So if dictators use force against protestors you folks are basically saying protestors can never suceeed because invariably, if they need weapons they will not likely be trained already, and we can't take a chance in trying to give them weapons because such methods have failed in the past. Ugh. Logical and depressing. Maybe I can find a quote from the French(!) arguing a contrary position re providing weapons!
I think this was once discussed previously upthread, but I think under Tracer's Rules of Protest, the American Revolution would never have happened or been viewed as legitimate.
Oh, and I do wish Obama had gone early to Congress for the same authorization the UN gave even though I have read views on both sides of the constitutional argument that seemed convincing.
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 13:25 (thirteen years ago) link
It's like hovering by a teetering toddler learning to walk, then lurching forward to catch him every time he tips over head-first.
Naive me wants the US to do this with the Libyans.
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 13:27 (thirteen years ago) link
Maybe I can find a quote from the French(!) arguing a contrary position re providing weapons!
let's... not get into the irony there
fwiw im pretty much in favour of intervention, but i think it's imperative to ask who we'd be giving weapons to and what they'd do with them
― patrice wil$on is my favorite rapper (history mayne), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 13:34 (thirteen years ago) link
ha, that was my position last week! A large part of my skepticism (which you mocked) rested in my ignorance about who The Rebels are. We're getting a better idea now.
― Hey Look More Than Five Years Has Passed And You Have A C (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 13:37 (thirteen years ago) link
curmudgeon your post reads like you're trying to extrapolate grand rules that can govern this and all future (and past!) situations. or you think that's what i'm doing. i'm not, and i doubt such a set of rules would be useful or realistic even if they could be drawn up.
― 40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 13:38 (thirteen years ago) link
Oh, I thought you were trying to come up with such rules.
So in this other NY Times article it says that Q pays his military officers well and relies on close relatives but:
And within the cities, Mr. Li argued, even a few tanks or other heavy weapons would allow Colonel Qaddafi’s forces to hold off the rebels and elude Western airstrikes. “A deadlock,” Mr. Li called it.
The wild card is the divided loyalties of the tribes who dominate the military’s upper echelons.
Although Colonel Qaddafi has surrounded himself with guards drawn from his own tribe and those close to it, a coup would not be unexpected.
A 1986 disagreement between Colonel Qaddafi and a cousin from the Qaddafa tribe who had been a top military commander ended when the cousin’s body was left at the gates of Colonel Qaddafi’s compound in Tripoli.
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 13:41 (thirteen years ago) link
the way tracer is arguing itt is turning me into hillary clinton.
― goole, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 15:03 (thirteen years ago) link
pant suit on standby
― Romford Spring (DG), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 15:05 (thirteen years ago) link
http://www.reuters.com/resources/r/?m=02&d=20110324&t=2&i=370587607&w=&fh=&fw=&ll=700&pl=390&r=2011-03-24T212528Z_01_GM1E73H082301_RTRRPP_0_LIBYA
― sonderangerbot, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 15:19 (thirteen years ago) link
Ya rly
― in my world of loose geirs (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 15:36 (thirteen years ago) link
how am i arguin, idgi
― 40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 15:43 (thirteen years ago) link
several posts in a row questioning not only the efficacy (fair enough) but the legitimacy of armed resistance against Qdf -- plus a really weird statement that we couldn't/shouldn't judge them at the time, but now that american planes are over the country, we can say that that anti-regime dudes should have just stayed indoors anyway. and nothing at all about the legitimacy of Qdf's violence against the protesters. whatever conclusions you can make about the situation, Qdf is the first actor here. he shot first and he's still shooting most.
i really don't get your whole orientation. either intervention in libya will work or it won't, but second-guessing the moral basis of the uprising is really rubbing me the wrong way
― goole, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 15:50 (thirteen years ago) link
yeah me too
― in my world of loose geirs (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 15:52 (thirteen years ago) link
like there's this weird subtext of somehow painting the rebels as the aggressors/in the wrong, you're giving the impression that you think they should have just continued peacefully protesting until Qudhaffy shot, tortured, imprisoned, "disappeared" all of them. because that would have been the "right" thing to do. How that is any less offensive/patronizing/morally invalid than Western intervention is kinda beyond me.
― in my world of loose geirs (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 15:54 (thirteen years ago) link
goole do you really need to hear me say that shooting and killing peaceful protestors is reprehensible??
i'm not sure where i questioned the legitimacy of the armed uprising. i don't know what that means, actually - moral legitimacy? legal legitimacy? at any rate, i didn't mean to imply that the rebels were "illegitimate" by choosing to fight gaddafi militarily.
― 40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:01 (thirteen years ago) link
initiating an armed rebellion is one of the biggest things any political group can do, with the biggest consequences in terms of human misery and suffering and you'd better fucking know what you're doing. i
^^^this is not how these things happen in real-time. there is no centralized decision-making process, no time for long-term strategizing or cost-benefit analysis. it's more like "holy shit they're shooting everybody! what am I gonna do! hey those guys over there have some molotov cocktails, I'm going with them"
― in my world of loose geirs (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:03 (thirteen years ago) link
like even categorizing them as a political group is just wrong.
