And if a group of people like that got out of control and shot some prisoners, it would be preferable to tell them: 1) we trust you not to do that again, or 2) we can’t allow this because that’s not the kind of country we’re trying to establish.
To be fair, letting off a group of murderers - I’m thinking more of the people who executed several dozen people at the hotel than the guy who shot Gaddafi - could do the same thing.
If you trust a bunch of people like that not to do what they’ve always done, you’re naive. May as well hire some wolves to guard your flock of sheep. The rebels are way too busy dividing the spoils of war and jockeying for power among themselves to care about obscure notions of proper form for revolutions.
Yeah…bad things happened. A dictator got popped, and so did quite a few of his collaborators. And in sports, the Saints scored 62 points on the Colts this week. Ahmed will be back with the weather after the commercial break…
That’s why you don’t let them do what they’ve always done, which means having laws and upholding them. You’re sort of arguing that there’s no point in trying to apply the law to these people because they’re lawbreakers. You have to get from Point A to Point B somehow.
It sounds like the Libyans want the issue to go away, and in time maybe it will. (In which case they probably shouldn’t have recorded it.) I am not sure the international community is going to want to push away a new Libyan government over something like this - to try and make them punish people who punished someone far worse and delivered an execution a little ahead of schedule. Massacres are another issue. It’s not really important that the international community wants anything done about them, it’s that Libyans may need to see something done for the government to have any credibility.
The international community mostly wants the spice to flow. If the Fremen massacre some more of Baron Harkonen’s troops, there might be an official “tsk, tsk”, but people are more interested tin knowing who’s going to be Maud’Dib.
And the Libyan people are mostly in Ewok celebration mode, if I may mix my metaphors. They’re glad Gadhafi’s dead, and they’re glad his collaborators are dead. Folks that were collaborators and aren’t dead are advised to keep a low profile, and cheer the new boss…whoever it may be.
Did I mention I can be a little cynical sometimes?
In this particular case, I’m willing to put the outcome down to “Shit happens.”
Gadhafi was rightly shunned and the rebels backed by NATO due to his use of heavy artillery/bombings of cities rebelling against his rule. He was shunned for killing without trial those who oppose him, rightly so again. Yet both of those things were being done by the very people who overthrew him, it was only indiscriminate mortars and rpgs but I am going out on the limb that if the rebels had aircraft and heavier artillery they would have done the same. My opinion is you better at least pretend you give a fuck about the rights of ALL Libyans or you will have an inter-tribal war to contend with before the elections.
Moral indignation at Gadafi’s demise is absurd. If anyone cared here truly about the Libyan people they would concern themselves more with the innocent that suffered during his regime.
That quite peaceful chair in front of your computer sure is comfortable.
Most of the kids who executed him are too young to know what life was like in Libya before his regime but it was no picnic under Mussolini, nor under Ottoman pirates for 500 years prior, nor under Islamic conquerors 1,000 years prior to that.
The innocent have suffered there before, and from the actions that the revolutionaries have taken even in victory and with worldwide support, I see every reason to believe that the innocent will suffer there again.
I have good news! It turns out that being interested in this situation or even concerned about it does not preclude being concerned about what happened in Libya under his regime or what happens next.
Baghdad Bob?
http://af.reuters.com/article/commoditiesNews/idAFN1E79P0SC20111026
This is almost surreal, first step to mending the wounds is tell a blatant lie?
Not a good beginning.
It could also be a very careful telling of the truth. You could interpret ‘he was wasn’t shot by a government soldier’ to mean Gaddafi was shot by one of his own men OR by a militia member who was part of the battle but wasn’t under the government’s command, for example. I don’t mean to parse this to the point of nonsense, but it’s hard to trust the Libyan government based on what’s come out so far, and when they seem to have the information needed to answer some simple questions - was he shot at close range or not and by what kind of weapon? - and have said they won’t explain.
I can just picture the ICC trying to prosecute anyone for abusing Gaddafi. “This man brutalized us for nearly forty years and he was never prosecuted. Now that he’s dead you’re interested in justice?” If I were a Libyan I’d be absolutely incensed if the ICC thought they could just butt their noses in at this point in time.
I’ve stated elsewhere that I think this is not a negative development.
After they put Ben Ali and mubarak on trial, despots might not have seen much of a downside to trying to retain power with bloody suppression.
I think the bayonet suppository might encourage despots to flee before fleeing is no longer an option.
Other dictators have died this way. Why didn’t Ben Ali and Mubarak and Gaddafi flee and why are guys like Saleh still trying to hold on? I think you’re assuming far too much rationality is in play here. It’s not like dictators don’t know what could happen to them if they are overthrown. It’s true these guys will do almost anything to survive, but they’re also egomaniacs who have trouble swallowing their pride and admitting their people don’t want them and they’ve lost the fight.
Eh. Maybe, I still think its probably a good thing.
Not that I believe it, but “Libyan Rulers to Put Dictators Killer on Trial”
Good news, but shouldn’t:
"Whoever is responsible for that (Gaddafi’s killing) will be judged and given a fair trial.”
read instead, “Given a fair trial and judged”?