Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Sour Mash

Libya - Moving Into Total Breakdown?

Recommended Posts

Looks like the beginning of the end for any semblence of order, the navy sent in to evacuate foreign nationals:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28627158

A Royal Navy survey ship is evacuating Britons from Libya amid worsening violence in the country, the BBC understands.

Some 108 people have registered to leave on board the ship. Not all of those registered are British - they are are said to include two Irish citizens and one German - and they are not thought to be diplomats.

The British embassy in Triploi is to suspend its operations on Monday, after which the remaining staff are to leave. It is relocating to neighbouring Tunisia for the time being.

Well, I must say that 'freedom from tyranny' is working out pretty well for the Libyans. Until 2011 they were living in a stable country with one of the best healthcare and education systems in Africa (OK, not saying much), a decent infrastructure,no national debt, blessed with reserves of oil and gas but a somewhat loony dictator who wouldn't take orders from foreign interests.

Luckily, the West was around to spread freedom and democracy and now the country is a broken wreck, riddled with militias fighting for territory and it's once modern infrastructure in tatters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I must say that 'freedom from tyranny' is working out pretty well for the Libyans. Until 2011 they were living in a stable country with one of the best healthcare and education systems in Africa (OK, not saying much), a decent infrastructure,no national debt, blessed with reserves of oil and gas but a somewhat loony dictator who wouldn't take orders from foreign interests.

You mean the same said loony dictator who played a bigger part than the Western intervention in the wrecking the country by firing the first shots? Libya and Iraq were never real countries, more like big multi-tribal zones held together by brutal but internally relatively fragile regimes formed out of the strongest ethnic group. Gaddafi's misrule caused Libya's factionalism in the first place, not so much the Western airstrikes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another job well done.

The West, although militarily/technologically vastly superior to the Islamic world, is trapped in a damned if do damned if you don't, painfully drawn out military struggle - if Phoney Blair and Chimpy didn't unwisely steamroll into Iraq more openly than the West did in Libya, it may have just posponed Iraq's collapse into anarchy at the hands of Saddam's spoilt, unbalanced sons instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The West, although militarily/technologically vastly superior to the Islamic world, is trapped in a damned if do damned if you don't, painfully drawn out military struggle - if Phoney Blair and Chimpy didn't unwisely steamroll into Iraq more openly than the West did in Libya, it may have just posponed Iraq's collapse into anarchy at the hands of Saddam's spoilt, unbalanced sons instead.

I see. Really judges should be praising murderers because in commiting a murder they have prevented someone else from murdering their victim. :wacko:

Personally, i dont see how its got anything to do with any moral crusade. The only reason we are at war is to be at war, and guarantee the military industrial complex continued income stolen from the people. That and banks can issue some more debt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The West, although militarily/technologically vastly superior to the Islamic world, is trapped in a damned if do damned if you don't, painfully drawn out military struggle - if Phoney Blair and Chimpy didn't unwisely steamroll into Iraq more openly than the West did in Libya, it may have just posponed Iraq's collapse into anarchy at the hands of Saddam's spoilt, unbalanced sons instead.

What does your assumption about Iraq have to do with a thread about Libya destroying itself after the West removed its leader who had kept stability for 42 years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does your assumption about Iraq have to do with a thread about Libya destroying itself after the West removed its leader who had kept stability for 42 years?

A tense, sullen stability that was already fatally unravelling weeks before the first NATO ordinance hit the ground. Western governments got dragged against their better judgement, but why should we blamed for their apparent inability for civil order?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A tense, sullen stability that was already fatally unravelling weeks before the first NATO ordinance hit the ground. Western governments got dragged against their better judgement, but why should we blamed for their apparent inability for civil order?

So the best recourse the West thought appropriate was to bomb the s#it out of the infrastructure and have its Dear Leader executed on the bonnet of some motor for the world to see?

Leading a couple of so years down the line to what we have now,

Scores killed daily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the best recourse the West thought appropriate was to bomb the s#it out of the infrastructure and have its Dear Leader executed on the bonnet of some motor for the world to see?

Leading a couple of so years down the line to what we have now,

Scores killed daily.

Unfortunately the riled up mob that he provoked in the first place, that tore down his long failing regime, makes a stable country almost impossible to solve through just air strikes. If the West stood by it would probably be worse and just as painfully prolonged as Syria. There was already internal dissent and violence decades before 2011, when Gaddafi's oil economy and clumsy, egotistical policies foundered.