― in my world of loose geirs (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:04 (thirteen years ago) link
initiating an armed rebellion is one of the biggest things any political group can do, with the biggest consequences in terms of human misery and suffering and you'd better fucking know what you're doing. it seems the rebels (who i don't consider an identical category with "the protestors") didn't have a clue. would the suffering have been less if no one had picked up a gun? would other pressure have been brought to bear had the protests remained peaceful? we'll never know.
tracer this whole paragraph is very "who is the real war criminal? well never know!"
― max, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:04 (thirteen years ago) link
no it's not
― 40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:05 (thirteen years ago) link
if it were, that's what i would have written
The difference between Egypt and Libya in this respect is that, while Mubarak had thugs, the bulk of the military in a passive coup refused to fire on the ppl while they demonstrated and dismantled the police force. Qaddafi and his military, otoh, have never flinched from using gunfire, including aerial gunfire, and beatings, arrest and torture to repress the demonstations. It's worth noting that many of the insurgents are ex-military who decided against propping up the regime.
― exécutés avec l’insolence accoutumée du (Michael White), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:09 (thirteen years ago) link
would other pressure have been brought to bear had the protests remained peaceful?
In other words, I assert that the primary responsibility for the protests not remaining peaceful was Qadaffi's.
― exécutés avec l’insolence accoutumée du (Michael White), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:11 (thirteen years ago) link
Uh, Tracer you said:
i think they shouldn't pick up guns. especially when it's perfectly clear they stand no chance.
― 40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Plus countless other postings repeatedly critiquing these rebels and how apparently despite the facts showing Q shooting at protestors, you seem to think rebelling with weapons was wrong. That's why I said "Tracer's Rules of Protest"
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:13 (thirteen years ago) link
guys i apologise i must be even more unclear than usual.
primary responsibility for the protests not remaining peaceful was Qadaffi's
obviously. i'm talking about AFTER this, when rebels decided to mobilize technicals, tanks and militias.
this isn't questioning the legitimacy of organized violence against the gaddafi regime. it's questioning whether it will work. it's also questioning whether such a move would lead to MORE death, displacement and suffering than a different move (or no move).
― 40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:17 (thirteen years ago) link
with the biggest consequences in terms of human misery and suffering and you'd better fucking know what you're doing.
The American revolution almost failed. The French revolution can be said to have failed (or to have essentially taken the better part of a century to 'take'). The Russian revolutions can be said to have failed and you could certainly say that of the Iranian revolution, too. None of that changes the fact that the very nature of the start of the revolt in Tunisia and its spread elsewhere is that disparate people of all stripes without much forethought or strategy simply were more willing to endure the the threat of violence from their regimes than to continue to bow down and remain silent.
― exécutés avec l’insolence accoutumée du (Michael White), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:18 (thirteen years ago) link
well to be fair, the initial phase (forgetting the dates here) of the armed part of the rebellion looked to be going pretty well too! key oil towns fell, Qdf's hold on the country looked like it was down to his 'base' support areas. it was not 'perfectly clear' they stood no chance, when they started, or even a week or so into the effort.
the_west's hands-off approach looked to be a win-win at the time. but Qdf managed to re-organize and rally, and with better equipment and trained soldiers swept back the rebellion very quickly.
― goole, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:23 (thirteen years ago) link
Plus Al-Qaeda's LSD strategy didn't work as well as planned.
― Si tu parles, tu meurs. Si tu te tais, tu meurs. Alors, dis et m (Michael White), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:27 (thirteen years ago) link
You are Derek Clontz and I claim my £5
― 40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:34 (thirteen years ago) link
No idea who that is.
― Si tu parles, tu meurs. Si tu te tais, tu meurs. Alors, dis et (Michael White), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:37 (thirteen years ago) link
He has broken many important stories, like space aliens capping the BP oil spill
― 40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:40 (thirteen years ago) link
You're talking about Al-Qaeda cropdusting America with mind-bending LSD, right?
No, that was Q's own colourful theory - that the protesters had all been spiked by Al-Qaeda because why would anyone not on drugs hate Q?
― Pop is superior to all other genres (DL), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:42 (thirteen years ago) link
No I'm talking about Qaddafi's assertion in February that the protestors were Al-Qaeda dupes who had had their coffee dosed with LSD.
― Si tu parles, tu meurs. Si tu te tais, tu meurs. Alors, dis et (Michael White), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:45 (thirteen years ago) link
Haha - I wasn't aware that focusing intently on your nation's political problems was one of the major effects of LSD
― 40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 16:49 (thirteen years ago) link
The parallel (non?) story in Syria is illustrative. Decades-long middle east dictator decides the only way to stay in power is to tighter power further, or at least ratify or reinforce restrictions that have been in place for years. And yet from Europe to the US ... nothing.
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 17:31 (thirteen years ago) link
"Oh, but Syria is totally different! Bashar's neo-Hitler stash is a lot more becoming than Qaddafi's frizzy hair transplant."
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 17:33 (thirteen years ago) link
Israel, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Josh.
