To begin with, they've apparently instituted a central bank; their own version of our Federal Reserve. I won't comment on the wisdom of a central bank, but doesn't it seem strange that a ragtag group of fighters, while not having sufficient C3I to fight a meaningful resistance still has a group that opens the "Central Bank of Benghazi", and signs an oil agreement?... Shouldn't you actually, you know, win before you do this?and included short mention of Samantha Power (wife of the regulatory czar Cass Sunstein) and the UN Responsibility to Protect movement, (which WSRA links to today):
Second, it might mean that Responsibility to Protect stuff is just a cover. The attention to Samantha Power, then, could be a distraction.Still, why Libya? Is it that they were not virulently anti-Israel enough for Samantha Power and George Soros, who has employed her in the past? Human rights?
No doubt Daffy Qadaffi, the Transvestite of Tripoli, was not a beneficent ruler who allowed freedom for this people in absolute terms, but Libya is reported to have had the best standard of living in Africa (and here, too) so they certainly didn't have it as badly as many other populations under dictatorships.
For Richard Falk, the UN special rapporteur for human rights in Palestine, the “degree of repression” in Libya is not "more pervasive and severe" than in other authoritarian countries. Even according to Amnesty International's country reports of human rights conditions, that of Libya differs little from many other countries; regarding the Arab allies in the NATO war alliance, such as Saudi Arabia, it is even much worse. (source)They publicly dismantled their WMD program in late '03 during the early phases of the Iraq war. They were trying to open tourism with the rest of the world again. They were, by all I can tell, not a problem in the region. Unlike Syria, where "Butcher" Al-Assad is killing his people by the hundreds. Unlike Sudan, where Muslims are killing Christians in prolific numbers.
If you were going to ask me to point out a global hot spot of oppression that needed to capped, Libya would not have made my list.
No, if we were going to get rid of an oppressive dictatorship, we don't have to go over to Africa; one of the worst is right here, 90 miles from Florida. I'm talking about Cuba, of course. Read Babalu blog if you're not familiar with the reality of Cuba, or a nice summary of the early days of the regime, here. It's one of the most brutally repressive regimes on earth. I refer to Chavez in Venezuela as "Fidel's Dumber Brother". His regime is trying to achieve the same levels of stupidity as Fidel's in Cuba. If we just wanted to show off a bunch of military hardware, we could have off'ed Kim Jung Il and liberated North Korea, where people don't have even a tiny fraction of the quality of life of the Libyans, and where everyone is starving, even the Army (who gets more than the people).
This clearly wasn't some sort of altruistic move, motivated by higher things. I come down to just a couple of possible reasons:
- Oil - for the Europeans mostly. True, the US doesn't buy Libyan oil directly, but oil is pretty dang fungible, and any added to the world supply affects the price of all of it. But oil was already flowing from Libya. I doubt there's a big increase coming.
- Israel. Always the center of goings on in the Middle East and north Africa, Libya just wasn't anti-Israel enough for the thug-nuts in DC. This is probably down the path a bit, but there sure is a lot of evidence that leftists and Islamists are working together to overthrow Western, free-market life. Destroying Israel would be a big part of that. Followed shortly thereafter by the destruction of the US.