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

[whoasksfinds.livejournal.com]

so we went in to give the oil feilds to a democratic iraqi government that could choose to open their development up to international bidding, most of which did not go to american companies?

thats an interesting brand of imperialism.

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

I stopped reading at General Smedly Butler.

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

I am wondering why - this guy started to get interesting .

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

He died in 1940 and wrote that in 1934 about wars he fought 25 years before that. In some cases, he had a fair point to make. But that was about a pre-WWII world. Indeed, it was thinking along Smedly's line, thinking deeply influenced by the horror and senselessness of WWI, that made WWII possible.

Smedly was also something of a crank, a fervent supporter of the Volstead Act and a conspiracy theorist of the first order. But that is another story.

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

But the world has changed since he died, right?
the American corporations and Multinational Companies don't use their economic clout to bully smaller countries and have the military might of the USA, the UK and France to break open markets any more - is this what you are telling me?

Well, listen; my faith in what you might call the 'better side of human nature' is well known on this forum, but even I don't buy that one.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Thinking on his line that imperialism and wars waged for imperialism were bad things were what led to Hitler trying to exterminate Europe's Slavs and Imperial Japan seeking control of China (a war that actually started 2 years before the European one did)? Yeah, OK. In the real world OTOH.....in the real world Hitler and the Imperial Japanese Army and Navy wanted to both replace the global European Empires and bring the shiny happy "progressive" techniques used in German Southwest Africa and the Congo Free State to Europe.

They failed abysmally and somehow became Magnificent Bastards despite having failed so utterly and completely. It was not anti-imperialism that motivated the aggressions of 1937 and 1939.

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

Do you disagree with the decorated patriot?

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

I disagree with equating all war to the Honduran police action of 1912, yes. Gen. Butler was a man of supreme courage, but his judgment in this case is distorted because of his particular frame of reference.

Gen. Butler was also eager for the Philadelphia police to kill more bandits in shootouts and was disappointed when it was represented to him that the court system frowned on just gunning down suspects. He was also a fanatical supporter of the Volstead Act.

Do you agree with decorated patriot?

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

How could I, a mere citizen, presume to comment at all on the exalted opinion of the decorated patriot, who so expressly fought for our freedoms? I think his statement spoke eloquently for himself. Can you provide proof that his judgment was distorted, and if so, by what agency.

[debergerac.livejournal.com]

i stopped reading at halliburton.

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

*laughs* You mean you really don't know? The oil fields have primarily gone to Chevron and Shell, with the French company Total only getting some of the oil fields. The majority have gone to American corporations. Halliburton got the contract to manage the oil infrastructure. I'd say Halliburton, Chevron, and Shell profiting would be American corporations profiting, don't you?

[whoasksfinds.livejournal.com]

you're either lying, or just misinformed. (http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/12/12/us-iraq-usa-oil-idUSTRE5BB18Q20091212)

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

Old news, man, old news. You gotta keep up. (http://www.iraq-businessnews.com/2011/02/21/shell-confirms-participation-in-basra-oil-gas-2011/) You missed the entirety of the results of the Basra Oil & Gas Conference 2011 (http://www.iraq-businessnews.com/2011/01/26/ibn-to-sponsor-basra-oil-gas-2011/).

[whoasksfinds.livejournal.com]

OMG an oil conference in iraq!

so were you lying?

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

No, I wasn't. The contracts were awarded at the oil conference I just mentioned. Go dig up the extracts.

[whoasksfinds.livejournal.com]

how about you admit that most oil contracts to date have gone to foreign companies. or are you just going to deny it, since it doesn't fit your false narrative?

and by the way, royal dutch shell (http://en.news.maktoob.com/20090000634380/Shell_CEO_hopes_Iraq_gas_deal_to_be_sealed_soon/Article.htm) is not an american company.

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

how about you admit that most oil contracts to date have gone to foreign companies.

The Expo mentioned reverses your information of last year.

and by the way, royal dutch shell is not an american company.

No, Americans just own over 65% of the stock in it. It's not under American control. Really!

[whoasksfinds.livejournal.com]

The Expo mentioned reverses your information of last year.

no, actually it doesn't. but hey, if living in denial helps you sleep at night.

Americans just own over 65% of the stock in it

why didn't we give it to a 100% owned american company?

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

why didn't we give it to a 100% owned american company?

*looks at the major oil corps* Tell me which one that is again?
Because last I checked, none of them are 100% American-owned.

[whoasksfinds.livejournal.com]

so royal dutch shell is the most american owned of the oil majors? lol.

and why did we allow chinese, russian, french, malaysian, and brazilian oil companies to get contracts? oh those imperialists!