The ME conflicts have been decades in the making and can only be ridden out by the West.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the riled up mob that he provoked in the first place, that tore down his long failing regime, makes a stable country almost impossible to solve through just air strikes. If the West stood by it would probably be worse and just as painfully prolonged as Syria.

You mean the Syria where Western governments have been arming and training the 'rebels' in order to keep the war going, and are now a bit miffed that their friendly 'rebels' have decided they'd rather have Iraq instead?

We predicted Libya would fall apart when Camoron and Obama were first getting a stiffy for bombing it, and useful idiots like you still supported them. Sooner or later, this will crap lead to WWIII, and the only people celebrating will be the Fundies who think they'll get Raptured Away once Russia invades Israel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had no confidence we would win the peace in Libya either but I suppose if we left Gaddafi alone to crush the Benghazi uprising (and Phoney Blair did a lot to placate and humour Gaddafi, while helping to crush Saddam) we'd get blamed for the Libyan crisis that would still happen today, but in a different pattern, with Gaddafi's intact forces getting bogged down in a nasty, nasty tit for tat guerrilla struggle against the Eastern Libyan tribes (similar to how the US gets blamed for Saddam's crack down on internal dissent after the first Gulf War). Libya fell apart after the West won the war but lost the peace again, because a typical Libyan (through no fault of his/her own) doesn't know how to contribute to a truly functional modern society and it was all dependent on the loopy, mismanaged Gaddafi regime (WHICH STARTED THE CONFLICT IN THE FIRST PLACE, after it started to buckle in the storm of the Arab Spring).

Syria's main problem is Russian support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The West had no business getting involved in Libya. The reason they got involved when they did was because Gaddafi was about to crush the rebellion - totally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would perhaps slowed down the collapse of his regime and country, not stopped it. And we'd get blamed for standing by. We can't win.

The West cannot win in the Islamic world, no matter what; we get condemned for doing business with autocratic Saudi Arabia and ostracising the slightly less crazy Iran, when it really comes down to it the Saudis are smarter players who have not overtly alienated the West out of hurt pride (unlike the Iranians who have a recent historical track record of burning their bridges with everyone).

If everything British and Americans touches turns to crap is a given, then how come South Korea after Japanese occupation, civil war, facing down an insane rival dictatorship for many decades, and itself being autocratic until only the late 80s is today ranking 15th on the HDI, with world dominating brands like LG, Samsung, and Hyundai?! With Libya, Afghanistan, and Iraq, the blame can be spread about quite evenly really when the locals cannot formulate proper civil order from the ground up and entrenched in tribalism, even though the Western leaders cannot formulate real follow up plans to their military inventions (intervention has evolved into a dirty word).

It'll take a century for these countries to become truly peaceful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would perhaps slowed down the collapse of his regime and country, not stopped it. And we'd get blamed for standing by. We can't win.

The West cannot win in the Islamic world, no matter what; we get condemned for doing business with autocratic Saudi Arabia and ostracising the slightly less crazy Iran, when it really comes down to it the Saudis are smarter players who have not overtly alienated the West out of hurt pride (unlike the Iranians who have a recent historical track record of burning their bridges with everyone).

If everything British and Americans touches turns to crap is a given, then how come South Korea after Japanese occupation, civil war, facing down an insane rival dictatorship for many decades, and itself being autocratic until only the late 80s is today ranking 15th on the HDI, with world dominating brands like LG, Samsung, and Hyundai?! With Libya, Afghanistan, and Iraq, the blame can be spread about quite evenly really when the locals cannot formulate proper civil order from the ground up and entrenched in tribalism, even though the Western leaders cannot formulate real follow up plans to their military inventions (intervention has evolved into a dirty word).

It'll take a century for these countries to become truly peaceful

So what your saying is its the locals fault? If they had out about em they'd be making cars and TV's?

Get a grip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say it was the ordinary Libyan people's fault but mostly the fault of a very burned out, very eccentric ruler who was in power over a immature country for far too long, who was too dependent on petro dollars like Putin, and Gaddafi laid much of the ground work for a messy collapse that has left a vacuum that hasn't been filled (with the disorganised rebel factions arising from the chaotic Libyan society that remained tribal squandering the fall of Gaddafi and Western help, such as it was).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   206 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.