan insurgency from the very start. This is the reality of NATOs Libyan revolution (led by AbdulHakim BelHaj, now leader of ISIS in Libya) and it is precisely this from which black Africans in Libya are now fleeing. As Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi put it, a person has to risk his life because he needs to escape from a situation where they are chopping off the heads of those near him.
And this head-chopping has not been restricted to Libyas borders. NATOs war has boosted head-choppers across the entire region, from Tunisia and Algeria to Mali, Nigeria and Cameroon. Before 2011, Boko Haram barely existed. Today, thanks to NATO opening up Libyas arsenals to them and their friends, they are killing hundreds every week, often burning them alive in churches and mosques. As one Nigerian told a reporter last week, We prefer to die trying (to migrate) than stay back there and die .Stay at home and get shot dead or maybe burnt to death; I just prefer to die while trying or survive.
Yet the Libyan war itself is only the latest in a long series of acts of aggression launched by the British state and its allies, all of which continue to have disastrous consequences across the entire Middle East and North Africa region. A look at the list of where the migrants come from makes this devastatingly clear. The majority of the worlds refugees come from one of three countries: Afghanistan, Somalia and Syria. What all have in common is that they have all been subject to vicious terror campaigns by Britain, the USA and their allies: whether directly, as in Afghanistan; through allied states, as with the US-backed Ethiopian invasion of Somalia in 2006 (which toppled the first stable government the country had had in decades); or through the provision of cash, weapons and diplomatic cover to sectarian death squads, as in the case of Syria. Yemen is the latest additional source of refugees, with the Saudi bombing campaign bringing new arrivals to almost 10,000 per week.
Full article: http://dissidentvoice.org/2015/05/britain-libya-and-the-mediterranean/
Behind Every Refugee Stands an Arms Trader
http://dissidentvoice.org/2015/04/behind-every-refugee-stands-an-arms-trader/
**************************************************************************************************
Trapped in Libya: the flotsam of the Wests wars
By Vijay Prashad
Source: al-Araby
May 14, 2015
European ambassadors have drafted a UN resolution, under chapter VII (which allows use of force), to tackle the crisis. For them the military option is the brightest light. As Mogherini said, the EU wants the authority to use all necessary means to seize and dispose of the [smugglers] vessels.
Thus far in 2015, over 60,000 people have tried to cross from Libya to Europe. Of them, close to two thousand have died a death toll 20 times higher than in 2014, it continues.
The threat to the refugees is a direct outcome of UN Security Council Resolution 1973, ironically under the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) banner. A new UNSC resolution is not going to be about the protection of the refugees, but to use force to destroy their lifeline. R2P has been ground under by the Wests behavior in Libya.
Full article: https://zcomm.org/znetarticle/trapped-in-libya-the-flotsam-of-the-wests-wars/
On Monday, a New York Times story demonstrated more specifically why Clinton's interactions with Blumenthal may have been a bad idea. Blumenthal, the Times reports via solid sources, was advising the Secretary of State both before and after former Libyan autocrat Muammar Qaddafi's death while also advising a group of private individuals who hoped to make money by obtaining reconstruction-type contracts in a post-Qaddafi Libya.
Much of the Libya intelligence that Mr. Blumenthal passed on to Mrs. Clinton appears to have come from a group of business associates he was advising as they sought to win contracts from the Libyan transitional government. The venture, which was ultimately unsuccessful, involved other Clinton friends, a private military contractor and one former C.I.A. spy seeking to get in on the ground floor of the new Libyan economy ...
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/05/18/hillary_clinton_sidney_blumenthal_libya_unofficial_adviser_represented_business.html
The detritus of regime change in Libya
By Vijay Prashad
Source: al-Araby
November 1, 2015
Much the same story is being repeated with the emergence of IS in Libya. Adversaries of Gaddafi in the 1990s took refuge in the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group; one of whose strongholds was the town of Derna.
These fighters fled the country to join the Jihad International in Afghanistan, Chechnya, Iraq, Yemen and Syria.
It had become a familiar matter to meet an al-Libi in the redoubts of the jihadis. Studies show that Libya provided per capita the highest number of jihadis to this global campaign.
Full article: https://zcomm.org/znetarticle/the-detritus-of-regime-change-in-libya/
Deadliest Terror in the World: The Wests Latest Gift to Africa
by Dan Glazebrook / November 30th, 2015
The earliest casualty of NATOs war outside Libya was Mali. Taureg fighters who had worked in Gaddafis security forces fled Libya soon after Gaddafis government was overthrown, and mounted an insurgency in Northern Mali. They, in turn, were overthrown, however, by Al Qaedas regional affiliates flush with Libyan weaponry who then turned Northern Mali into another base from which to train and launch attacks. Boko Haram was a key beneficiary. As Brendan O Neill wrote in an excellent 2014 article worth quoting at length:
Boko Haram benefited enormously from the vacuum created in once-peaceful northern Mali following the Wests ousting of Gaddafi. In two ways: first, it honed its guerrilla skills by fighting alongside more practised Islamists in Mali, such as AQIM; and second, it accumulated some of the estimated 15,000 pieces of Libyan military hardware and weaponry that leaked across the countrys borders following the sweeping aside of Gaddafi. In April 2012, Agence France France Presse reported that dozens of Boko Haram fighters were assisting AQIM and others in northern Mali. This had a devastating knock-on effect in Nigeria. As the Washington Post reported in early 2013, The Islamist insurgency in northern Nigeria has entered a more violent phase as militants return to the fight with sophisticated weaponry and tactics learned on the battlefields of nearby Mali. A Nigerian analyst said Boko Harams level of audacity was high [in late 2012], immediately following the movement of some of its militants to the Mali region.
Full article: http://dissidentvoice.org/2015/11/deadliest-terror-in-the-world-the-wests-latest-gift-to-africa/
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/05/the-problem-with-hillarys-friends/393635/
The memos covered everything from warnings about possible terrorist attacks and the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood within Libya to the potential training of Libyan rebels and the hiring of new economic advisers by the Libyan premier. As the National Journal reports, the House Benghazi Committee is already seeking Blumenthals testimony.
WE CAME, WE SAW, HE DIED 10.20.15 6:00 PM ET
Hillarys Libya Post-War Plan Was Play It by Ear, Gates Says
She still defends the invasion as smart power at its best. But war backers like Clinton had no plan for securing the country, says ex-Pentagon chief Bob Gates.
As secretary of state, it was Clintons job to ask questions about the state of Libya, both before the intervention and after. She was secretary when the intervention beganand when the U.S. presence in Benghazi ended with a deadly attack. And while she held talks in the early months after Gaddafis death, Libya became largely a public afterthought. In the email caches released so far from her personal account, former adviser Sidney Blumenthal repeatedly kept Libya before Clinton, sharing his views of the situation, at the time contradicting the diplomats working for Clinton. Blumenthal, a longtime adviser to both Clinton and President Clinton, was not an expert on the region.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/20/hillary-s-libya-post-war-plan-was-play-it-by-ear-gates-says.html
Hillary's record as Secretary of State is among the most militaristic, and disastrous, of modern US history. Some experience. Hilary was a staunch defender of the military-industrial-intelligence complex at every turn, helping to spread the Iraq mayhem over a swath of violence that now stretches from Mali to Afghanistan. Two disasters loom largest: Libya and Syria.
Hillary has been much attacked for the deaths of US diplomats in Benghazi, but her tireless promotion of the overthrow Muammar Qaddafi by NATO bombing is the far graver disaster. Hillary strongly promoted NATO-led regime change in Libya, not only in violation of international law but counter to the most basic good judgment. After the NATO bombing, Libya descended into civil war while the paramilitaries and unsecured arms stashes in Libya quickly spread west across the African Sahel and east to Syria. The Libyan disaster has spawned war in Mali, fed weapons to Boko Haram in Nigeria, and fueled ISIS in Syria and Iraq. In the meantime, Hillary found it hilarious to declare of Qaddafi: "We came, we saw, he died."
Perhaps the crowning disaster of this long list of disasters has been Hillary's relentless promotion of CIA-led regime change in Syria. Once again Hillary bought into the CIA propaganda that regime change to remove Bashir al-Assad would be quick, costless, and surely successful. In August 2011, Hillary led the US into disaster with her declaration Assad must "get out of the way," backed by secret CIA operations.
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/02/05/hillary-candidate-war-machine
Just as much a sham as Iraq, with the exact same results. And on ........ to Syria.
randome
(34,845 posts)The ideas behind PNAC still exist but for the most part they died when Bush, Jr. left office. If you still think it's a going concern, well, it's been 8 years now and no 'progress' has been made so I kind of doubt it's much of a threat to anyone. And Syria? Even Russia is trying to tackle ISIS in Syria. Are they part of PNAC too?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]
polly7
(20,582 posts)ISIS didn't exist in Libya when Qaddafi was alive, just as it wasn't in Iraq or Syria.
The destruction of Iraq and Libya created it.
randome
(34,845 posts)We can argue either position but there is no point in saying either event is definitive. It's not like ISIS put out a press release to the world at a certain juncture that it had now formed and the rest of the world had better watch out.
