Obama's Libyan Adventure-Will It End Badly?

[Ramira]

It is clear it was damaged in fighting and it i was the place where Seif made his broadcast.

[BrainGlutton]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Nothing wrong with tribalism. If the country splinters into a bunch of satellites, so what?

So, malia.

[ElvisL1ves]

@gonzomax

What assurances do you have that a democracy will arise?

Mainly their successful experience in establishing and growing self-government, while simultaneously fighting a war of liberation. There are no guarantees, of course, but this is how the US started, if you’ll recall.

They have no political parties .

But there are disparate interests, the basis of forming parties. Plus, it isn’t an information vacuum there - they know how it works in the rest of the world, and the educated class you don’t think exists has spent quite a bit of time there as well.

By the way, our borders are where our responsibilities end. We have no treaty with Libya.

Our responsibilities to our fellow humans exist only by written contract, IYHO? :dubious: Sad.

[dropzone]

“To the shores of Tripoli.” Guess it ends at the shore.

[Frank]

@ElvisL1ves

Mainly their successful experience in establishing and growing self-government, while simultaneously fighting a war of liberation. There are no guarantees, of course, but this is how the US started, if you’ll recall.

He’ll recall that only if he’s making it up out of thin air, as you are. For example, the House of Burgesses in Virginia was established some 150 years before the U.S. revolution. The colonies were quite familiar with self-government; in fact, that was one of the primary causes of the revolution.

Comparing the U.S. revolution to the Libyan civil war displays more ignorance on your part than even I thought you capable of. My mistake.

[ElvisL1ves]

You just can’t force yourself, can you?

[Magiver]

@ElvisL1ves

Our responsibilities to our fellow humans exist only by written contract, IYHO? :dubious: Sad.

fine, off to Syria and every other warring country in the Mid-East because they all need to be saved by democracy.

[BrainGlutton]

From an interview with Gilbert Achcar, a prof at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London:

AMY GOODMAN: Who are the rebels, Gilbert Achcar?

GILBERT ACHCAR: Who are the rebels? Well, this is actually the $1 billion question, actually, because even in NATO circles, you find the same questions. The fact is, of course, we know about the Transitional National Council, and even that is a limited knowledge because not all the members of this council are known, and there will be new members announced in order to represent the remaining areas, including Tripoli. And here you find a mixture of, you know, liberals and former regime members and traditional people representing tribal or original components of the country.

What we can judge really is the program put forward by this council. In terms of a political program, what we have looks like a democratic blueprint for a democratic transition. They pledged to organize election, and actually two rounds of election: one for a constituent assembly, which would draft a constitution, and then a second round of election, based on the constitution, to elect a final government. And they pledged—and I’m really skeptical about it—but they pledged even that all the members of the existing National Council, the Traditional National Council, would not, I mean, enter in this electoral arena for the two rounds of election. Well, of course, this, again, remains to be seen.

At the level of the economic program that is represented in the existing cabinet of the council, you find people who actually were already playing the same role under Gaddafi in supervising the neoliberal reforms in the country. So nothing much original, I think, to expect in that regard. I mean, this is not a socialist revolution. I don’t think anyone has ever had any kind of illusion about that.

But this said, when we think of the rebels in terms of the fighting people, the fighting groups, when you think of the rebels in terms of the masses that have been—the insurgent masses that we have even seen in Tripoli on Sunday night coming out in huge numbers in what was formerly called the Green Square, which is the Martyrs’ Square, well, then you find, I mean, a completely heterogeneous landscape, and I would say the overwhelming majority of these people are people with no previous political background, and including those holding weapons now, because you have—I mean, most of the—on the rebel side, most of the people holding weapons were civilians before that. They were not military. And most of these people, you know, after 42 years of dictatorship, without any real, genuine political life in the country, are very difficult to describe politically. We will have to wait and see what will come out, when you will have a real political struggle starting in the country, in the same way that we have—we are witnessing a political struggle going on in Egypt or Tunisia, the two countries where the dictators have been toppled until now.

!!! The bolded part – bad idea! See the Self Denying Ordinance.

[Frank]

@ElvisL1ves

You just can’t force yourself, can you?

I was convinced that U.S. activity in Libya was wrong; I’ve read the arguments supporting that activity from better thinkers than you, and I am still convinced that U.S. activity in Libya was wrong; barring stronger arguments in future, I will remain convinced that U.S. activity in Libya was wrong.

What, precisely, do you feel that I should be forcing myself to do?

