interesting proposal Night Owl. who is the international community in this case? is it the US again?

Posted by: dan of steele | Feb 21 2011 21:06 utc | 3

who is the international community in this case? is it the US again?
From a diplomatic sense we’d probably be talking about the UN through the security council.
For military implementation we’d most likely be talking NATO via the French or the Brits.
Best for the US (and Italy and Turkey) not to be involved directly.
The alternative of course, is widespread aerial bombardment of civilians by Quadaffi loyalists in the Libyan Air Force with the risk of intervention by Egypt to protect the 1 million Egyptians living in Libya.
Pick your poison.

Posted by: Night Owl | Feb 21 2011 22:01 utc | 5

on Libya? very strange the level of violence. Is this the reason?
Libya arrests Arab ‘network’ for destabilising country
AFP, Feb 20, 2011, 05.21am IST
Read more: Libya arrests Arab ‘network’ for destabilising country – The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/middle-east/Libya-arrests-Arab-network-for-destabilising-country/articleshow/7531509.cms#ixzz1Ed3nygnk
TRIPOLI: Libyan authorities have arrested dozens of members of a “network” of Arab nationals allegedly seeking to destabilise the country, the official Jana news agency reported Saturday.
Those detained in several Libyan cities were members of a “foreign network (and were) trained to damage Libya’s stability, the safety of its citizens and national unity.”
Sources close to the investigation, quoted by the agency, said the group included Tunisian, Egyptian, Sudanese, Palestinian, Syrian and Turkish citizens.
Those arrested were “charged with inciting acts of looting and sabotage, such as burning hospitals, banks, courts, prisons, police stations and offices of the military police, as well as public buildings and private properties, according to plans drawn up earlier,” Jana said.
Noting that “certain Libyan cities have been the scene of acts of sabotage and destruction since Tuesday,” Jana said the suspects sought to “take arms from police stations and the military police and use them.”
“Sources close to the investigation have not ruled out Israel being behind the network,” the news agency added, without providing details.
On the fifth day of an unprecedented challenge to his four-decade regime, Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi has still made no public comment, although he reportedly appeared at a mass rally of supporters in the capital on Thursday.
Human Rights Watch said security forces have killed more than 80 anti
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/middle-east/Libya-arrests-Arab-network-for-destabilising-country/articleshow/7531509.cms

Posted by: brian | Feb 21 2011 22:08 utc | 7

the CIA factbook says this about the Libyan economy

The Libyan economy depends primarily upon revenues from the oil sector, which contribute about 95% of export earnings, 25% of GDP, and 80% of government revenue. The weakness in world hydrocarbon prices in 2009 reduced Libyan government tax income and constrained economic growth. Substantial revenues from the energy sector coupled with a small population give Libya one of the highest per capita GDPs in Africa, but little of this income flows down to the lower orders of society. Libyan officials in the past five years have made progress on economic reforms as part of a broader campaign to reintegrate the country into the international fold. This effort picked up steam after UN sanctions were lifted in September 2003 and as Libya announced in December 2003 that it would abandon programs to build weapons of mass destruction. The process of lifting US unilateral sanctions began in the spring of 2004; all sanctions were removed by June 2006, helping Libya attract greater foreign direct investment, especially in the energy sector. Libyan oil and gas licensing rounds continue to draw high international interest; the National Oil Corporation (NOC) set a goal of nearly doubling oil production to 3 million bbl/day by 2012. In November 2009, the NOC announced that that target may slip to as late as 2017. Libya faces a long road ahead in liberalizing the socialist-oriented economy, but initial steps – including applying for WTO membership, reducing some subsidies, and announcing plans for privatization – are laying the groundwork for a transition to a more market-based economy. The non-oil manufacturing and construction sectors, which account for more than 20% of GDP, have expanded from processing mostly agricultural products to include the production of petrochemicals, iron, steel, and aluminum. Climatic conditions and poor soils severely limit agricultural output, and Libya imports about 75% of its food. Libya’s primary agricultural water source remains the Great Manmade River Project, but significant resources are being invested in desalinization research to meet growing water demands.

my bold
The Italians are not ready to intervene in Libya’s affairs. Pissing off Qaddafi will simply open the floodgates of immigrants coming to Italy. Some 5 billion in construction projects and the like were offered in 2008 to get Libya to help stem the tide.
I doubt that the English will do anything to upset Qaddafi either so as not to risk a pretty good deal BP got
So it is up to the French to do something then. how likely is that?