Objectively, you would need to admit the possibility that Iraq had more to do with it than Libya. I am more willing to do the same for Libya but I am not willing to assume one or the other. The Mideast has always been chaotic. The invasion of Iraq made it even more so. Maybe the decisions about Libya made it even worse but there is no disputing the fact that Qaddafi was threatening a bloodbath in response to the Arab Spring.
I don't know what a better solution might have looked like but I'm not going to blame Clinton for making the case for intervention to Obama.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]
polly7
(20,582 posts)And yes, I DO blame Clinton for influencing Obama.
The 'need' to invade Libya under the 'no-fly' pretense (drummed up by lies by the western trained 'rebels' and 'Prime-Minister' to be taken to the UN makes it perfectly clear. She saw it as another great business opportunity - just as Iraq. Seriously ...... some of us were paying attention.
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]
polly7
(20,582 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)We already had troops in Afghanistan. Is your point that the invasion of Iraq made things worse? I completely agree with you. It doesn't dispute my point that Qaddafi was threatening a bloodbath and other nations -including the Arab League- wanted us to intervene to stop it.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]
polly7
(20,582 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)So why was the Arab League, France and Britain all clamoring for us to intervene?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]
polly7
(20,582 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)Or as a secret member of PNAC.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]
polly7
(20,582 posts)for regime change? Or ANY of the lies trotted out and western training of 'rebels', and British boots on the ground before the 'no-fly zone' was even implemented?
My .... I guess she wasn't so good at her job if she didn't know of those things.
randome
(34,845 posts)All I'm saying is that the situation there was complex enough that I, for one, am willing to give her the benefit of a doubt. I'm not going to leap to any conclusions when Qaddafi truly was fighting the Arab Spring rebels.
That's not to say that he 'deserved' it. In the end, I'm simply glad I don't need to make those kind of decisions.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]
polly7
(20,582 posts)founder, publicly pushed for the Iraq invasion and who's been 'tough talking' against Iran - who, like the others, has done NOTHING to anyone in the region.
MILLIONS have been killed in horrible ways, maimed, mutilated, tortured, widowed, watched children die and now live in terror of the fanatics created in the vacuums once the plunderers and looters destroyed economies for the IMF, the oil companies and the MIC and weapons dealers, AFRICOM to finally get into Africa, etc. etc. etc. then left it to the radicals they created - like Boko Haram in Africa to burn more people alive.
Now, little children wash up dead on beaches.
Fuck that!!!! She's trying to get a no-fly zone for Syria - with Russia bombing ISIS. How smart is that??
'Benefit of a doubt' - you sound like she was in charge of arranging the homecoming parade and fucked up.
She knew EXACTLY what she was doing.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)with someone that is completely unreasonable in their defense of the Pentagon and every choice that has ever been made militarily and that our government has executed.
If you asked if invading Iraq was wrong, you will get some hems and haws, but ultimately, you will *never* get a yes or no answer.
You are asking, blatantly, if the toppling of the Libyan was a positive for the Libyan people, and you are getting a full-throated yes without the individual having to admit that is exactly what they are saying.
No nuance, no amount of suffering endured, no examples of consequences will get them to arrive at even "well maybe that wasn't a good idea."
I know, I've tried.
I would go so far as to say if you asked that individual point-blank if the torture of prisoners is wrong, you will get a dissertation about what torture is, the definition of is, "is", but you will NEVER get a yes or a no.
Draw your own conclusions as to why that is, "is"
randome
(34,845 posts)Maybe in the long run, the cost was many more lives but unless someone can read the future, I don't know how one can be assured of being 100% right in these matters.
At the time, people were dying and Qaddafi was threatening that more would die. What do you think would have been the best course? Do nothing? Try diplomacy? I'm sure diplomacy was tried.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]
newthinking
(3,982 posts)Access and Mass riches the wrenches of corruption for the Neoliberal Order.
randome
(34,845 posts)I don't see what we got out of Libya by taking him out. We may have saved some lives but what kind of monetary advantages accrued to us? A few more business deals? Nothing to write home about, I'd bet.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]
polly7
(20,582 posts)Are you serious????
You didn't see the 'African mercenaries/aka migrants let in to work in Libya' hung up in the streets. The articles showing dead women and children raped and burned. The articles showing Libyan - Qaddafi loyalists burned alive?
BULLSHIT - saved some lives!
The only protest in Libya before the western trained rebels entered to ramp it up enough to call for the lying 'no-fly zone' was against a member of gov't who was NOT Qaddafi.
It was another lying, stinking, horrible destruction of a sovereign nation leading the region in human rights and trying to use its own resources to actually benefit not only Libyan people, but all of Africa.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Imperialists in Europe never STOPPED their racist desires to 'conquer' Africa and the ME and take their stuff. Empires always fall as did the old European Empires, but when they got the invitation from the latest Empire, they were more than willing to tag along and continue their centuries long racist invasions of Africa and the ME.
They could TEACH our neocons how to do it, and probably did.
So to your question re France et al, I seriously thought you were kidding.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)polly7
(20,582 posts)Why was it a mess?
Because the U.S. had troops in Afghanistan? Why were they there? It doesn't seem like Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran or any of the other '7 countries in 5 years' were doing a thing to disrupt the ME.
randome
(34,845 posts)Bush, Jr. should go down in history as a murderous buffoon.
But before our invasion, the Muslim Brotherhood was being born in Egypt and there was an Islamic Insurgency in Saudi Arabia and a civil war in Yemen, among other events. (Admittedly, this is what I pulled from Wikipedia.)
You could even make the case that the first Gulf War was the progenitor for these uprisings. Iraq as it was actually helped keep the entire region stable. The entire Mideast is paying the price for Bush, Jr.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]
Aerows
(39,961 posts)"We made things worse by invading".
But.
See what I mean? Never real condemnation.
I had a very astute person that I worked for and with - she said to me if someone makes a statement, then follows it with a but - that means that they don't believe anything they just said to you. They are MARKETING to you.
Ex.
Not jumping off of a cliff is a good thing, but with the right equipment and circumstances, the sites you will see on the way down will be FANTASTIC!!!!
questionseverything
(9,631 posts)Libya was one of only five countries without a Rothschild model central bank, Quaddafi openly discussed, in 2009, the nationalization of US, UK, Germany, Spain, Norway, Canada and Italy's oil companies, switching to the gold dinar - a single African currency that would serve as an alternative to the U.S. dollar and allow African nations to share the wealth.
///////////////////////////////
the thing we still "export" is the dollar, if countries move away from that, switching to some currency that benefits their country the 1% no likey
polly7
(20,582 posts)polly7
(20,582 posts)The film also points to Washingtons long history of supporting Islamic fundamentalist and other terror groups in the Middle East. In mid-1979, six months before the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the Carter administration authorised $500 million to help establish the Mujahedin. For many years Osama bin Laden was regarded as an ally by London and Washington, both of which provided finance and political backing. Pilger says: "The American people were completely unaware that their government, together with the British secret service, MI6, had begun training and funding Islamic extremists, including Osama bin Laden. Out of this came the Taliban, Al Qaeda and September 11th."
In 1996, the Clinton administration established friendly relations with the Taliban government in order to secure its backing for a US oil pipeline from Central Asia through Afghanistan. Taliban officials were flown to the US, where they were given red carpet treatment. Rare, grainy footage illustrate Pilgers words. However, says Pilger, "By the time George W Bush came to power, the link between Al Qaeda and the Taliban had become an embarrassment, and September 11th gave Bush an opportunity to get rid of them. Today, Afghanistan is run by a regime installed by the Americans and the pipeline deal is going ahead."
Pilger concludes: "We need not accept any of this if we recognise that there are now two superpowers. One is the regime in Washington the other is public opinion now stirring all over the world. Make no mistake it is an epic struggle. The alternative is not just conquest of far away countries; it is the conquest of us, of our minds, our humanity and our self-respect. If we remain silent, victory over us is assured."
http://johnpilger.com/videos/breaking-the-silence-truth-and-lies-in-the-war-on-terror
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Once again, you nailed it.
it is ALL...ALL about business opportunities... everything..
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)as a business opportunity.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Iraq, Philippines, Indonesia, Tibet, Libya, China, India, Sudeten, American West, or East, for that matter, Plymouth Rock, ... Gaul, ... it is all just 'business'....
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)Robert Kagan founded PNAC with Bill Kristol. He's the sociopath who concocted and engineered the war plan.
While Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, one of her closest advisers was Robert Kagan.
Last week, Kagan endorsed HRC for President. The biggest war lord of our time--endorsed HRC over any Republican!
The PNACers became known as the "neocons" but they've realized that the brand is tarnished and now they're scrambling to downplay that term. These guys are everywhere.
Make no mistake, their plan is still "a go".
And I fail to see how anyone can overlook the fact that their fucking founder was one of Hillary Clinton's advisers at State.
Don't overlook the fact that the PNACers/neocons said they wanted was Libya--way back in 1996. Clinton handed it to them.
Libya is no different from Iraq. Only this time, they didn't bother to ask the American people how they felt about it. No fanfare. No speeches on the Senate floor to sell it to the American public. Clinton spearheaded the effort to topple Gaddafi and turn the country into a hell hole.
Many mistakenly suggest that turning Libya into a hellhole is a failure on Clinton's part. Hellhole is the goal. It's what they did to Iraq, what they're doing to Syria and what they can't wait to do to Iran.
