Why Libya? Why now?

S

Shawady

Registered User
Messages
944
Why are the americans and europeans so eager to use force against Gadaffi now?
It wasn't that long ago Tony Blair was embracing him back into the fold and they sent the Lockerbie bomber back to Libya last year.
There has been innocent protesters killed in Bahrain, Yemen and Syria. Are they going to use force there?
 
It is one of those difficult things but I think when a someone starts using warplanes, tanks and starts talking about genocide, it is time to act. I agree that using this criteria, we could end up getting involved in most of the Middle East but what's the alternative. Not arm these nut jobs in the first place is ideal but there is always some Country that will provide them with weapons.

To be honest, I would rather see action than see another Rwanda, Sudan, Balkan type event.
 
Oil of course. But there is also a moral need to intervene and the fact that Libya, unlike Rwanda and Zimbabwe is on Europe's doorstep. I saw the rebels waving French flags in Benghazi last night, and posters thanking the UK & USA. What worries me is that this could quickly change, and the West is again seen as a Crusader Army in Muslim lands.
 
I guess the West gets the money is spend on Arab oil back by selling them Arms. When the opportunity arises a given Arab country's military capability may be destroyed and the regime falls. The new crowd will sell oil and buy Arms. Handy if you're in the Arms business.
 
PaddyW said:
Hard to look beyond oil being the main reason.
Click to expand...

Not sure that oil singles Libya out - Bahrain, and other Gulf nations where unrest is spreading, would be a much higher priority than Libya it oil was the deciding factor.

I think it is because the circumstances were right i.e. that the majority of the population wanted Gaddafi out, Gaddafi was hinting at genocide, and it was logistically possible to do it.
 
Bahrain doesn't have any oil.
It has oil refineries and a massive US army base and it's a playground for rich Saudi's.

Dictators with oil need to sell that oil. Iraq and Libya both sold all they could to the West so simply saying "oil" is not the whole answer.
 
...Bahrain is home to the US 5th fleet & next door to the Saudi autocracy/theocracy which the US needs, and its opposite Iran etc etc. Yemen is probably the one to be more worried about from a Western perspective. Large contingent of Al queda there, and opposite war torn Somalia, next door to Saudi, near the Suez... scary stuff really.
 
I find this confusing:

Democratic uprising in Egypt and Morocco encouraged and supported by the West.

Democratic uprising in Bahrain, but Bahrain ask Saudi Arabia for loan of 1000 troops to quell it, nothing said by West.

Who are the Saudi's friends with? Doesn't take a genius to work it out.

Oh, and Libya only supplies 2% of the worlds oil, so strange that the West got so bothered about it. And strange that the price at our pumps was affected so much by such a small player in the oil market. There's a conspiracy theory in there somewhere.
 

The situation in Bahrain is a bit more complex. Average incomes are $18’000 a year which is much higher than those of its neighbours. It is also a far less repressive country than its neighbours (which isn’t really saying much).
A few years back the USA insisted that it start moving towards democracy. This meant that a weak elected parliament was elected though the king still held the real power. The problem is that the ruling class is a minority but the same side of the fence as the Saudis so if the majority gain control the Saudis will just take over. The Bahraini royal family are related to the Saudi royal family (the Saudis put them there). Bahrain was a member of the British Commonwealth ‘till 1940’s. I’m not convinced that the “movement” there has popular support.
 
What short memories, they have been waiting the chance to get Gaddafi for years. The Americans bombed his residence years ago.
He has been supporting terrorism including the Libyan embassy siege in London when PC Fletcher was shot, he was involved in the Lockerbie air crash, Supplying arms and semtex to the IRA, he did more harm than Sadam Hussein.
 

The west have been kissing Gadaffi's butt for years now. The UK, Italy, France and even Ireland all bent over backwards to get access to Libya.
 
I think that the use of terms like "supporting democratisation" are just used to make certain actions palatable to the western public. Western governments couldn't care less what kind of political system is in place, and would probably generally prefer an "approved" dictator. Under a democracy the wrong people may get elected.

A 2% decrease in supply of a good that is fundamental to world economies makes a huge difference when it cannot be quickly, if at all, back filled by other producers. The reason European countries are so vocal about it is because about 85% of Libyan oil goes to Europe (http://www.eia.doe.gov/cabs/libya/pdf.pdf). Majority of that to Italy, Spain, France; not surprisingly the very countries that supported the UN resolution and jumped up to the task of bombing land targets rather than just enforcing a no-fly zone.
Germany on the other hand is more dependent on Russia for oil, which is probably why they abstained from the UN resolution.

Sunny said:
The west have been kissing Gadaffi's butt for years now. The UK, Italy, France and even Ireland all bent over backwards to get access to Libya.
Click to expand...

I think that perfectly sums it up.
 
Why did Europe stand back and allow genocide in the Balkans? Unfortunately, the world's track record is not good.
 
Sunny said:
Why did Europe stand back and allow genocide in the Balkans? Unfortunately, the world's track record is not good.
Click to expand...

Yep, it was Americans who died to protect Europes Muslims from Christian attackers. Ironic eh?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register