No Fly Zone over Libya - Rhetoric/Implications

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by EnderD_503

@AtLast,

Personally still not thinking the UN is as benevolent as it claims to be, and I continue to think this is all about oil. If Sarkozy and David Cameron were so concerned about Gaddafi they wouldn't have been so friendly as to be selling him weapons/weapons systems a few months back (again, are we not seeing a pattern here?). And if it wasn't, then why would the West only be extending military aid to a country with a rich oil supply that exports 83% of its crude oil to Europe? Why not get involved in Egypt? Why not get involved in Tunisia? What about Syria? What about Algeria? Apparently Libya is the only one worth taking a military stance on. Again, the West benefits from a destabalised Middle East/North Africa.

I also wonder if the French elections are playing any role on Sarkozy's stance, which is something else to consider.



I totally share your concerns about people taking a stance on the oppression they face. But unfortunately there is a danger to it. Most of the people protesting against their respective dictatorships right now are not members of organised groups, and there are no real organised groups ready to replace Gaddafi should he step down or be forced out. The reality is somebody has to take his place if he's to step down. The only organised groups ready to step in and take control of the country are Islamic extremists. So yes, I think people should want to free themselves from dictatorship. However, the problem is that they may be freeing themselves of one dictator that is leading the nation to some semblance of prosperity and eventual democracy, and may very well lend themselves in the hands of religious extremist dictators who would be far, far worse and, instead, be leading them backward. What is worrying is that, at least in Egypt there seems to be a clear intent about the direction the protestors want to go that won't be likely to allow the Islamic Brotherhood to take hold of the country. Particularly interesting is that there are some women's rights groups who are speaking out particularly loudly at this point. What is worrying is that doesn't seem to be the case in Libya, and it seems more likely to fall to religious extremism rather than further toward democracy.

Do we really need more Middle Eastern and North African nations in Iraq's/Afganistan's shoes? If the West were actually concerned about democracy in Libya or any other such country there would be far better ways to support it than to go in guns blazing...that much is for sure. Right now the West just seems set on destabalising another North African/Middle Eastern oil nation.

Thanks for your take on these things- I know, it is damn hard to justify these actions with such a history about oil and politics and religious extremism.

And I have been thinking about why the US and other western nations never went into African nations slaughtering people like ants in the past. With Libya, it is obvious that western European nations have a direct link to the "sweet crude" in Libya.

It does make me crazy that leaders in these countries have ruled with iron hands and ripped off the people taking oil money and common people live in poverty. No social services, intra-structure. Nuts, when you think about how much money is involved which is a resource of the people. They end up without education and opportunity and these ruling families stash the money away.

So hard to trust politics!