I don't begin to know who all of the players are, and what role these countries play in all of this. However, if our own Democratic party could be infiltrated with this sick bullshit--are there any institutions that aren't infested?
These people have complete power now. If Clinton is at the helm, we'll be looking at war with Iran.
The only person who can stop this is Bernie Sanders.
polly7
(20,582 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)And if there is no natural disaster handy, as there was for example in Indonesia, why just make your own...
KA- CHING !!!!!!!
mia
(8,356 posts)drop out now.
She is winning and no matter how many caps you use in posts...or GOP lies you regurgitate or how many people show up at Bernie Rallies...you all are not winning delegates...Democrats are voting and not for Bernie...reality bites sometimes.
Jitter65
(3,089 posts)People who think like that are truly dangerous as well as delusional. If you think that Bernie will not jump when Bibi tells him to jump you are on another planet.
Peace Patriot
(24,010 posts)For one thing, no friend of Netanyahoo would have voted against the Iraq War and opposed it as vigorously as Sanders did. The whole point of that war, for Netanyahoo, was to draw the U.S. military, wholesale, into the Middle East!
For another, Sanders has spoken against "the settlements" and for a two-state solution. He has said that "the settlements" are PREVENTING a two-state solution.
He is NOT a friend Israel's militarists!
But Clinton is.
Justina For Justice
(94 posts)Clinton appointed Robert kagan, a PNAC founder, to her State Department Advisory Counsel, while his wife, Victoria Nuland, who formerly worked for VP Cheney, was put in charge of European affairs, from whence she the coup in the Ukraine. Clinton herself carried out the PNAC projects to gain dominion over Libya and Syria. Clinton's foreign policy at State was just as fascist as much a fascist as Cheney ever was. PNAC policy was successfully implemented in all those countries causing horrendous suffering to all their inhabitants.
AgerolanAmerican
(1,000 posts)Isn't Rubio's campaign slogan "For a New American Century"? The only thing he left out was "project".
Looks to me like that project is proceeding on schedule as originally planned, but for the wrench Russia threw into the machinery.
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)Thanks for posting
polly7
(20,582 posts)It's just things I'd saved in my journal and a few more recent ones I repost whenever I see the lies about Libya.
Those of us who protested it here from the beginning were tried to be run off, labeled Qadaffi lovers - all the same things we were when we were against the invasion of Iraq.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)were all better for us than the self-determination position we have now taken as Mid East policy.
Since the two Bush's, where have we invaded and what are we occupying?
Where are Democrats worse than Republicans?
And if it weren't for the never-ending compulsion to bash Hillary, would we even be having an argument?
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Bush invaded Iraq. It's hard to top that. Hillary Clinton supported it though.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)This is all very interesting. It's true Hillary Clinton had to be well aware of this historical context and the aims of groups like PNAC.
I strongly suspect the real "crime" of Libya was economic independence. Existing as a separate force not depending on the global finance institutions. It was as nasty dictatorship, but that never seems to bother the powers that be as long as the dictator is serving the centers of power.
polly7
(20,582 posts)all of Africa to be the same while at the same time blocking Africom. Iran is to become a powerhouse - it was also never about acquiring nuclear weapons - everyone in the world knows that apparently except those who need it for another regime change. Clinton has always talked 'tough' about them, too. Saudi Arabia and Qatar cannot have another powerhouse in the region. It's all one big-tangled web of lies, control and suffering. She dealt with SA in billions of dollars of arms sales now being used in war crimes in the tragedy that is Yemen. Of course she was aware of all of it. People here who claim she wasn't, apparently believe she wasn't up to the job of SOS, as they are supposed to be completely informed. Kerry is doing a much better job and actually trying for peace, imo.
There were so many that knew from the start.
SEPTEMBER 16, 2011
The Real Reason the US Wanted Gaddafi Gone
by MURRAY DOBBIN
It is almost certain that in return for putting the new bunch in power, and freeing up the billions in state funds, NATO will demand these new institutions be smothered in their cribs. Gaddafi was also instrumental in killing AFRICOM, a new U.S. military command and control base intended to add military intimidation to American economic domination. Look for that initiative to be revived.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/09/16/the-real-reason-the-us-wanted-gaddafi-gone/
newthinking
(3,982 posts)state.
polly7
(20,582 posts)newthinking
(3,982 posts)with potential consequences far worse then what we are now seeing.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)DURec X 1000
Copied and bookmarked.
nationalize the fed
(2,169 posts)If you want to see some prophecy check out this article from 1999-
when the US was just finishing the assault on Serbia- which was- you guessed it- a PNAC project http://web.archive.org/web/20020205133621/http://www.newamericancentury.org/balkans.htm
Backing up Globalization with Military Might
New World Order Onslaught
by Karen Talbot
Covert Action Quarterly, Issue 68, Fall 1999
-----------excerpt-----------
McDonald's Needs McDonnell Douglas to Flourish
An article by Thomas Friedman in the New York Times entitled "What the World Needs Now" tells it all. Illustrated by an American Flag on a fist it said, among other things: "For globalism to work, America can't be afraid to act like the almighty superpower that it is....The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist-McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the designer of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon Valley's technologies is called the United States Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps."
http://www.globalissues.org/article/448/backing-up-globalization-with-military-might
Almost everything that Karen Talbot wrote in 1999 has come true. A prophet.
polly7
(20,582 posts)Peace Patriot
(24,010 posts)I generally knew what a neo-con clusterfuck Libya was, and that Clinton was responsible for it. I also knew that Gadaffi was running a stable government--quite a feat considering Libya's warring tribes--and the Gadaffi government was using the oil revenues to create a pretty decent life for most Libyans. I certainly understood that the chaos now is a horror-filled catastrophe for millions of people, especially the most vulnerable--women and children. But I had NO IDEA what fucking lies were told to take Gadaffi down and destroy the country--though I found the Clinton vid ("We came, we saw, he died" appalling in its callousness and its ugly, naked joy at the suffering of others. It's Bush, Cheney & Rumsfeld all over again! Only worse: It's our own "inevitable" Democratic Party nominee!
I'm just sitting here shaking my head. I figured Kissinger and Kagan were omens for next year, should Clinton reach the White House--that the neocons intended to ride her back into the White House. That certainly alarmed me. But I hadn't analyzed Libya enough to understand that they had already ridden her into the State Department!
And, also, I think I now better understand the intense efforts that Obama and Kerry are making, for instance, to normalize relations with Iran--they are trying to UNDO the damage she did in the ME! (I think this is also true of Obama and Kerry in Latin America.) One could say that what they're doing is too damn late, or that they're only doing it for U.S. and global corporate interests. But at least it's not the neo-con Chaos Plan!
A suggestion, polly7: I know this would be time-consuming for you, but I think you should post the Libya information (above) as an OP. VOTERS NEED TO KNOW THIS! It's kind of buried here in this long discussion. Or have you posted it before and I didn't see it?
polly7
(20,582 posts)I really wasn't any more educated than most here on it - most of this is just what was left and I'd saved in my journal years later and what some of us were frantically trying to point out at the time. Some here knew though exactly what was going on from the beginning - I had a gut feeling, but had heard so much about how awful was life under the horrrible Qaddafi! I wasn't completely sure. Until I saw those first videos and just how easy it was to bring it all about - "How the CIA Used "Libyan Expatriates" To Engineer Consent For Regime Change". The more we dug, the faster the lies started unfurling, one by one.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article29428.htm
The pictures and video that were coming out at the time - just as they did for Iraq - were beyond horrific, yet daily this place had running threads full of laughter!! and jokes! and lies - so many lies. Many were booted off for pointing them out. Exactly as with some of us protesting on other sites against the invasion of Iraq who came here thinking views on overturning sovereign nation govt's would be like our own.
I am so complimented that I've finally been able to help you with something here .... I'm probably your biggest fan for everything you've contributed on Latin America and the horrible things that have gone on there. You and Judi Lynn, Mika, Catherina and others opened up a whole new world for me.
Regarding posting this up top ....... I think everyone here is sick of seeing it, I've posted it so many times .. and it's pretty disjointed and not in chronological order and some of the links may not work, but I don't have the heart to go through it all. It still hurts - and some here may find that crazy, but it does. But I keep my eyes open for mention of Libya on this board and have no problem grabbing it from my journal when I see the 'rah-rah' - we came, we saw he died bullshit being cheered on as if it was something special that wasn't actually all a dirty lie from the start and that hadn't harmed so many then and isn't now, in horrible, awful ways.
thesquanderer
(11,955 posts)Please see the post at http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511410437
amborin
(16,631 posts)pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)Vattel
(9,289 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)He probably felt a lot of pressure to pick her because he needed full cooperation from the previous Democratic president and administration in order to govern well.
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)I wouldn't let her wash my dog.
BreakfastClub
(765 posts)Vattel
(9,289 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)brooklynite
(93,873 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)It's not of an excuse after you destroy a whole society and make things 1000 times worse.
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]
polly7
(20,582 posts)You should probably look up their posts and see what a hell-hole it 'wasn't'.
Women there were half the work force. They got equal pay - do you? They went to university, were doctors, lawyers and anything they pleased (just as in Iraq). Not any more - we fixed that!
Libya's oil money funded social programs that made sure every family had a decent home and health care.
Hundreds of thousands of African migrants were offered jobs and worked in Libya for decades.