Posted by: dan of steele | Feb 21 2011 22:47 utc | 9

“This man (Gaddafi) helped us at a time when we were all alone, when those (Britain and the US) who say we should not come here (Libya) were helping the enemy.”
Nelson Mandela, 1997
Gaddafi’s wrongdoing has far outweighed the good that he has done. He is a narcissistic tyrant, and I hope that he is soon gone from the scene. But let’s keep things in perspective. He has less innocent blood on his hands than many of his prominent critics, such as former VP Cheney who has never apologized for supporting apartheid and calling Mandela a terrorist.

Posted by: Watson | Feb 22 2011 0:11 utc | 11

Well now, the “tyrant” did make a bold stand against the combined interests of USuk. He deserves our support.

Posted by: slothrop | Feb 22 2011 1:33 utc | 13

zzzzzzzzzzzing!

Posted by: slothrop | Feb 22 2011 1:43 utc | 15

So many spellings for the Libyan Leader with the Marvelous Mug. Will the real spelling please stand up!
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/513/how-are-you-supposed-to-spell-muammar-gaddafi-khadafy-qadhafi

Lord knows I hate to be critical, but the proliferation of spellings for the name of Libya’s head dude has been one of the continuing scandals of American journalism. I mean, come on, we’re trying to plumb this guy’s psychic depths and we can’t even get his name straight? Sometimes I shudder for the future of my country.
I count at least 12 different ways to spell the colonel’s handle, including Qaddhafi (New York Review of Books), Qaddafi (New Republic), Gaddafi (Time), Kaddafi (Newsweek), Khadafy (Maclean’s), Qadhafi (U.S. News & World Report), Qadaffi (Business Week), and Gadaffi (World Press Review). Libya’s UN mission, in an effort to spread further confusion, spells the name Qathafi, and I know I’ve seen Gadaafi somewhere. To make matters worse, the Library of Congress and the Middle East Studies Association, to whom one would ordinarily look for guidance, have a fondness for Qadhdhafi, which is an abomination unto God. I think you now begin to grasp the dimensions of the problem.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | Feb 22 2011 1:59 utc | 17

Oxymorons make me wince, slothrop. Hearing the word Social Media Revolution, or even seeing it on a page/screen, is likened to nails on a chalkboard.
Wasn’t it Hoover who said an I-Phone in every palm? EEEgads!!!!

Posted by: Morocco Bama | Feb 22 2011 2:23 utc | 19

night owl – i haven’t seen it & neither have you – what i see is mostly words. i see a people fed up. i see an autocrat who wants to hold on. the event is the event. history is also history. it is not a defence of gaddaffi. it is simply to remind people at the risk of seeming ridiculous that libyas assistance in third world struggles was not insignificant. i didn’t really like nasser or sukarno but i do understand their historical contexts & as watson pointed out – his crimes are relative until this week. he is a monster but in a century full of them he hardly takes the cake. you have entire us administrations full of people who have killed more people than gaddaffi in a minute
i see what i see, a people who have had enough, as is the case in tunisia, egypt, bahrain, algeria but as in all revolutionary moments there are a multitude of impulses & i am not a cheerleader of each & every impulse & even the impulses you support you do so with questioning & doubt
for example, if the iranians had been able to produce a general strike in their oppossition to ahmedinijad – it would have authenticated – the mass nature of the revolt – it didn’t happen & so it seemed clear to me that the revolt did not possess mass support
what i am witnessing in libya seems to be a popular uprising but yes i do not feel guilt for wanting to know more, to have more ‘facts’ at my disposal

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 22 2011 3:06 utc | 21

that is to say i think he should go & i think he will

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 22 2011 3:16 utc | 23

what i see is mass revolts on the street, that is enough for me – one would assume its enough for the autocrat too – as i said i think he will leave – he’s eccentric but he is not mad – he can see what is happening before his eyes – i would be surprised if he is still in libya by the end of the week

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 22 2011 3:34 utc | 25

he’s eccentric but he is not mad.
giap, you just don’t get what is happening.
Q has completely lost the plot and is taking his country down with him in a fit of suicidal revenge.
Sorry, but that’s the reality right now.

