Libya

[GrizzlerBorno]

It would most certainly be in the best interests of the oil companies to drum up international support and anger towards a singular man and his army standing in their way.

Nothing too fancy, mind you. Simple smash and grab, no elaborate scheme, really.

So what, the Oil companies had the Media exaggerate about the conditions?

I dunno man, seems too "out there" for me. Especially considering that, at the beginning, News Channels weren't reporting anything of their own from Libya at all, since they couldn't even get in. They were mostly airing the few Amateur videos they could scrape out of sites like Vimeo that weren't (aren't?) blocked off by the Govt. Which is why I suggested the "people's Propaganda" angle...... but then, how would they arrange any of that without any operating social networks?

 

[Booze Zombie]

Weak enough to roll over him and steal his resources? We could've flattened him at any point in the last forty years, Libya's army is nothing compared to the combined forces of the US, various European nations and whoever else is joining in. Truth is we were happy to trade with him. But now his country is falling apart and he's actively shooting his people, yes we do have to get involved. Not everything is some moronic conspiracy.

He had power via control of oil, not military.
His country destabilised and now it's a simple matter of shooting him/putting him in prison, "freeing the people" and placing some foreign interests down there for profit.

It's not very much of a conspiracy, anyway:
Wait for rebels to rise up, fire missiles, "liberate" country, ???, PROFIT!

So what, the Oil companies had the Media exaggerate about the conditions?

I dunno man, seems too "out there" for me. Especially considering that, at the beginning, News Channels weren't reporting anything of their own from Libya at all, since they couldn't even get in. They were mostly airing the few Amateur videos they could scrape out of sites like Vimeo that weren't (aren't?) blocked off by the Govt. Which is why I suggested the "people's Propaganda" angle...... but then, how would they arrange any of that without any operating social networks?

Simple thing there. If little media is coming out, you can just make shit up.
It's not hard or unheard of.

I mean the guy they used for the source of information that Sadam H' had WMD's? He's on record as saying "yeah, I lied like a ***** because I hated Sadam, what of it".

Politics is people vying for money and control, ideally both at the same time.

 

[Verlander]

Hypocrisy from the powerful nations? Never!

There are people that NEED removing from the UK, but no action ever seems to be taken. I think anyone would do what Gaddafi has, and I think that the UNs reaction shows how out of touch they are with modern society. What's happening in Libya, Egypt and suchlike will spill it's way over to us. Maybe not violently, but the political world as we know it is changing irreparably

 

[Booze Zombie]

Hypocrisy from the powerful nations? Never!

There are people that NEED removing from the UK, but no action ever seems to be taken. I think anyone would do what Gaddafi has, and I think that the UNs reaction shows how out of touch they are with modern society. What's happening in Libya, Egypt and suchlike will spill it's way over to us. Maybe not violently, but the political world as we know it is changing irreparably

It happens in waves, really. Every 20-50 years there's a revolution, a few deaths and some "grand actions".

You know, it reaches a certain stage where it's more expensive to invade a country, bring in our own guys and steal the oil than it is to just buy the freaking oil.

Especially considering what makes tanks and planes go.

Fair point, but this seems pretty effortless on the part of the UN. Let the Colonel blast off his ammo at the rebels, knock out his air support and wait for his own people to try and shoot him.

 

[Atmos Duality]

So... rebellion isnt allowed anymore? Cause I'm pretty sure thats how EVERY country came to be today.

Lets not ignore assassinations and economic collapse. Sometimes, people just let someone else take over without protest simply because everything currently sucks anyway.

And no, assassinations are not explicitly a form of "rebellion". Dictators in the last century have made extensive use of political assassination to prevent rebellion.

Politics is people vying for money and control, ideally both at the same time.

Politics is the most profitable waste of time ever devised.

All gains can simply be summed up with POWER. Control is power. Money is a form of power (as long as said money has value). Influence is power. The US making a play to assist the rebels serves several purposes beyond the obvious "We want your oil", of which I won't bother to pontificate on due to relevancy.

 

[Lord Doomhammer]

The thing of it is that he is deceiving his people by controlling the media, and not offering a diplomatic solution to the obvious problems the administration has produced.

The UN has made it abundantly clear that they want to see a diplomatic solution to this problem, and this air campaign is sort-of to force them all to the table to start talking.

Personally, I think both sides need to sit down and have a re-think on the whole matter, the rebels don't seem to have enough legitimacy or diplomacy to truly be a government, nor do they have a set down leader or leading organization, if they could come up with a leading body like a senate or something I would support them a hell of alot more. The same goes for Gafadi, he is a dictator and frankly is getting to the point of being completely delusional. He's lost the ability to lead and needs to leave power, though when faced with people who want his blood I can see why he's doing what he is doing. But that still dose not make it right.

 

[Booze Zombie]

Politics is the most profitable waste of time ever devised.