In May 2010, Libya was voted on to the UN Human Rights Council by a huge majority. The UN Watch's campaign to remove Libya from the Human Rights Council began immediately.
In March, 2011, a report, containing positive quotes from UN diplomatic delegations in many countries, was due to be presented by the UN Human Rights Council, leading to a Resolution commending Libya's progress in a wide aspect of human rights (listed in the article). March 19, 2011, the attack on Libya began.
Libya was one of only five countries without a Rothschild model central bank, Quaddafi openly discussed, in 2009, the nationalization of US, UK, Germany, Spain, Norway, Canada and Italy's oil companies, switching to the gold dinar - a single African currency that would serve as an alternative to the U.S. dollar and allow African nations to share the wealth. Libya has an abundance of water - Gaddafis Great Man-Made River Project project offers limitless amounts of water for Libyans and would allow them to be totally self-sufficient. In the near-future, water will be the next resource equated with money and power, other countries may be dependent on its reserves. A self-sufficient, dictator-ruled nation with control over some of the worlds most precious resource waves a big red warning flag.
In 2010 Gaddafi made a motion to the UN General Assembly to investigate the circumstances of the invasion of Iraq. He was also wasting the west's ....... 'libya's' oil on free education, housing, tolerance of immigrants, raising the standard of living in Africa, lowering infant mortality while raising life expectancy.
nichomachus
(12,754 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)WOW !!
Thanks for all these posts..
truly eye-opening..
polly7
(20,582 posts)posts made here by others on the topic of Libya. I wish I'd somehow been able to link to them all - they blew my mind at the time. Bvar22 in particular, mainer and Sabrina1 were amazing sources of information. Yes, the Great Man-Made River was a huge accomplishment - look what happened to it:
http://humanrightsinvestigations.org/2011/07/27/great-man-made-river-nato-bombs/
The Great Man-Made River
Libyans like to call the Great Man-Made River The eighth wonder of the world.
According to a March 2006 report by the BBC the industrialisation of Libya following the Great Al-Fatah Revolution in 1969, put strain on water supplies and coastal aquifers became contaminated with sea water, to such an extent that the water in Benghazi was undrinkable. Finding a supply of fresh, clean water became a government priority and fortunately oil exploration in the 1950s had revealed vast aquifers beneath Libyas southern desert.
In August 1984, Muammar Al Qadhafi laid the foundation stone for the pipe production plant at Brega. The Great Man-Made River Project had begun. Adam Kuwairi, a senior figure in the Great Man-Made River Authority (GMRA), vividly remembers the impact the fresh water had on him and his family:
The water changed lives. For the first time in our history, there was water in the tap for washing, shaving and showering. The quality of life is better now, and its impacting on the whole country.
On 3 April Libya warned that NATO-led air strikes could cause a human and environmental disaster if air strikes damaged the Great Man-Made River project.
(Sorry, link no longer works.)
pangaia
(24,324 posts)I never knew anything about this at all.
Imagine what 'lower-information' folks don't know.
And trying to tell them is so damn complicated.
It just doesn't condense down into nice campaign phrases.. or evem 'positions.'
One has to "care" to even begin to see...
Thanks again for all...
mainer
(12,013 posts)I saw a country that was just beginning to open up its archaeological sites to the world. I visited the country with a number of other Americans (quite a few of them Jews) who felt perfectly comfortable wandering unsupervised throughout Tripoli, hailing taxis, dropping in unannounced in clinics. Everywhere we went, we were welcomed with open arms. I spent a night in the desert, found myself the subject of countless selfies by Libyans with camera phones. While the country was still unsophisticated when it came to accommodating westerners, they were all looking forward to the future -- and to American visitors.
I longed to return, because there were so many parts of the country just waiting for tourists. Now, no longer.
polly7
(20,582 posts)I remember your posts on Libya. It broke my heart reading your stories as the country was being ripped apart and so many of us knew it was yet another illegal overthrow of a sovereign nation. I'm so glad you got to see it as it was.
nichomachus
(12,754 posts)Libya was actually the most prosperous and most democratic country in Africa -- until Mrs. Clinton got her hands on it.
newthinking
(3,982 posts)Do you really think that they appreciate this approach?
The whole arrogant thinking involved in "Humanitarian warfare" stinks no different than the "Just Wars" of Religions during the crusades. Let's save them from themselves and destroy their countries and pilfer their resources while we are at it.
And the fact that we are involved in giving arms in these situations to Jihadi's and other extreme groups lays bare the real (lack of) care and interests.
mainer
(12,013 posts)I was very vocal on DU when Hillary decided to take down Gaddafi. I said she was wrong, wrong, wrong.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)You know, to make it better? Will Hillary have Robert Kagan and his lovely wife run that as well? Or should she just bring in her pal Henry?
amborin
(16,631 posts)change in Syria and arm "friendly" rebels.....the rebels used our weapons against us......
and recently, US taxpayers paid $500 million to train rebels and only 5 were viable....
but the chaos, ISIS, the bloodbath, the refugee crisis, and the delayed peace treaty are all
due to Hillary:
she lied at the Milwaukee debate:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511238301
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511102439
Hillary Clinton and the Syrian Bloodbath
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-sachs/hillary-clinton-and-the-s_b_9231190.html
"This is the kind of compulsive misrepresentation that makes Clinton unfit to be President. Clinton's role in Syria has been to help instigate and prolong the Syrian bloodbath, not to bring it to a close.
In 2012, Clinton was the obstacle, not the solution, to a ceasefire being negotiated by UN Special Envoy Kofi Annan. It was US intransigence - Clinton's intransigence - that led to the failure of Annan's peace efforts in the spring of 2012, a point well known among diplomats. Despite Clinton's insinuation in the Milwaukee debate, there was (of course) no 2012 ceasefire, only escalating carnage. Clinton bears heavy responsibility for that carnage, which has by now displaced more than 10 million Syrians and left more than 250,000 dead. "
The article goes on to explain how.
---
Hillary Clinton played a role in instigating the Syrian blood bath and refuge crisis, just as she helped cause the refugee crises in Honduras and Columbia - google (she helped instigate the Honduras coup that de-stablized the country and she helped with the Columbia plan that wrecked that country thus causing those refugee crisses too)
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)for their chaos
virgista
(48 posts)(last I heard), and probably would have made a good, moderate, leader in Libya. I'm not sure of his status now, but I think he is
alive and in hiding.
He didn't fit into O and HRC's wrong-headed plan for COMPLETE regime change. And now the world is suffering.
brooklynite
(93,873 posts)...when I was in Syria five years ago.
kristopher
(29,798 posts)Agony
(2,605 posts)that much is clear.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)I think emails have pretty much shown that.
So she made choices probably that she thought would make her look good for her next election campaign. To look tough I guess. But as so often it backfired.
FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)Karmadillo
(9,253 posts)pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)And she always seems to get it wrong. . .then when the sh*t hits the fan she "evolves" to the current popular opinion. A true leader (not).
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)That implies good intentions but bad decisions. That's not clear to me.
amborin
(16,631 posts)Duval
(4,280 posts)And thank you for the OP. I do not want to see Boots on The Ground. Go Bernie Go!
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)And we keep posting actual historical facts, and yet, they believe the lies they tell and deny the history. That'll work out well . . . ..
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)The Secretary of State is obliged to support them. The President averted a oncoming slaughter. I support our efforts with regards to our supporting role in Libya lead by Britain, France, Egypt and the Arab League. No apologies necessary IMO.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)I respect his deliberative qualities. He was receiving advice from our diplomatic branch, military branch, foreign allies and the Arab League. Ghadaffi was rampaging towards the coast to put down an uprising. A slaughter was imminent. The world community stepped in to avoid this slaughter.
polly7
(20,582 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)"President Obama was deeply wary of another military venture in a Muslim country. Most of his senior advisers were telling him to stay out. "...
"Her conviction would be critical in persuading Mr. Obama to join allies in bombing Colonel Qaddafis forces. In fact, Mr. Obamas defense secretary, Robert M. Gates, would later say that in a 51-49 decision, it was Mrs. Clintons support that put the ambivalent president over the line."...
"The consequences would be more far-reaching than anyone imagined, leaving Libya a failed state and a terrorist haven, "...
"This is the story of how a woman whose Senate vote for the Iraq war may have doomed her first presidential campaign nonetheless doubled down and pushed for military action in another Muslim country. "...
"her record on Libya illustrates how, facing a national-security or foreign-policy quandary, she was inclined to act in marked contrast to Mr. Obamas more reticent approach."...
"Anne-Marie Slaughter, her director of policy planning at the State Department, notes that in conversation and in her memoir, Mrs. Clinton repeatedly speaks of wanting to be caught trying. In other words, she would rather be criticized for what she has done than for having done nothing at all."...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/politics/hillary-clinton-libya.html
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)took full credit for it in her released emails. She acted against advice of Gates, Biden, even Obama. She "misread" the intel,
which Amnesty International and other groups on the ground said was bogus.
She is responsible, solely.
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)LiberalArkie
(15,686 posts)polly7
(20,582 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Authoritarian leaders all over the world take steps to create a veneer of democracy. In Egypt, for example, there are elections, though there is never any doubt that the governing party will win.
Libya outdoes almost all of them.