[Frank]

@BrainGlutton

!!! The bolded part – bad idea! See the Self Denying Ordinance.

Even besides that bit of history, it’s a bad idea in the same way that term limits are and the de-Ba’athification of Iraq was a bad idea. I’ve got to assume that amongst the members of the TNC are competent and experienced politicians and technocrats who would be useful in whatever government Libya winds up with.

[ElvisL1ves]

@Magiver

fine, off to Syria and every other warring country in the Mid-East because they all need to be saved by democracy.

Who said “every”? :dubious: You do what you can, where you can. In Libya, we could. In most places, we couldn’t. The fact that you can’t do everything does not mean you can’t do anything.

Are you going to tell us why you think a war being “civil” is an excuse for not doing anything?

@Frank

I was convinced that U.S. activity in Libya was wrong; I’ve read the arguments supporting that activity from better thinkers than you, and I am still convinced that U.S. activity in Libya was wrong; barring stronger arguments in future, I will remain convinced that U.S. activity in Libya was wrong.

What, precisely, do you feel that I should be forcing myself to do?

For starters, explain *why *you concluded the arguments were wrong. You have never done so, only tossed in some snark. All you’ve provided by way of thought is on the same level as Magiver’s. So, force yourself to post like an adult and we’ll take it from there, m’kay?

[Frank]

@ElvisL1ves

For starters, explain *why *you concluded the arguments were wrong. You have never done so, only tossed in some snark.

Nonsense. I explained that a civil war in Libya was none of our business. You responded, “Won’t somebody think of humanity?” (alternating with frantic cries of, “Won’t somebody think of spreading democracy!”) while conveniently coming up with facile explanations why places like Syria, Zimbabwe, and China are none of our business because they’re not convenient.

I see no reason to begin that conversation again.

[BrainGlutton]

@Frank

Nonsense. I explained that a civil war in Libya was none of our business. You responded, “Won’t somebody think of humanity?” (alternating with frantic cries of, “Won’t somebody think of spreading democracy!”) while conveniently coming up with facile explanations why places like Syria, Zimbabwe, and China are none of our business because they’re not convenient.

I see no reason to begin that conversation again.

I would say that whether a conflict is “our business” strictly speaking, and whether it is convenient to get involved, are but two items of several to put on the scale in deciding whether to get involved.

[Frank]

@BrainGlutton

I would say that whether a conflict is “our business” strictly speaking, and whether it is convenient to get involved, are but two items of several to put on the scale in deciding whether to get involved.

If you think you can make stronger arguments than ElvisL1ves, feel free. I’m all ears. (Or eyes, as the case may be.)

[ElvisL1ves]

@Frank

Nonsense. I explained that a civil war in Libya was none of our business.

Wrong. You *asserted *it, and continue to do that and nothing more. You have *explained *exactly nothing.

I see no reason to begin that conversation again.

IOW, you acknowledge not having any actual *thought *to offer on the subject. But we knew that already.

[Frank]

@ElvisL1ves

Wrong. You *asserted *it, and continue to do that and nothing more. You have *explained *exactly nothing.

IOW, you acknowledge not having any actual thought to offer on the subject. But we knew that already

This is exactly why I do not care to begin that conversation again. Nice editing, pal.

[ElvisL1ves]

No, friend, metronomically repeating “You’re wrong, you’re wrong, you’re wrong” is not a conversation. So you’re wrong even about your claim to having started one.

Perhaps you need to start with some easier forum, perhaps MPSIMS, and build your way up to a basic proficiency before trying this Great Debates stuff. At least try to learn the difference between an assertion and an explanation, and between repetition and discussion. Then, you can move up to establishing a coherent view of the responsibilities of a great democracy in the world that goes beyond the level of “Whatever it is, Obama is wrong”. But you have a great deal of work ahead of you.

[Magiver]

@ElvisL1ves

Wrong. You *asserted *it, and continue to do that and nothing more. You have *explained *exactly nothing.
.

You haven’t explained the criteria for involving ourselves in a civil war. We don’t know who we’re backing and without any thought process behind it we’ll be fighting wars in dozens of countries.

[ElvisL1ves]

The fact that you do not accept, or perhaps cannot understand, humanitarian and democratic principles does not mean they have not been explained to you.

Now, how about that “civil war” point you’ve been so insistent upon? Got anything for us besides Frankian pouting?

[Frank]

@ElvisL1ves

Now, how about that “civil war” point you’ve been so insistent upon?

What are the scare quotes supposed to mean, O Lord and High Master of the definition of explanation? Was there not a civil war?