All gains can simply be summed up with POWER. Control is power. Money is a form of power (as long as said money has value). Influence is power. The US making a play to assist the rebels serves several purposes beyond the obvious "We want your oil", of which I won't bother to pontificate on due to relevancy.

Of course, but desire for oil due to profit is the most simplistic one to convey. There could be any other number of reasons that go along side it.

The other most obvious one is "exporting how we think things ought be done".

Personally, I think both sides need to sit down and have a re-think on the whole matter, the rebels don't seem to have enough legitimacy or diplomacy to truly be a government, nor do they have a set down leader or leading organization, if they could come up with a leading body like a senate or something I would support them a hell of alot more. The same goes for Gafadi, he is a dictator and frankly is getting to the point of being completely delusional. He's lost the ability to lead and needs to leave power, though when faced with people who want his blood I can see why he's doing what he is doing. But that still dose not make it right.

You've pretty much said what I think, but more eloquently.
That'll teach me to post at 3 in the morning... le sigh.

 

[Lord Doomhammer]

Also, why do people still bring up the "the us is coming to steal your oilz!!!1!" argument? Do you know how much oil we actually get from these countries? almost nothing compared to the Saudis!

The only way you could even come close to a legitimate argument with this idea is that when violence erupts in these countries it makes the Saudis worry and jack up the oil prices. So the US getting involved to calm everyone down with a few tomahawks makes sense in that way, but even still, compared to how much oil we get from FUCKING MEXICO, your argument makes no sense. Especially when mexico is basically being run by drug cartels and we're not doing shit about it.

 

[Kathinka]

does anyone really believe for one second any military is intervening to make live for the people there more pleasant? oh please!
the u.s. and their cronies have no problem of discarding the democraticly elected mosaddegh and installing a regime that repressed the iranian people and did not even think twice about torture & murder of anybody who dared to speak up. and now we are supposed to believe that they will plunge into a fight just to make the world a nicer place. seriously now^^


the spi...oil must flow!

 

[Booze Zombie]

Also, why do people still bring up the "the us is coming to steal your oilz!!!1!" argument? Do you know how much oil we actually get from these countries? almost nothing compared to the Saudis!

The only way you could even come close to a legitimate argument with this idea is that when violence erupts in these countries it makes the Saudis worry and jack up the oil prices. So the US getting involved to calm everyone down with a few tomahawks makes sense in that way, but even still, compared to how much oil we get from FUCKING MEXICO, your argument makes no sense. Especially when mexico is basically being run by drug cartels and we're not doing shit about it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12802108 (Sorry, wrong link a moment ago.)

It's already happened, apparently. The prices have been jacked up and oil money is what kept the Colonel going for the most part and I imagine it is viewed that it'd be better that the oil support Western interests than a violent dictator, regardless of the amount of oil.

If it's enough to support a government, it's enough to be profitable.

Also, it's not all just about oil, obviously. You free a country, it's new government is pretty much like "we owe you, you know". You export your politics to other countries, they tend to be more agreeable when things come up internationally. It's investment in the long-term.

The oil is just the shallow economic side of it all.

 

[Scorched_Cascade]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12805183
Yes that is showing unarmed peaceful protesters getting mown down by armed local security forces.

The people react with violence and get shot down again. The people arm themselves, loot weapon caches and force loyalist forces out of the cities and Gadaffi vows to take back the cities street by street and house by house with no mercy for rebels.

Why we care about this more when it happens in Libya and not other countries I'm sure will be revealed in time. All I have to say on the matter is:

Meanwhile in Darfur...

 

[Dwarfman]

it's not like Western powers don't open up on protesters, however.
This isn't something only he does, as much as I disapprove of it.

The West do not open up on their own population with live ammunition. We have this little thing called freedom of speech. And please don't quote Iraq at us in defence of your quote, most of any civiliian casualties from protests there at the hands of the West were made right after the successful invasion, or by paid mercenaries who shouldn't have been there, or by insurgents trying to destabilize the region further.

If anything, the West should have dealt with Gadaffi much much sooner. Alas compared with other despot wankers the West kinda thought Gadaffi was on their side. Then again Sadam Hussain used to be on our side, so feel free to ignore everything I've just said.

One thing to remember however. A COUNTRY IS DEFINED BY ITS PEOPLE, NOT BY ITS GOVERNMENT. It is the people of Libya who started this revolt (peacfuly I might add) and it was the Libyian people who requested aid from the West.

 

[Booze Zombie]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12805183
Yes that is showing unarmed peaceful protesters getting mown down by armed local security forces.

The people react with violence and get shot down again. The people arm themselves and force loyalist forces out of the cities and Gadaffi vows to take back the cities street by street and house by house with no mercy for rebels.

Why we care about this more when it happens in Libya and not other countries I'm sure will be revealed in time. All I have to say on the matter is:

Meanwhile in Darfur...