Here, tens of thousands of people take part in meetings to discuss issues that are decided by a small group at the top, with all direction coming from the Brother Leader.
There was a theater of democracy but I don't think it had much teeth. Maybe it did, I don't know. But that's not the point. We need need Libya to have been a great place to say it was a bad idea to destroy it. We can say Qaddafi was a thug while still criticizing the interventionist policy of the US.
polly7
(20,582 posts)It's great to see some actual facts.
Western propaganda makes me ill anymore. I no longer believe a word I hear from it.
JohnnyRingo
(18,581 posts)It's easy to look in the rear view mirror and express shock about how things transpired, but impossible to tell how things would have gone if we'd taken a different route. It could have been much worse.
Any excuse to bash an opponent during an election.
polly7
(20,582 posts)JohnnyRingo
(18,581 posts)...as per the OP.
polly7
(20,582 posts)JohnnyRingo
(18,581 posts)...at least since the '80s. If you think it's been all milk & honey in Libya you haven't been keeping up. The place is a powder keg.
polly7
(20,582 posts)Or Canada? Or any other sovereign nation?
And what business is it of any other country to interfere in internal affairs - even strife of a sovereign nation? The ONLY very small protest going on in Libya was not even against Qaddafi, but another member of gov't I can't remember at the moment. It took western-trained 'rebels' to ramp it up burning police stations, gov't buildings, etc. to cause that 'powder keg' that necessitated the lying no-fly zone. Millions of Qaddafi loyalists who then came out to protest were completely IGNORED by western media. Some of them were later burned alive. African migrants who'd been welcomed into Libya to work were hung in the streets - women and children raped and tortured, murdered and burned - by the 'friendly' rebels. HRW sent out alerts and pleas to stop the carnage. They were also IGNORED.
If you think it was anything but another lying, PNAC, regime-change for greed and empire, you haven't been keeping up.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)I think it would be a mistake because objective record in Libya is mixed and somewhat brutal.
polly7
(20,582 posts)He was the only one who helped Mandela, branded by the west as a 'terrorist' during Apartheid. He could be brutal to those who opposed him - perhaps he knew what would be in store for the region had he failed in what he was trying to do - which was everything the west didn't want - a prosperous, independent Libya controlling its own resources and keeping Africom out. I don't believe much from western media anymore, sorry, Cheese Sandwich - as much as I do respect you. I saw the videos of the hundreds of thousands of Libyans gathered to support him while the west was ramping up the protest into a bloody mess - many crying and holding up his pictures. No, he was no saint to be sure, but certainly not the devil to his people the MSM and many here are trying to make him out to be.
Mandela praised Qaddafi for fully supporting ending apherteid.
This question becomes even more valid in light of what the mainstream media, in the wake of the former South African presidents death, have been anxiously hiding from the public: the actual close and crucial alliance between Mandela and Gaddafi. Back in the 70s and 80s, when the West refused to allow sanctions against Apartheid in South Africa and used to call Mandela a terrorist, it was none other than Libyas Muammar Gaddafi who kept supporting him. Gaddafi funded Mandelas fight against Apartheid by training ANC fighters and by paying for their education abroad, and their bond only became stronger after Mandelas release from prison on February 11, 1990.
When Mandela was taken to the ruins of Gaddafis compound in Tripoli, which was bombed by the Reagan administration in 1986 in an attempt to murder the entire Gaddafi family, he said:
No country can claim to be the policeman of the world and no state can dictate to another what it should do. Those that yesterday were friends of our enemies have the gall today to tell me not to visit my brother Gaddafi. They are advising us to be ungrateful and forget our friends of the past.
In response, Gaddafi thanked Mandela for his friendship, saying: Who would ever have said that one day the opportunity for us to meet would become reality. We would like you to know that we are constantly celebrating your fight and that of the South African people, and that we salute your courage during all of those long years you spent in detention in the prison of Apartheid. Not a single day has passed without us having thought of you and your sufferings.
Eight years later, when then U.S. president Bill Clinton visited Mandela in March 1998, Clinton criticized the South African presidents meeting with Muammar Gaddafi. In reaction to that criticism, Mandela straightforwardly replied:
I have also invited Brother Leader Gaddafi to this country. And I do that because our moral authority dictates that we should not abandon those who helped us in the darkest hour in the history of this country. Not only did the Libyans support us in return, they gave us the resources for us to conduct our struggle, and to win. And those South Africans who have berated me for being loyal to our friends, can literally go and jump into a pool.
On the eve of the NATO-led war against Libya, Gaddafis booming country largely co-funded three projects that would rid Africa from its financial dependence on the West once and for all: the African Investment Bank in the Libyan city of Sirte, the African Monetary Fund (AFM), to be based in the capital of Cameroon, Yaounde, in 2011, and the African Central Bank to be based in the capital of Nigeria, Abuja. Especially the latter angered France not coincidentally also the main orchestrator of the war on Libya because it would mean the end of the West African CFA franc and the Central African CFA franc, through which France kept a hold on as much as thirteen African countries. Only two months after Africa said no to Western attempts to join the AFM, Western organized protests against the AFMs benefactor, Muammar Gaddafi, started to erupt in Libya
ultimately resulting in the freezing of $30 billion by the West, which money mostly was intended for the above mentioned financial projects.
But Gaddafi helped the African continent in more than just material ways. More than any other African leader, he supported Mandelas ANCs struggle against the racist regime in South Africa. Above that, many Black Africans, especially sub-Saharan African migrants and refugees, found a new home in Gaddafis prosperous Libya.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37301.htm
Gaddafi was praised for his human rights record towards women. He introduced equal pay, women were half the work force.
Prior to western military involvement Libya was a modern and secular state with the highest regional womens rights and standards of living. No more.
Libya had the highest GDP per capita and life expectancy on the continent. Less people lived below the poverty line than in the Netherlands.
Unlike many other Arab nations, women in Gaddafis Libya had the right to education, hold jobs, divorce, hold property and have an income. The United Nations Human Rights Council praised Gaddafi for his promotion of womens rights. More than half of Libyas university students were women. One of the first laws Gaddafi passed in 1970 was an equal pay for equal work law.
Now, the new 'democratic' Libyan regime is clamping down on womens rights. The new ruling tribes are tied to traditions that are strongly patriarchal. Extremist Islamic forces see gender equality as a Western perversion. Many women live in fear.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)people don't have to buy into that part of it to still think the Libya regime change policy was very wrong.
Even if Qaddafi was a murderous thug, like Saddam Hussein, it doesn't mean we should go around toppling governments when there are so many unintended consequences.
I'm having a hard time finding the type of info you are describing in any familiar news source.
polly7
(20,582 posts)I don't post anything I haven't verified.
And .......... the west has NO business interfering in any sovereign nation. None.
But from Latin America to the Middle East, Africa, East Asia - long planned and implemented military interventions and funded dirty coups to enrich the multi-national corporations, the IMF and World Bank and new bases around the world from which to do it to someone else has been proven, over and over. I hate war and the carnage it leaves. Anyone pushing for it is soulless and completely oblivious to human suffering. They are killing this planet and millions of people on it - fuck them.
JohnnyRingo
(18,581 posts)I'm not going to argue with you on ever changing subjects. You're headed to Alex Jones type conspiracy theories, and there's no talking sense to someone like that.
Hillary Clinton isn't some New World Order agent coming to take your Social Security and put you in a FEMA trailer camp. You can go on with your senseless rant without me.
polly7
(20,582 posts)Does another country have the right to militarily intervene in the U.S. or Canada for our resources?
nationalize the fed
(2,169 posts)By Hillary Rodham Clinton
Washington Post
September 4, 2014
...Kissinger is a friend, and I relied on his counsel when I served as secretary of state. He checked in with me regularly, sharing astute observations about foreign leaders and sending me written reports on his travels. Though we have often seen the world and some of our challenges quite differently, and advocated different responses now and in the past, what comes through clearly in this new book is a conviction that we, and President Obama, share: a belief in the indispensability of continued American leadership in service of a just and liberal order...https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-reviews-henry-kissingers-world-order/2014/09/04/b280c654-31ea-11e4-8f02-03c644b2d7d0_story.html
Only kooks and wackjobs talk about a "New World Order"
The affirmative task we have now is to actually create a new world order
--Vice President Joe Biden, 2013
polly7
(20,582 posts)leveymg (34,352 posts)
9. Evidence State Dept was involved in organizing the rebellion from early April '11
This latest tranche of withheld and redacted "personal" emails from Sidney Blumenthal to Secretary Clinton shows he was part of efforts to overthrow the Ghadaffi regime from nearly the beginning, working as a liaison between the USG, western corporations, and Blackwater-type mercenaries to train and coordinate the uprising. The NYT summarizes some of his April 2011 email to Clinton this way:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/19/us/politics/what-sidney-blumenthals-memos-to-hillary-clinton-said-and-how-they-were-handled.html
Clinton Says Idea on Rebels Should Be Considered
In April 2011, Mr. Blumenthal sent Mrs. Clinton a memo about the rebel forces fighting the regime of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi. The rebels, Mr. Blumenthal wrote, were considering hiring security contractors to train their forces. Mrs. Clinton forwarded the memo to her aide, Jake Sullivan, and said that the idea should be considered. (Pages 1-3)
In 2011 and 2012, Mrs. Clinton forwarded 18 memos to Mr. Sullivan, who in turn circulated them to senior State Department officials, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, who was killed in the 2012 attacks in Benghazi, and Ambassador Gene A. Cretz, who preceded him.