Posted by: Night Owl | Feb 22 2011 3:44 utc | 27

Keep fucking that chicken, giap. When b wakes up, after having slayed a Hapsburgian potentate cum starfucker, he’ll be fucking that chicken too.

Posted by: slothrop | Feb 22 2011 3:47 utc | 29

Watson: “let’s keep things in perspective. He has less innocent blood on his hands than many of his prominent critics, such as former VP Cheney who has never apologized for supporting apartheid and calling Mandela a terrorist. That reference is not a reflection on Gaddaffi. The Cheney administration ended up doing business with Gaddaffi – in my opinion, they deserved each other.
Gaddaffi has maneuvered in a purely self-interested political way for “his” survival, for “his” power, from the beginning. Killing his own people is beyond any comparison. One could argue that Cheney “killed his own people” by bringing them into a war based on a pack of lies. Comparing levels of such evil men is not something that is useful.
R’giap: “it is time for gaddaffi to go,…
Where would he go? What nation would take him? Maybe Venezuela would accept him…that would be a stupid move by Chavez.
…but i really want to see evidence that i have not seen
I repeat what Night Owl said, and was about to write very much the same “What, strafing and bombing his own civilians with attack helicopters and high tech fighter jets ain’t enough for you?’ I also was ready to write (right before Sloth posted his “zzzz…zing!) something like: “Hey, don’t give Sloth any ammunition for his main thesis!” But alas, I was late posting that also.
Gaddaffi is bad news and always has been. To defend that clown, that murderer, on any level is ludicrous. The people are 99 and 44/100 % united against him, yes even much of the military is abandoning him. Pictures of death because of this man have come across the Internet faster than I could download them.
R’giap: “this sad day for the libyan people”
The needless, merciless deaths are more than sad, but reports are that the Libyan people are more in control of the country than Gaddaffi. The people are being freed by their own hands after more than 40 years of this tyrant. I may have been too optimistic this early morning when I gave the dictator only hours left in power, but his time left in power is short.
Morocco Bama: “The revolution cannot, should not…..will not be televised. To do so would be heresy…..by both sides.”
First, let me say: The revolution is being televised – I am watching videos on commercial TV right now. Videos by individuals have been sneaking out continuously – the Internet is the ultimate media in our history. Secondly, media , of all types, is a good thing – the world needs to know and world media attention hastens the end of these tyrants. The world needs to bear witness…the Libyan people desire this. Many have given their lives – so who are we to try, or justify any attempt, to hide these crimes?
We who live in the West need to shed our tyrants also, and let the world bear witness.
[I got interrupted by a phone call – my mother who is in her nineties is ill. I talked at length and in the meantime additional posts between R’giap and Night Owl have transpired but I will still post though somewhat now redundant.]
One final comment:
R’giap:“perhaps you are right night owl & he will take this to another bloody sphere but i doubt it”
For heaven’s sake, it is there right before your eyes! “This” is already a “bloody sphere” – what would another “bloody sphere” prove to you or anyone? Perhaps your outlook (comparing against U.S./Western governments) is interfering in your judgment. Maybe it is time for all of us to look at the world through a new lens.

Posted by: Rick | Feb 22 2011 6:21 utc | 31

Since the US, in it’s self assumed role as Master of the Universe, has been ‘interfering’ in the ME for decades, 6 decades to be exact–it behooves us to interfere on the right side for a change in what could rapidly become a genocide in Libya.
Put US planes in Bahrain in the air over Libya 24/7 and never underestimate the value of a show of force as a unnerving agent.
The psychopath is in his castle in Tripoli – bomb it.
A psychopath isn’t crazy, he’s just without a conscience and his one motivation is self preservation–up the anty for Gaddafi.

