They just don't get it...

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

It turns out that a British diplomat turned up at the border and asked to be taken to rebel commanders in Libya. he had with him a detail from the SAS, a crack British Special Forces outfit, similar to the American Delta Force, only with stiffer upper lips and no chewing gum to hand out.

Anyways, the Libyan commanders didn't ask for, and didn't want any forign troops involved in what they see as 'their' struggle against Gaddaffi. So they captured the SAS guys and threw them into the brig, only releasing them unharmed once they had got the british diplomat out of their country.

http://news.antiwar.com/2011/03/05/libyan-rebels-capture-british-sas-unit/

So, there you have it. The Libyans are asking for a UN backed intervention in their struggle.
They want the UN , not the UK or the USA to send in any ground troops.

Seeing as if the rebels win, they are going to have to go to their own people and say that' we are not the sellouts to Western Powers like Gaddaffi was ( remember that the jets and tanks he is currently using to murder his own people were supplied by the same people who want to start an invasion) - well , i think it is only fair that they should be the ones who set the terms on how Gaddaffi is otten rid of. Ok, he has to go, nd his own people are the ones to take him down.

Ii don't see the military dictators and undemocratic despots who rule Arab League countries being very enthusiastic about establishing a bit more democracy in the world , somehow - esp. in a place like Libya.

And that leaves the UN. So, what is the UN for? UK/USA forces have basically been acting like the military wing of their countries corporate interests of late. i don't blame the Libyans for telling the SAS that they were unwelcome.

I do think that the Libyans have every right to appeal to the international community, via the UN , which pledges itself to uphold human rights , to which they belong , to give them a hand by way of enforcing a no fly zone and supporting the Libyan Ground forces with airstrikes on Gaddaffis mercenaries, together with his tanks and artillery.

I am suprised that the UK Government didn't get it that the age of gunboat diplomacy is over, but what else can we expect of ex public schoolboys like 'Call Me Dave'? Cameron and his cronies in the British foriegn office 'just don't get it' - but I hope that someone out there in the wider world does, and does what the rebels are begging the international community to give them without delay.

But if you disagree with the idea of airstrikes, and the Libyans are not going to co operate with any foriegn troops that they regard as 'invaders', then what role or position do we want the UN to adopt here? It has been said in this community that ' this is not what the UN is for - well, ok, what should it be doing instead?

Comments

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

Yes and this is neither of those wars is it? Everyone knew Iraq was a bad idea at the time. (well everyone that didn't have their head up FOX news's ass) Again, this is not korea for the reasons I gave.

Furthermore, as I said to jersey, I know that the U.S. diplomatic policy for the previous administration basically consisted of with us or against us, but I think we can return to a little nuance in our positions.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Everyone except the 75% of the US population who supported the war in 2003. After people realized that Baghdad of 2003 was not 1944 Paris people suddenly wised up, but by then it was too late. We never had this nuance in our politics, which is another thing people overlook. Wilson was nothing but Bush with the ability to pronounce the word "nuclear." The US idealistic approach to politics is simultaneously our great strength and our great weakness.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

I think in this case, we're playing smarter. Heck, we already held back until the Arabs were down with it, that's pretty huge!

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Pfttt....they were down with our backing Saddam Hussein through the 1980s and against him in the 1990s, too. There is no inherent hostility between US military power and Arab dictators.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

There's quite a bit of enmity between us and the arab world however. We just have most of the dictators in our pockets.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Between the US government and the Arab *masses*, sure. The Arab and US governments tend to be best buds, and the US government has armed both Israel and the Arabs for decades now.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

Military industrial complex welfare. Keeps a lot of politicians in office.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Offers a lot of room for corruption, too.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

Its ok, we have it codified, so it's not corruption, it's our electoral system!

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Baron Vladimir couldn't have done it better.....