Doesn't sound comical or non-lethal to me. But, what it shows is that by early April, the State Dept. had already taken the lead, at least publicly, in aiding the Libyan opposition. The President didn't authorize "non-lethal" aid until April 26th, and that, we were told at the time, did not include training the rebels: http://foreignpolicy.com/2011/05/11/libyan-rebels-get-first-tranche-of-u-s-aid-10000-mres/
"This shipment, authorized under the Presidents April 26th drawdown, consisted of more than 10,000 halal meals ready to eat, so-called MREs, that were transferred from Department of Defense stocks in support of the s efforts to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas under the threat of attack," State Department spokesman Mark Toner told reporters at Tuesdays briefing.
The meals are part of the $25 million in non-lethal aid to the Libyan rebels the White House approved on April 26. That approval came 11 days after the State Department notified Congress that it wanted to spend the funds to help the Libyan rebel army fight off the forces of Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi.
"One of the reasons why I announced $25 million in non-lethal aid yesterday, why many of our partners both in NATO and in the broader Contact Group are providing assistance to the opposition, is to enable them to defend themselves and to repulse the attacks by Qaddafi forces," Clinton said April 21.
But while the State Departments notification said the money would go to things like "vehicles, fuel trucks and fuel bladders, ambulances, medical equipment, protective vests, binoculars, and non-secure radios" all items identified by the Libyan oppositions Transitional National Council (TNC) as urgently needed now the list is much more weighted to humanitarian goods.
Toner said Tuesday that the shipments were meant to be in "support of the TNCs efforts to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas under the threat of attack." More items are en route to Benghazi, including medical supplies, uniforms, boots, tents, and personal protective gear, he said.
"We continue to work with the TNC to determine what additional assistance requirements we might be able to support in the coming weeks," said Toner.
In fact, by the time the State Department acknowledged the delivery of "non-lethal" US aid to Libya, special emissary Chris Stevens had already settled in in Benghazi, where he immediately commenced coordination of US assistance to rebel groups. Plans were clearly afoot by April 1 to send Stevens to Eastern Libya, and the danger posed by by US aid to Jihadist extremist groups being doled out by arriving State Dept. personnel. The Department briefing ended on this ominous note: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2011/04/159596.htm
MR. TONER: Im not sure I know how to answer that question. I mean, look, these are professional diplomats who are conducting these kinds of outreaches, and so these are theyre used to assessing political environments and political opposition groups, and their judgment is sound. Is that it?
QUESTION: Is the State Department envoys already on ground in the eastern part of (inaudible)?
MR. TONER: Im sorry, the State Department?
QUESTION: (Inaudible).
MR. TONER: Not yet.
QUESTION: Not yet.
Three weeks later, at a April 21 press briefing, State Dept. spokesman Mark Toner alluded to the release of the $25 tranche of US aid to opposition groups in that eastern Libyan city: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2011/04/161440.htm#LIBYA
A few questions later, Toner responded to a second question about Stevens and the State Department team that had arrived in Benghazi:
MR. TONER: Thats a good question. Im not sure how big the DART team is there. Is that what youre talking about in addition to Chris Stevens?
QUESTION: Yeah.
MR. TONER: Ill have to confirm that figure. Sorry, Ill get back to you, Josh.
Note that, as the NYT reported, Blumenthal's emails to Clinton were routed to Stevens, among other Department officials assigned to Libya. This would indicate that both Clinton and Stevens were aware of private contractor plans to train opposition militias.
In addition, Blumenthal's emails to Hillary confirm what he had learned about the activities of the military and intelligence services of Egypt, Qatar, Britain and France in providing direct military assistance to the rebels, and MI6's ongoing mechanizations to replace the regime with figures backed by London.
In an April 8 email to Clinton, titled in part, "Egypt moves in", Blumenthal describes the intervention of Egyptian special forces in the civil war, and the their training and equipping of the opposition. He also explicitly warned about the danger in Libya of the rise of the very same al-Qaeda groups that would later coalesce into ISIS: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/05/19/us/politics/libya-related-messages-hillary-clinton-email-account.html?action=click&contentCollection=Politics&module=RelatedCoverage®ion=Marginalia&pgtype=article
Here, Sid references a meeting he had earlier that day with a member of the opposition:
According the UK Telegraph, Blumenthal had an active line of information into "UK game playing" in the uprising and plans to "break up" Libya, news that he passed on to Secretary Clinton. Not surprisingly, this email was also withheld: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/hillary-clinton/11616018/Britain-hid-secret-MI6-plan-to-break-up-Libya-from-US-Hillary-Clinton-told-by-confidante.html
Sidney Blumenthal, a long-time friend of the Clintons, emailed Mrs Clinton on her personal account to warn her that Britain was "game playing" in Libya.
Mr Blumenthal had no formal role in the US State Department and his memos to Mrs Clinton were sourced to his own personal contacts in the Middle East and Europe.
Nevertheless, Mrs Clinton seems to have taken some of his reports seriously and forwarded them on to senior diplomats working at the highest levels of American foreign policy.
The first of Mr Blumenthal's Libya memos - which were leaked to the New York Times - was sent on April 8, 2011, as rebel forces struggled to make gains against Gaddafi's troops, and had "UK game playing" in the subject line.
On April 21, the first known report of intervention on the side of the rebels by foreign "mercenary" forces from Egypt was published: http://www.eurasiareview.com/21022011-civil-war-in-libya-gaddafi-uses-pak-and-bd-mercenaries/ Three weeks later, the Washington Post reported that Qatar was training and equipping the rebellion's militias in Eastern Libya, as well as conducting airstrikes. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/qatari-military-advisers-on-the-ground-helping-libyan-rebels-get-into-shape/2011/05/11/AFZsPV1G_story.html
Why wouldn't Hillary want to withhold this and related email? Think about it.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1128037
JohnnyRingo
(18,581 posts)I'm not going to encourage people who think they're internet sleuths uncovering grand schemes that escape the rest of us.
I hear the lunar landing was faked and 911 was an inside job too. There's proof.
polly7
(20,582 posts)Millions are paying for it.
Your little opinion / lack of desire to know what really happened matters ......................... zilch in the grand scheme of things. Over - done. We came, we saw he died! lol
Babel_17
(5,400 posts)Thank you for adding in more background. Having those correspondences is another irritation to the administration, afaik. IIRC, those kinds of communiques to and fro with him (Blumenthal) weren't supposed to happen. Is my memory correct on that?
Edited to add Blumenthal's name.
polly7
(20,582 posts)I honestly don't know much at all about the emails, specifically. I'm still trying to figure it all out, myself - what happened to Libya, I thought was so easy to understand - now I see that Saudi Arabia may have been a big part of it. I'd like to know how big, and what agreements were made wrt not only Libya, but Syria ... and even Yemen. I know they're against Iran finally being able to assert its influence as a growing economic power - what have they got planned for them, I wonder. Almost unimaginable how many millions have suffered so much from all of this already, I don't see an end.
George II
(67,782 posts)andrewv1
(168 posts)& tons of other baggage & could be recommended for indictment?
Hey, why don't we just coronate her now!
George II
(67,782 posts)....from the nomination. What does that say for her opponent?
And that "recommended for indictment" is just right wing / Donald Trump tripe. There is no chance of that.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)You know, the ones who vote in the general election?
This imbecilic chanting of "scoreboard" does not explain how H. Clinton will overcome her high negative ratings in the general election.
George II
(67,782 posts)....unfavorability rating.
Plus, Clinton's "high negative rating" (a rating created by the media) is lower than any of the republican candidates.
If her negative rating is a factor that plays into who one votes for, why have 2.5M more people voted for her in the primaries than Sanders?
tabasco
(22,974 posts)Clinton has name recognition, due primarily to her marriage to Bill Clinton. If not for her connection to Bill Clinton, Hillary would be an unknown attorney working for Walmart. She has not earned her name recognition with hard work, and is a weak candidate. Negative ratings were not invented by the media. If you have some evidence for that assertion, please post it. It was developed by polling organizations to evaluate a persons popularity. With regard to politics, a high negative rating has proven to be a detriment to electability.
Very few Americans knew who Bernie Sanders was before this election. But, now that he is running for national office and getting his message out, he has won several primaries and is strongly challenging Clinton in the upcoming primaries. Sanders' hard work is responsible for his name recognition, not his marriage to a celebrity. He would be a much stronger candidate in the general election because he has earned the respect of those who get to know him.
Keep chanting "scoreboard" if it makes you feel great. H. Clinton is a deeply flawed candidate and Sanders is telling us and showing us exactly why. Nationwide, she is polling just 2.5 points ahead of Ted Cruz!
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/
George II
(67,782 posts)tabasco
(22,974 posts)and I see no more reason to communicate with you.
ladjf
(17,320 posts)We don't have enough sense to take steps to head off environmental degradation (true all over the World) and we seem to be unable to select the best people to run our Government.