Posted by: Renfro | Feb 22 2011 7:36 utc | 33

“What, strafing and bombing his own civilians with attack helicopters and high tech fighter jets ain’t enough for you?”
I have also yet to see any evidence for this. A frantic phone call to Aljazeera is not proof.
A no-fly zone is complete nonsense. It would only be an excuse for further “western” intervention which would rob the fruits the people may get from THEIR revolution. Likely by installing another dictator.
The “west” should stay out of this.

Posted by: b | Feb 22 2011 8:24 utc | 35

remember that 5 yr plan to take 7 countries ?
with sudan just taken cared of….
hmmm, libya, its about time now

Posted by: denk | Feb 22 2011 9:16 utc | 37

sorry for this intrusion mr b
let me introduce myself
i used to read moa n i was sad to see it closed shop
the other day i was browsing at http://tinyurl.com/2fb5w9
n one sentence leap up at me….*over at the moon of alabama…*
u mean moa is back ?
what a preseant surprise!
thank up mr b !

Posted by: denk | Feb 22 2011 9:28 utc | 39

First, let me say: The revolution is being televised – I am watching videos on commercial TV right now. Videos by individuals have been sneaking out continuously – the Internet is the ultimate media in our history.
Well, I suppose it depends on the definition of “televised.” Also, Marshall McLuhan’s The Medium is The Message must be taken into account. Here’s a great article on understanding McLuhan’s now famous mantra:
http://individual.utoronto.ca/markfederman/article_mediumisthemessage.htm

Why is this understanding of “the medium is the message” particularly useful? We tend to notice changes – even slight changes (that unfortunately we often tend to discount in significance.) “The medium is the message” tells us that noticing change in our societal or cultural ground conditions indicates the presence of a new message, that is, the effects of a new medium. With this early warning, we can set out to characterize and identify the new medium before it becomes obvious to everyone – a process that often takes years or even decades. And if we discover that the new medium brings along effects that might be detrimental to our society or culture, we have the opportunity to influence the development and evolution of the new innovation before the effects becomes pervasive. As McLuhan reminds us, “Control over change would seem to consist in moving not with it but ahead of it. Anticipation gives the power to deflect and control force.” (McLuhan 199)

Here are the lyrics to that original message about the Revolution not being televised because I believe many people don’t grok it.

You will not be able to stay home, brother.
You will not be able to plug in, turn on and cop out.
You will not be able to lose yourself on skag and skip,
Skip out for beer during commercials,
Because the revolution will not be televised.
The revolution will not be televised.
The revolution will not be brought to you by Xerox
In 4 parts without commercial interruptions.
The revolution will not show you pictures of Nixon
blowing a bugle and leading a charge by John
Mitchell, General Abrams and Spiro Agnew to eat
hog maws confiscated from a Harlem sanctuary.
The revolution will not be televised.
The revolution will not be brought to you by the
Schaefer Award Theatre and will not star Natalie
Woods and Steve McQueen or Bullwinkle and Julia.
The revolution will not give your mouth sex appeal.
The revolution will not get rid of the nubs.
The revolution will not make you look five pounds
thinner, because the revolution will not be televised, Brother.
There will be no pictures of you and Willie May
pushing that shopping cart down the block on the dead run,
or trying to slide that color television into a stolen ambulance.
NBC will not be able predict the winner at 8:32
or report from 29 districts.
The revolution will not be televised.
There will be no pictures of pigs shooting down
brothers in the instant replay.
There will be no pictures of pigs shooting down
brothers in the instant replay.
There will be no pictures of Whitney Young being
run out of Harlem on a rail with a brand new process.
There will be no slow motion or still life of Roy
Wilkens strolling through Watts in a Red, Black and
Green liberation jumpsuit that he had been saving
For just the proper occasion.
Green Acres, The Beverly Hillbillies, and Hooterville
Junction will no longer be so damned relevant, and
women will not care if Dick finally gets down with
Jane on Search for Tomorrow because Black people
will be in the street looking for a brighter day.
The revolution will not be televised.
There will be no highlights on the eleven o’clock
news and no pictures of hairy armed women
liberationists and Jackie Onassis blowing her nose.
The theme song will not be written by Jim Webb,
Francis Scott Key, nor sung by Glen Campbell, Tom
Jones, Johnny Cash, Englebert Humperdink, or the Rare Earth.
The revolution will not be televised.
The revolution will not be right back after a message
bbout a white tornado, white lightning, or white people.
You will not have to worry about a dove in your
bedroom, a tiger in your tank, or the giant in your toilet bowl.
The revolution will not go better with Coke.
The revolution will not fight the germs that may cause bad breath.
The revolution will put you in the driver’s seat.
The revolution will not be televised, will not be televised,
will not be televised, will not be televised.
The revolution will be no re-run brothers;
The revolution will be live.