It's a pretty average day in a middle east dictatorship, basically. Sorry to sound cynical, but I guess that's just how I am.

I am wagering why we care is because this is one of the easier ones to deal with, honestly.
Smash, smash, smash... oh look he surrendered, new puppet state and some oil. Yay!

If anything, the West should have dealt with Gadaffi much much sooner. Alas compared with other despot wankers the West kinda thought Gadaffi was on their side. Then again Sadam Hussain used to be on our side, so feel free to ignore everything I've just said.

One thing to remember however. A COUNTRY IS DEFINED BY ITS PEOPLE, NOT BY ITS GOVERNMENT. It is the people of Libya who started this revolt (peacfuly I might add) and it was the Libyian people who requested aid from the West.

The main problem the Libyan people face is that not all of them hate the colonel; he has a rather sizeable group of supporters, last I checked.

Then there's the whole moral issue of "is it our place to put our judgements upon other countries" and all of that sort of thing, as quite a few judgements are ethnocentric.
That is, people between countries have different views, morals, etc.

I mean, imagine is there was a coalition of Muslim countries who noticed there was a little island where women wore NO CLOTHING, so they had to go invade it for the women's "own protection" and wrap them all up in burkas?

 

[DEathgod650]

Even if you don't support the airstrikes from the West, or if you're unhappy with the West taking resources from them, there's nothing you can do about it.

Just hope the Libyan people make it out of this ok.

 

[Verlander]

Hypocrisy from the powerful nations? Never!

There are people that NEED removing from the UK, but no action ever seems to be taken. I think anyone would do what Gaddafi has, and I think that the UNs reaction shows how out of touch they are with modern society. What's happening in Libya, Egypt and suchlike will spill it's way over to us. Maybe not violently, but the political world as we know it is changing irreparably

It happens in waves, really. Every 20-50 years there's a revolution, a few deaths and some "grand actions".

This time is different though. Never before have individual people been able to communicate so well, while governments loose all privacy they once had. There will be governments who will rise to the occasion, but will have to adopt new policies and methods of remaining in control. Every government has a slightly fascistic side, and that's getting exposed.

I think things are gonna go through a massive overhaul. I'd like to say that this poor façade of democracy would be replaced by an actual, working model, but I doubt it.

 

[Booze Zombie]

This time is different though. Never before have individual people been able to communicate so well, while governments loose all privacy they once had. There will be governments who will rise to the occasion, but will have to adopt new policies and methods of remaining in control. Every government has a slightly fascistic side, and that's getting exposed.

I think things are gonna go through a massive overhaul. I'd like to say that this poor façade of democracy would be replaced by an actual, working model, but I doubt it.

You maybe think we'll see some armed uprising over the world? Could be a fun ride... very chaotic, but fun.

Even if you don't support the airstrikes from the West, or if you're unhappy with the West taking resources from them, there's nothing you can do about it.

Just hope the Libyan people make it out of this ok.

Yeah, I know. As I've mentioned, though, the oil thing is just the shallow economic reason, really. It's also about having a middle eastern area which is like "hey, our Western brothers".

More supporters, more power.

 

[Rex Fallout]

I have a question for you, people of The Escapist. Do you believe that if any country had armed rebels in it, it wouldn't respond in a similar manner to Col Gaddafi?

There are reports of the rebels capturing mercenaries and setting them on fire in a police station, lynching police officers and other violent and terrible actions occurring.
If you had violent rebels running amok in your country, can you honestly say that the person in charge would not shoot them, if you were in charge that you would not shoot them?

Now, I'm not saying I'm a Gaddafi supporter here, but I find it hard to believe that Western forces are complaining about collateral here, when they've all done it in Iraq and if they had a civil war, they'd be shooting their own people, I'd bet you anything.

What do you guys think?

Ok the problem isn't the rebellion per se, It's more about the atrocities that Gaddafi has done. The people want their voices heard, and he is refusing to acknowledge it. He is a dictator who needs to be over thrown. Interresting side note, Hu Jintao is also a dictator that needs to be overthrown but...

The problem I have with the situation is that we aren't helping out for the right reasons. "They got oil!" is what we say, and people support it. I would be honored to be part of an America where my leader stepped up in front of the populace and said:

"My fellow Americans, it is in these times that we must realize that all wars are civil wars. We are humanity. And it matters not if we are from Britain, Cairo, New York or Beijing, we must stand up to protect the individuals of humanity. We must protect democracy everywhere around our great planet. So why are we fighting in Afghanistan? Why are we fighting in Libya? Because we, not just the American people, but humanity, must step up for our brothers if we are ever to prosper, find utopia, and ultimately, peace. Let freedom reign!"

We claim to the rest of the world that we are defenders of democracy and then we ignore atrocities like Tianenmen Square. Disgraceful.