Cruz, Trump, Kasich and Clinton. There are hundreds of thousands Americans better qualified for the Presidency than any of those four. (In My Opinion) (Or does that matter any more?)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027733004
Pending Mississippi law: No sex outside of marriage, women can be forced to wear makeup, must wear
gender correct clothing that matches the gender shown on birth certificate)
(One week ago, I posted that IMO ,Mississippi was perhaps the least enlight.... ......... My post was hidden. I was born and raised in Mississippi and was an educator there for 20 years.)
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)1. I do NOT trust her.
2. No...More...Clintons.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,129 posts)I wish she would just go away.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Sounds lovely.
zentrum
(9,865 posts)
..and Libya makes five.
The suffering she's created or abetted is staggering and on-going.
Who is she?
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Turned out to be a fraud
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)Paka
(2,760 posts)Regime change for all.
thereismore
(13,326 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)thereismore
(13,326 posts)salinsky
(1,065 posts)... what we see in Libya now, was inevitable regardless of what we did or did not do.
The Obama administration acted in response to an international plea to prevent an imminent genocide.
In retrospect, it was a waste of time and resources.
But, let's not pretend that Libya wasn't already coming apart at the seams.
And, please don't act as if had the administration stood by and done nothing, the Sanders supporters wouldn't be on here today screeching about how Hillary Clinton advised Obama to allow a preventable genocide to occur.
polly7
(20,582 posts)From Africas Wealthiest Democracy Under Gaddafi to Terrorist Haven After US Intervention
Counterpunch
Saturday, Oct 24, 2015
In 1967 Colonel Gaddafi inherited one of the poorest nations in Africa; by the time he was assassinated, he had transformed Libya into Africas richest nation. Prior to the US-led bombing campaign in 2011, Libya had the highest Human Development Index, the lowest infant mortality and the highest life expectancy in all of Africa.
Today, Libya is a failed state. Western military intervention has caused all of the worst-scenarios: Western embassies have all left, the South of the country has become a haven for ISIS terrorists, and the Northern coast a center of migrant trafficking. Egypt, Algeria and Tunisia have all closed their borders with Libya. This all occurs amidst a backdrop of widespread rape, assassinations and torture that complete the picture of a state that is failed to the bone.
The Basic Peoples Congress (BPC), or Mutamar shaʿbi asāsi was essentially Libyas functional equivalent of the House of Commons in the United Kingdom or the House of Representatives in the United States. However, Libyas Peoples Congress was not comprised merely of elected representatives who discussed and proposed legislation on behalf of the people; rather, the Congress allowed all Libyans to directly participate in this process. Eight hundred Peoples Congresses were set up across the country and all Libyans were free to attend and shape national policy and make decisions over all major issues including budgets, education, industry, and the economy.
In 2009, Mr. Gaddafi invited the New York Times to Libya to spend two weeks observing the nations direct democracy. The New York Times, that has traditionally been highly critical of Colonel Gaddafis democratic experiment, conceded that in Libya, the intention was that everyone is involved in every decision Tens of thousands of people take part in local committee meetings to discuss issues and vote on everything from foreign treaties to building schools.
The fundamental difference between western democratic systems and the Libyan Jamahiriyas direct democracy is that in Libya all citizens were allowed to voice their views directly not in one parliament of only a few hundred wealthy politicians but in hundreds of committees attended by tens of thousands of ordinary citizens. Far from being a military dictatorship, Libya under Mr. Gaddafi was Africas most prosperous democracy.
Today, after US intervention, Libya is home to the worlds largest loose arms cache, and its porous borders are routinely transited by a host of heavily armed non-state actors including Tuareg separatists, jihadists who forced Malis national military from Timbuktu and increasingly ISIS militiamen led by former US ally Abdelhakim Belhadj.
http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_71969.shtml
(The 'imminent genocide' was a bunch of made up lies, just as were the 'viagra for rape claims'.)
salinsky
(1,065 posts)... and things got really, really bad.
polly7
(20,582 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)Sec. Clinton poses with the late Mutassim Gaddafi, in a shiny brown suit.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2051826/We-came-saw-died-What-Hillary-Clinton-told-news-reporter-moments-hearing-Gaddafis-death.html
Hah. Hah. It is to laugh.
polly7
(20,582 posts)It's strange how leaders are used then discarded so easily when the right opportunity comes along, isn't it??
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)He's tall too. Doesn't really look like his dad at all.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)opposed to this human disaster? We were insulted, smeared, attacked and called all kinds of names.
We warned these cheerleaders that this was NEVER a 'humanitarian' effort, but just another Colonial, Imperialist invasion of an African nation because they DARED to decide to manage and use their own resources as they saw fit.
An apology would be nice, since the attacks were so vicious, but I don't expect or really want it.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)They probably wouldn't want to take credit for it at this point.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)the Western Imperialists had in mind for them. After Iraq one would think there was no one left on the planet who believed that 'noble lie'.
We were told we were 'protecting the Libyan people from danger. But where is NATO now? Libyans were among the most advanced country in Africa, my cousin in Europe used to go there to shop occasionally. Can't do that anymore without risking being raped and murdered.
Humanitarian organizations have been begging for the world to do something to help the people there who are living in Mad Max world since our 'humanitarian intervention' but our 'heroes' don't seem to care anymore.
I would like to know if they feel GUILTY for what has been done to those unfortunate people.
Even worse, those NATO humanitarians, who created one of the worst refugee crisis in history, DON'T WANT the people they SAID they were going to 'protect'.
Many Libyans have drowned trying to escape that Paradise of freedom I was supposedly trying deny the Libyan people, turned away from those 'humanitarians' in France and elsewhere.
To be honest it makes me sick and anyone who supports ANY of this horror makes me sick
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)doubtful. Honestly it seems like a lot of them don't think about such things at all. It's like they only consider political consequences and spin, not the real life physical consequences. Strange game some people play.
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)GOP to point out in the general election.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Her so-called qualifications and experience aren't helping her one bit because her record stinks.
amborin
(16,631 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)That's what makes her the most qualified person for the job!
DiehardLiberal
(580 posts)Jitter65
(3,089 posts)the sooner she breaks ties with AIPAC the better for all of us. Anyone know where Bernie stands on AIPAC? Do they support him at all?
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Bernie stayed away but said he would submit his speech.
John Poet
(2,510 posts)to her creating even MORE terrorist hell-holes.
She made a great start in Honduras, where her preferred government ARE the terrorists.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Highly qualified at creating failed states and refugees.
AzDar
(14,023 posts)Unfit For Office.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Tarc
(10,472 posts)Sorry, but the relatives of the Pan Am 103 victims probably have some sense of closure these days, however little it actually makes up for their loss.
Removing a terrorist-funding dictator is never a bad thing.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Tarc
(10,472 posts)You take care of these things one problem at a time . Removing a terrorist-funding megalomaniac was #1.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Dangerously misinformed. Sorry.
Try watching this video and see if it helps.
Tarc
(10,472 posts)mainer
(12,013 posts)They called it a place for investments. Such a disaster.
http://www.theguardian.com/money/2006/jul/23/libya.observercashsection
killbotfactory
(13,566 posts)mainer
(12,013 posts)Yes.
Ditto for Iraq.
Congrats, Hillary.
Tarc
(10,472 posts)So, yes.
mainer
(12,013 posts)Prior to Gaddafi being killed, setting off this Libyan chaos, the NYT estimated that only 300 anti-Gaddafi rebels had been killed by him in the uprising.
Now we're looking at hundreds of thousands dead or displaced.
Tarc
(10,472 posts)Let me know how that goes...
mainer
(12,013 posts)But who cares about the hundreds of thousands of uprooted Libyan lives and the thousands dead? Gaddafi's gone! Hip hip hooray!
Tarc
(10,472 posts)With him out of the way, there is at least the possibility of progress.
You may consider this the proverbial "last word".
polly7
(20,582 posts)and burned government buildings, as well as killing police officers. I hate killing and death, but what would happen in NA or any other place ... I imagine the exact same thing.
CalvinballPro
(1,019 posts)I don't care what kind of "quality of life" he allowed most Libyans to have. Not while he was still having his soldiers disappear, rape, and murder his political opponents all over the country. Dictators are bad, full stop.
Yes, the situation in Libya is not great right now. That doesn't mean that it was better off under a despot just because the buses ran on time. The struggle for freedom is not an easy one, and it's the people of Libya who need to stand up now, and fight for their own freedom.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)It's a fake reason anyway. The USA loves murderers and dictators as long as they serve the empire and protect corporate profits.
mainer
(12,013 posts)Of course, this was before Hillary made it all better.
http://www.theguardian.com/money/2006/jul/23/libya.observercashsection
Electric Monk
(13,869 posts)Vattel
(9,289 posts)but she convinced him to do stupid shit in Libya.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)By her own admission she was pushing President Obama to help overthrow the Syrian government during the early days of his administration.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/06/hillary-clinton-arming-syrian-rebels-memoir
reddread
(6,896 posts)mission accomplished!
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)azmom
(5,208 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)mainer
(12,013 posts)These are not mine. I went online and Googled "Libya 2006," which is when I was there. (I was part of a scientific group to observe the eclipse.) These photos were taken by Canadians whom I don't know, who posted photos of their visit to Libya in 2006, and many of these places I also visited, including the magnificent Leptis Magna. These people called it the visit of a lifetime.
If you want to see images of Libya before Hillary decided to "fix the country", just Google Libya 2006. You'll find dozens of sites with photos taken by some of the thousands of western tourists who saw the country for themselves.