What I gather from this is that a real Revolution, one that is truly effective and meaningful, will be so organically pervasive and ubiquitous, so overwhelming in its manifestation, that it cannot be contained and/or controlled by the very system that led to its purposeful, unintended…yet perfectly predictable existence.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | Feb 22 2011 12:39 utc | 41

According to new Aljazeerah reports the planes in Lybia did NOT bomb civilians but ammunition depots and command centers. Helicopters fired to “scare people”.
Oh, well that’s much better. Sorry, for awhile there, I thought people were actually being killed.

Posted by: Rick | Feb 22 2011 13:36 utc | 43

I don’t know anybody else but regimes that kill dozens (many if not most civilians) a day in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and gloat about it, don’t follow my definition of ‘good guys’.

Posted by: ThePaper | Feb 22 2011 14:29 utc | 45

Iran and U.S. in the Suez Canal

The Ongoing Stability of this Important Waterway’
by Gary Leupp / February 21st, 2011
On Wednesday the U.S. Navy official website reported: “Enterprise Carrier Strike Group (CSG) transited the Suez Canal and entered the U.S. 5th Fleet area of responsibility (AOR), Feb. 15.” This refers to the passage of the world’s first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, the USS Enterprise (CVN-65), from the Mediterranean into the Red Sea. It is accompanied by the guided missile cruiser USS Leyte Gulf and the USNS Arctic, a combat support ship. Naval strike group commander Rear Admiral Terry Craft says such passage is routine and “demonstrates the ongoing stability of this important waterway.” Are we to suppose that if the U.S. didn’t deploy massive military power in the canal, or if the Egyptians denied access, the waterway would be “unstable”?

Iran sending warships through Suez Canal

Iran was reported on Wednesday night to be sending warships through the Suez Canal for the first time in 30 years in a provocative flexing of muscles amid chaos in the region which poses a serious test of Egypt’s new leadership.
Iran is reported to be sending warships through the Suez Canal for the first time in 30 years

who writes this shit, a bot?

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Feb 22 2011 15:18 utc | 47

Bahrain is almost completely off the news. I don’t see anything about the large march today in AJE frontpage. Someone has advised the Bahrain government on this clever strategy of just ignoring what is happening and avoid unwanted publicity. Wait a few days with no news and try to make the protesters go back home with some token concessions. Not sure if it will work but seems more intelligent than killing protesters in front of cameras so it’s worrisome (as I don’t really believe the regime or the US want any real reform).

Posted by: ThePaper | Feb 22 2011 15:19 utc | 49

A no-fly zone is complete nonsense. It would only be an excuse for further “western” intervention which would rob the fruits the people may get from THEIR revolution. Likely by installing another dictator.
What is complete nonsense is the idea that imagined fruits of this revolution in the future should supercede the wholesale slaughter of civilians in the present.
What’s also complete nonsense is that somehow a future Libyan government will be less legitimate if thousands more of the population are alive to see it.
Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate the political concerns over western powers getting involved, and where the military has behaved well during these uprisings there is no good purpose for outside powers taking an active role.
But these are modern Western weapons killing unarmed civilians, and if we don’t at least level the playing field a little with regard to air power, there will be a bloodbath that could very well spark a regional war.
According to new Aljazeerah reports the planes in Lybia did NOT bomb civilians but ammunition depots and command centers. Helicopters fired to “scare people”.
Gotta link b? Because I suppose those two senior pilots in Malta defected because they didn’t like the way Q was wasting ammunition?
I’m watching Q right now ranting and raving about ‘no mercy’. You really think this guy at this stage is going to show any kind of restraint?