― Si tu parles, tu meurs. Si tu te tais, tu meurs. Alors, dis et (Michael White), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 17:38 (thirteen years ago) link
But Elliot Abrams who was convicted of a crime in the Iran-Contra affair and later pardoned by George Bush Sr., did an editorial in the Washington Post re how the US should go after Syria! These neo-cons are trying to link everything going on with their spin on the past that conveniently overlooks the slimy ways they have always tried to accomplish their goals
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ridding-syria-of-a-despot/2011/03/25/AFSRRVYB_story.html
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 17:44 (thirteen years ago) link
The WaPo editorial page is where neocons go to die, curmudgeon
would love to see this gif tbf
― Hey Look More Than Five Years Has Passed And You Have A C (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 17:46 (thirteen years ago) link
Oh, but Syria is totally different!
it is a totally different situation involving a completely different set of regional actors/interests. so yes, it is totally different.
― in my world of loose geirs (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 17:48 (thirteen years ago) link
I've got to say I didn't get even a hint of this vibe from what Tracer wrote, let alone any assertion that resembled this one.
It is stupidly easy to take the moral position that oppressed people ought to sacrifice not only their own lives, but those of their families and neighbors, in the sacred pursuit of political freedom, if only because the person taking that position doesn't envision making any such sacrifice themselves. Tracer was just noticing the salient fact that civil wars are bloody messes that can ruin countries for a couple of generations, with no guarantee that the outcome will be anything remotely like what the combatants sought as their original goal.
Once such a war starts, everyone gets blood on their hands, not just the 'bad guys', and it's a fairly dodgy exercise to intervene in such wars simply for high-minded moral reasons, instead of hard, practical ones. War and high-minded morality make poor partners in almost every case.
For example, France intervened in the American Revolution for the simple reason that we were the enemy of their enemy and it was in France's interest to see to it that Britain spent a lot of treasure trying to keep her colonies and ultimately failed to do so. They didn't just come flying to our aid as soon as the war started, either. They waited to see if we could muster an effective army.
― Aimless, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 17:50 (thirteen years ago) link
Neo-cons have been after Syria for a good while; Hezbollah, threat to Israel, alliance with Iran....
― Si tu parles, tu meurs. Si tu te tais, tu meurs. Alors, dis et (Michael White), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 17:50 (thirteen years ago) link
x-postWashington Post editorial page editor Fred Hyatt loves neo-cons and is apparently one himself. So it's uh interesting watching a US should do whatever it wants guy like Abrams advocate the following steps:
Second, we should prosecute Syria in every available multilateral forum, including the U.N. Security Council and the Human Rights Council. Others should refer Assad to the International Criminal Court. With blood flowing, there should be no delays; this is the moment to call for special sessions and action to prevent more killing. Even if these bodies do not act, the attention should give heart to Syrian demonstrators.
Third, we should ask the new governments in Egypt and Tunisia to immediately call Arab League sessions to debate the violence in Syria. Libya was expelled; let’s demand that Syria be, too
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 17:51 (thirteen years ago) link
this would be nice but so not gonna happen
― in my world of loose geirs (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 17:52 (thirteen years ago) link
xpost So, hard-nosed realpolitik and morality be damned?
― Pop is superior to all other genres (DL), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 17:53 (thirteen years ago) link
There should be a break between "realpolitik" and "and"
"realpolitik" and "morality" have no business being together.
― Hey Look More Than Five Years Has Passed And You Have A C (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 17:55 (thirteen years ago) link
Tracer was just noticing the salient fact that civil wars are bloody messes that can ruin countries for a couple of generations, with no guarantee that the outcome will be anything remotely like what the combatants sought as their original goal.
One of the possible outcomes would be a split between Cyrenaica and Tripolitania (no idea where the Fezzan would go). I've been reading that Cyrenaica linguistically and tribally looks more to the East and Tripolitania looks more to the Maghreb. Since Benghazi is the capital of Cyrenaica (in insurgent hands) and Tripoli is in Qaddafi's hands, I can see some kind of cease-fire along those lines. Unfortunately, since most of the oil is in the East, Qaddafi could always make his usual anti-imperialist noises and would probably always intrigue at the very least in an attempt to get the region back.
― Si tu parles, tu meurs. Si tu te tais, tu meurs. Alors, dis et (Michael White), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 17:56 (thirteen years ago) link
Brokering a peace based on extensive compromises has not been working especially well in the middle east lately, but I must say it would be a welcome outcome.
― Aimless, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 18:03 (thirteen years ago) link
Even if these bodies do not act, the attention should give heart to Syrian demonstrators.
Fred's problem, like most neo-cons, is that his head is too far rectally inserted to clearly see the situation. The uprisings in Libya were pretty wide-spread and quickly joined by people abandoning the regime. In Syria, they have not been as widespread, concentrating recently mostly on Daraa. I rather wish that Assad would read the handwriting on the wall and get rid of the emergency law that has been in place since '62 and call for genuine, multi-party elections but after today's speech, I'm not terribly sanguine about that.
― Si tu parles, tu meurs. Si tu te tais, tu meurs. Alors, dis et (Michael White), Wednesday, 30 March 2011 18:07 (thirteen years ago) link