It will be a long, long time before any westerner can safely see this beautiful country which we helped destroy.
http://www.jookjoint.ca/libya/
polly7
(20,582 posts)Thanks, mainer ... what a fascinating look at Libya and its people! I've just skimmed it so far, but it looks like it was absolutely beautiful ... what a great vacation, and so many good memories.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Demsrule86
(68,352 posts)Obama made his own decision...and you can't keep unpopular governments in power...remember the Shah...the entire middle east is indeed a mess..but the blame belongs squarely to George Bush period. Quadafi killed way more Americans than Isis you know...he killed my neighbors child who was on the plane that he blew up in Scotland.
amborin
(16,631 posts)please read the posts and educate yourself about HRC's disastrous actions in Libya and other parts of the ME. There was
no justification for bombing Libya; please read, there's great info
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)Choice between her and Sanders and you choose HER? WTF? It's madness.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)Libya was ruled by a bloodthirsty dictator who supported terrorism, which was a bad thing until doing business with Libya became moreimportant than holding grudges over a few bombings.
Now, let's say that the people of Libya rise against the tyrant in revolution. And let's say that the libyan army will crush the rebels. In fact, the libyan army crush the rebels so hard that the son of the tyrant laughingly brags on TV how the rebels will be massacred.
Option 1:
Do nothing. Allow the rebels to be killed. The tyrant stays in place.
Option 2:
Support the rebels, which inevitably means ouster of the tyrant. Hope that the libyan people somehow sort it out to form a new government.
Pick one.
polly7
(20,582 posts)using lies, lies and more lies! - when does it stop?
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)All I'm hearing from you is: Whine, whine, whine.
Decide.
What would you have done in Libya?
Support the tyrant?
Support the rebels?
Or do you see a third option?
polly7
(20,582 posts)you know what you can do with your 'whine, whine, whine' - I'll respond to the lying destruction of a sovereign nation any way and time I please.
I'd have left Libya alone, obviously.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)Standing by and doing nothing as the libyan army massacres the rebels of Benghazi...
Well, your hands are clean and Libya (minus a few thousand people) is back under the strong rule of Gaddafi.
You win, Gaddafi wins, a few thousand people die... Hey, it's almost a win-win-situation!!!
Guess what? Sometimes life is a lose-lose-situation.
polly7
(20,582 posts)burned down buildings and who were threatening and using violence against all those Qaddafi loyalists who came out long before the west got its lies to the UN?
Guess what ........ millions of human beings and a nation lost, and are losing. Children are being washed up on beaches.
Were going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran Libya - tick.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)The following is an entirely hypothetical scenario:
"There is this country in Africa!
It is ruled by a brutal warlord whose family is famous for embezzling government-money!
And the people start rebelling against that tyrant!
They are taking up arms!
There is already fighting in the streets and they have taken over a major city!
The tyrant's army is now marching towards that city!
They have promised to kill all of the rebels!
The son of the tyrant went on TV to brag about how swiftly their army will kill all the rebels!"
Decide.
Not with what you know about Libya. This hypothetical scenario isn't Libya. You have no idea what will happen if you side with the tyrant, you have no idea what will happen if you side with the rebels.
Decide.
Tyrant or rebels.
If the tyrant massacres the rebels, it's your fault.
If the rebels win and the country becomes a free country, it's your fault.
If the rebels win and the country descends into sectarian war-fare, it's your fault.
Decide.
polly7
(20,582 posts)and leave other nations the fuck alone.
Go play your war games with someone else.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)Tell me how your grandiose plan of giving Gaddafi free reign to massacre the rebels would have worked out.
No, seriously. Your hypothetical scenario hinges on you standing idly by while people get killed and you are trying to convince me that this is the right decision.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Empire of greed, that it. How do you actually explain that?
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)Because politics.
Because power corrupts and politics is ugly.
Because a thousand people dying in a faraway land means less than one friend or family-member suffering in front of your eyes.
Politics is ugly and sometimes it's a lose-lose-situation. polly7 refuses to accept that and thinks the problem will go away if you ignore it. (Pacifist extremism?) But it doesn't go away.
If you do nothing, the tyrant kills civilians. If you topple the tyrant, the country descends into sectarian warfare.
Neither option is ethical.
All you can do is trying to do the least bad thing.
amborin
(16,631 posts)DetlefK
(16,423 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)mainer
(12,013 posts)Every time I see that clip of Hillary's gloating about Gaddafi's death, it gives me chills. There's something deeply disturbing about it.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Response to mainer (Reply #235)
Name removed Message auto-removed
amborin
(16,631 posts)Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)
rbrnmw This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to rbrnmw (Reply #254)
Cheese Sandwich This message was self-deleted by its author.
senz
(11,945 posts)It shows the talent we have here on DU. I bookmarked it a month ago to use as reference.
You do excellent work in getting the truth out, Cheese Sandwich.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)ucrdem
(15,512 posts)The problem with using Libya against Clinton is that Bernie shares her views, though with less analysis:
And he didn't just sign onto, he co-sponsored a bill condemning Gaddafi:
The Senate approved the resolution by unanimous consent, so senators never actually voted on it. But Sanders showed his support by joining in as one of 10 cosponsors.
http://time.com/4156220/democratic-debate-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-libya/
Bernie is happy to hold himself out as the anti-war alternative but the record says otherwise.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/politics/hillary-clinton-libya.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=span-ab-top-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
Hllary Clinton's Smart Power and A Dictator's Fall
President Obama was deeply wary of another military venture in a Muslim country.
Most of his senior advisers were telling him to stay out.
Still, he dispatched Mrs. Clinton to sound out Mr. Jibril, a leader of the Libyan opposition. Their late-night meeting on March 14, 2011, would be the first chance for a top American official to get a sense of whom, exactly, the United States was being asked to support.
snip
The Libya Gamble
An examination of the American intervention in Libya and Hillary Clintons role in it.
Did the oppositions Transitional National Council really represent the whole of a deeply divided country, or just one region? What if Colonel Qaddafi quit, fled or was killed did they have a plan for what came next?
snip
Mrs. Clinton was won over......
Her conviction would be critical in persuading Mr. Obama to join allies in bombing Colonel Qaddafis forces.
In fact, Mr. Obamas defense secretary, Robert M. Gates, would later say that in a 51-49 decision, it was Mrs. Clintons support that put the ambivalent president over the line.
The consequences would be more far-reaching than anyone imagined, leaving Libya a failed state and a terrorist haven, a place where the direst answers to Mrs. Clintons questions have come to pass.
This is the story of how a woman whose Senate vote for the Iraq war may have doomed her first presidential campaign nonetheless doubled down and pushed for military action in another Muslim country.
snip
Here's what we have in Libya Today:
What We Know About ISIS in Libya
The self-described Islamic State, also known as ISIS, has long been making a push to capitalize on the chaos in Libya.
For over a year, it has carried out terror attacks, taken over territory and released propaganda from its franchise in Libya. Now, a new assessment from the Pentagon states the number of ISIS fighters in Libya has doubled since the fall to over 5,000, spurring fresh debate among security officials over the possibility of foreign intervention.
Analysts and officials worry that Libya is increasingly becoming a sort of fallback option for ISIS as it loses territory and power in Syria and Iraq.
If we look at the raw numbers, the presence of ISIS is definitely strengthening and growing. I think the security threat they pose is definitely going up, Riccardo Fabiani, senior North Africa analyst at political risk research firm Eurasia Group, told The WorldPost.
The threat ISIS presents in Libya is different than in other nations, and is related both to the group's changing capabilities and to the country's ongoing instability
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/isis-presence-in-libya_us_56b369e2e4b08069c7a6352f
13
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Fozzledick
(3,859 posts)especially when he said just the opposite.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)HRC SOLD Algeria billions of $$$$$ of sophisticated weapons, even though we condemned their horrific record
Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)Didn't you get the memo?
amborin
(16,631 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)It was supposed to be her big strength but they are afraid to talk about it.
2banon
(7,321 posts)which is what I'm reading by supporters right here on DU.
so dude, cut her some slack! she was on a steep learning curve! She wants another chance to demonstrate her War Hawk creds and dammit she's entitled!
amborin
(16,631 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)We're not hiring a CEO to just manage a country. We're choosing the direction for our country. People can decide for themselves what counts as qualifications.
anotherproletariat
(1,446 posts)that person will be making all the decisions unilaterally.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)to follow this catastrophic policy. A policy, by the way, which he now claims was his biggest mistake.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)she took full credit for Libya in her emails
Orsino
(37,428 posts)I get assigning responsibility, but the president was not an innocent victim here. He backed his SoS over the advice of others.
amborin
(16,631 posts)HRC took full credit for Libya, even in her released emails
Orsino
(37,428 posts)And "pressure" from only one adviser, against all others?
No, I think the president got pretty much the policy he wanted.
amborin
(16,631 posts)She was SoS, and he was assuming (wrongly) that she would competently and ethically carry out her duties; she did not.
If he is guilty of anything, it is over-delegating in this case.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)High-level policy, such as whether or not to turn a sovereign nation into a hell-hole, belongs to the president who didn't reverse course.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)So there is that.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)...or either of them from blame for not reversing course.
ViseGrip
(3,133 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Tarc
(10,472 posts)The Sanders camp really has run out of ideas.