Posted by: Night Owl | Feb 22 2011 16:28 utc | 51

r’giap:what i do suggest though is that the mass media is hardly an honest broker in this affair & i include aje in this
I agree 100%. But that is the beauty of the Internet in its ability to reveal – the pictures that we have seen of people covered in blood, taken by other people – not prof. media, are horrible. Eye witness accounts are subject to more questions than a video. And add to that the basic fact that the media is not even allowed is enough proof to me that this tyrant has to go.

Posted by: Rick | Feb 22 2011 16:40 utc | 53

even with slothrop’s truly impoverished understanding of rhetoric, even he would understand that this is a speech, not of triumphalism but of defeat

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 22 2011 17:06 utc | 55

Oh, aren’t the market manipulators cute. Maybe they read my earlier comment….or my mind…..and programmed a little downside in to make it look good.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Libya-unrest-rattles-markets-apf-3667776437.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=main&asset=&ccode=

Stocks fell sharply and oil prices spiked as investors became worried about increasingly violent unrest in Libya.
Oil prices rose 6 percent to $95 a barrel Tuesday. The fight between protesters and forces loyal to the Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi threatens the country’s oil production. Libya is the world’s 18th largest oil producer.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | Feb 22 2011 18:00 utc | 57

in libya as in algeria, watson’s question – of who takes control is in itself intriguing if not also troubling as the only organizations with anything like an appareil are salafists – those in libya mirror gaddaffi & in algeria where the labrynthine relationships between state security & the salafists demands more questions than it answers
i wondered too, whether the mass work demanded of the political processus of hezbollah & the muslim brotherhood have not mediated both their ideological & social function in a fundamental way that seperates them from the salafists who have no mass base
the thinktanks of doha are not in the least helpful – they ere not helpful in egypt either & remained peculiarly silent on bahrain

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 22 2011 19:26 utc | 59

It appears the “USuk”(ers) are suffering heavy challenges reducing the contradictions of protests erupting in historically USuk-unfriendly states to the usual “the dignity of the masses will prevent a revolution from spreading to Libya, Syria, et al.” and if it does, it’s all a CIA plot.
Keep fucking that chicken, brothers.

Posted by: slothrop | Feb 22 2011 19:30 utc | 61

By this point, giap, you’re like one of those execrable French parlour sissies writing (Bataille,Althusser) in the forties winded apologies for Stalin…” well, the five-year plans were unnecessary if imperfect achievement to propel the motherland into industrial modernity even while several millions of peasants were made to pay for our future with their souls…”

Posted by: slothrop | Feb 22 2011 19:37 utc | 63

slaughter, your open support for the slaughter of the people of iraq, afghanistan & pakistan & your exhortations of violence against the iranians, i would have thought – gave you absolutely no rhetorical space within which to carry out the quarrel with yourself

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 22 2011 19:41 utc | 65

WSJ: John Kerry : “The Qadhafi government’s use of deadly force against its own people should mean the end of the regime itself”

Of course when it was the Tunisian, Egyptian or Bahrein government it just meant that they had to exercise restraining in controlling the protests.

Posted by: ThePaper | Feb 22 2011 20:06 utc | 67

while aje demonizes latin americans – cnn sees insurrections

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 22 2011 20:50 utc | 69

Rumors have been circulating over the past 24 hours that a group of Libyan army officers is preparing to move into Tripoli to oust Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi. A STRATFOR source claims that Gen. al-Mahdi al-Arabi Abdulhafiz is leading this movement but that the officers are awaiting the results of a U.N. Security Council (UNSC) meeting that is currently in progress.
Based on allegations that Gadhafi ordered the Libyan air forces to bomb civilian opposition targets, many high-level Libyan defectors, including Libyan ambassador to the United States Ali Suleiman Aujali, have been calling on the UNSC to declare a no-fly zone over Libya and for the United States to enforce the zone. Although the U.S. Air Force has the assets in place to do so, there is not yet any clear indication that it is an option the United States is pursuing. According to one source, the army officers leading the movement are trying to lobby the United States to enforce the no-fly zone so that Gadhafi cannot order his remaining loyal units in the air force to bombard advancing army units. However, Gadhafi is likely calculating that global concerns over energy cutoffs from Libya and civil unrest escalating in the country could deter such plans…
…Though plans appear to be in the works for an army-led intervention to oust Gadhafi, there is no guarantee that such a new regime would hold in place. Events over the past 48 hours indicate a splintering of the armed forces, though the severity of the splits remains unclear. Ultimately, without a strong regime at the helm, the loyalties of Libya’s army officers are more likely to fall to their respective tribes. At that point, the potential for civil war increases considerably.
Moreover, the Libyan military is not a highly respected institution in the country (unlike in Egypt, where the military held together as a cohesive force and was welcomed by the populace) and has long been viewed as the source of the Gadhafi regime’s repression. Unless Libyans distinguish between those army units that defected early on and those that remained loyal to Gadhafi, any army-led faction that tries to impose control will likely encounter great difficulty in sustaining its hold on power.
In other words, the Libyan situation cannot be viewed as a replication of the crisis management employed by the military in Egypt.

Posted by: Griego | Feb 22 2011 20:55 utc | 71

‘Gaddafi resembles Robert Mugabe in that both incurred the hostility of the Western establishment because of the good that they did, not the bad. ‘
absolutely…and i the case of President Mugabe…hes done very little bad(other than his IMF mistake) and a great deal of good.

Posted by: brian | Feb 22 2011 21:11 utc | 73

@ Morocco Bama
here is the correct spelling of the name of the Libyan Leader with the Marvelous Mug معمر القذافي‎
now you know.

Posted by: dan of steele | Feb 22 2011 21:41 utc | 75

From Aljazeera:
Navi Pillay, the UN high commissioner for human rights, has warned that the widespread attacks against civilians “amount to crimes against humanity”, and called for an international investigation in possible human rights violations.
Witnesses in Tripoli told Al Jazeera that fighter jets had bombed portions of the city in fresh attacks on Monday night. The bombing focused on ammunition depots and control centres around the capital.
Helicopter gunships were also used, they said, to fire on the streets in order to scare demonstrators away.
etc
http://www.countercurrents.org/aljazeera220211.htm

Posted by: brian | Feb 22 2011 21:46 utc | 77

Thanks, Dan. I’m assuming that’s Arabic. Either way, it’s beautifully artistic script……and quite a juxtaposition when put to a photo of the Marvelous Mug. Kinda like lipstick on pig. There are a lot of lipsticked pigs these days. Too numerous to count, actually.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | Feb 22 2011 22:10 utc | 79

So when the zionists bomb a Lebanese school or hospital where ‘terrorists’ are reckoned to be using the citizens as human shields thats a good thing, when the US sends a drone into the middle of a wedding party killing 70 people, that is unfortunate collateral damage, an accident but still a good thing, but when any Arab leader on the DC shitlist blows up an armoury in his own country killing those who broke into it, that is a war crime?
I find them all abhorrent but I can’t understand US moral relativity.
Any intervention such as a no fly zone, would only make things worse. Those who want to believe the US has a right to play sheriff and force its will on other states, need to go back and study their nation’s history properly using impartial objective source material. I don’t believe there has been a single instance in the 200 + years of US intervention in the affairs of others where US motivation was other than naked self interest.
That applies to the vast majority of interventions by other countries and the UN, as well.
As for the airforce pilots, my underestanding is that they were paid a great deal of money to escort senior Total execs that had been based in Eastern Libya, out of the country. The lies may be out of shame, or media created spin, or both.
Doubtless there will be genuine proven instances of Muammar’s crimes against fellow Libyans, but thus far those which have been presented have lacked substance.
Given the outrageous lies which western media have peddled about any Arab on their shit list over the years, it is just plain foolish to accept what we are being told about Libya at face value.

Posted by: UreKismet | Feb 22 2011 22:44 utc | 81

not a whisper

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 22 2011 23:13 utc | 83

This is what it boils down to for our friends the USuk(ers). they have their stack of chips, and they’re all in. the rule is simple: beloved tyrants are ones who have a track record of opposing USuk. And the protesters in these countries who risk death, are CIA dupes.
Rinse. Repeat.

Posted by: slothrop | Feb 22 2011 23:59 utc | 85

@r’giap: today there has also been massive demonstrations in bahrain – on aje – not a word
The only news I’ve seen (in my limited time to blog-walk) has been that the F1 Gran Prix of Bahrain – the 2011 season opener – has been cancelled “to allow the people of Bahrain to concentrate on their national dialogue.”
That’s a BIG chunk of ‘tourist dollars’ that will now not be going to the regime, in addition to all the money they pony up to keep the track and facilities maintained.

Posted by: Dr. Wellington Yueh | Feb 23 2011 0:42 utc | 87

those saying its time for Gaddaffi to go….may like to ask: who or what is to replace him? like a US satrap? Will the protestors be happy to be under a US backe dictator/govt? Whose privatisation will drive them into poverty
What gets me about the Q apologists on this board is that most appear to be stuck in a Cold War time warp where Q is still the non-aligned hero opposing evil western imperialism and standing up for the downtrodden masses toiling under the yolk of exploitative capitalism.
What they refuse to acknowledge is that in the last decade Q sold them and their ideological brethren out to BP and is now the BFF of neocon corporatists like Tony Blair and Silvio Berlusconi.
Sorry to break it to you guys, but Q’s just not that into you any more.

Posted by: Night Owl | Feb 23 2011 1:08 utc | 89

The USuk(ers) are neocons in reverse, entering somebody else’s pain into their calculus of the One Pure Idea.
It’s not that democracy is good, where tyranny is bad–no, no. For our USuk(ers), the struggle in Libya is illegitimate because the sacrifices that people make there don’t tidily comport with the USuk Tendentious Use of Dictators rule.
The hypocrisy would be shocking if the people who practice it here were less intellectually effete.

Posted by: slothrop | Feb 23 2011 1:31 utc | 91

“our motto must therefore be : reform of consciousness not by means of dogmas but through the analysis of consciousness which is not clear to itself or presents itself in religious or political forms. it will then be clear that the world has for long had a dream of something…..”
karl marx lettre à ruge

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 23 2011 1:42 utc | 93

giap,
i think you greatly misunderstand at least some of the dissension – partly it is due to a complete absence of information – in this affair there is very very little which is sourced even in a rough fashion
It is very clear what is happening right now for anyone willing to take off their historical and ideological blinders. Or don’t the reports of the many in the Libyan diplomatic corps who have resigned in disgust count as sourced?
While you wait for your smoking gun, people are getting gunned down in the streets. Apparently denial is also a river in Libya.
i have a little difficulty in understanding your point – to place someone in a historical context is usually a form of elaboration, not escape
usually… but not always.

Posted by: Night Owl | Feb 23 2011 1:45 utc | 95

there has been no elaboration from the diplomats – hyperbole – i don’t wait for a smoking gun – but proof that some of the claims have evidence behind them
& i’m hardly defending him nightowl – at least look at what i have written for fuck’s sake
in egypt there were often mutiple sources from different points & evidence provided in short order ever by the events themselves or some kind of record – it is not the same situation – that is all that i am suggesting, the same is true for bahrain & to a lesser degree, algeria

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 23 2011 1:53 utc | 97

let me be clear then
gaddaffi is an autocrat
that autocracy is being challenged by a popular revolt
that revolt has many sources
the nature of that revolt is violent, considerably more violent than either egypt or tunisia
it appears that there is no appareil of state left or even substantial allies
gaddaffi will leave
the information available is poor, very poor
aje has its own boat to row as revealed by its utter silence on bahrain
we are not here to consume information but interpret it
conversations are not facts
youtube is not history

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 23 2011 2:02 utc | 99