Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Biden: Oh no. We’ve upset Big Pharma again.

The revolution will be supervised.

The fundamental promise of conservatism all over the world is a return to an idealized past that never existed.

We won’t go back.

Republicans: slavery is when you own me. freedom is when I own you.

Only Democrats have agency, apparently.

If you tweet it in all caps, that makes it true!

“Joe Biden deserved better than he got from some folks in his own party.”

Nothing says ‘pro-life’ like letting children go hungry.

President Biden is doing good where he can, and getting it done.

Even though I know this is a bad idea, I’m off to do it anyway!

We are aware of all internet traditions.

Not all heroes wear capes.

I might just take the rest of the day off and do even more nothing than usual.

Hey Washington Post, “Democracy Dies in Darkness” is supposed to be a warning, not a mission statement.

Cole, when it comes to calico cats, restraint is overrated.

They’re not red states to be hated; they are voter suppression states to be fixed.

This blog will pay for itself.

The rest of the comments were smacking Boebert like she was a piñata.

I was promised a recession.

Whatever happens next week, the fight doesn’t end.

You are so fucked. Still, I wish you the best of luck.

I am pretty sure Katy Tur wasn’t always such a bootlicking sycophant.

The current Supreme Court is a rogue court. Very dangerous.

You are here: Home / Balloon Juice / Readership Capture / Look At All These Idiots Who Think Libya Is Just Like Iraq

Look At All These Idiots Who Think Libya Is Just Like Iraq

by | 110 Comments

This post is in: ,

Although I have been informed by the commenters in the previous thread that I am petulant for having concerns despite being happy with the possibility that Gaddafi is gone, and also being informed that I was wrong, wrong, wrong, and that we won with NO CASUALIES!, it appears some other people are not popping the bubbly yet:

But NATO and the rebels had another possibility to deal with, a nightmare that traced back to what happened in Baghdad: that Colonel Qaddafi, taking a leaf from Mr. Hussein, had allowed much of his capital to be taken quickly as part of a tactical retreat that was preliminary to entrapping the rebels, or to a longer-term fight of the kind that evolved into the insurgency in Iraq, still unsuppressed after more than eight years and tens of thousands of dead.

That possibility merged into the larger nightmare, one that appeared to be obsessing Western leaders like Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain, President Nicolas Sarkozy of France and President Obama: that having committed themselves to the overthrow of Colonel Qaddafi and providing the crucial margin of military power to do so, they might only have opened a Pandora’s box of menacing possibilities.

Could Libya, like Iraq with its dictator removed, descend into bloody fratricide and civil war? And would the West, careful thus far to limit its military involvement mostly to aerial strikes, get drawn into the chaos?

At Downing Street and the Élysée Palace, officials were keen to suppress, at least for the moment, any sign of gloating over the rapid disintegration of the Qaddafi government, after months of political siege from critics who had accused them of committing too hastily to a campaign that could drag on for many more months, even years, and of making their combat aircraft, in effect, the air attack arm of the rebels.

***

Now, it is not yet known whether the best intentions of the West, and of the rebel leaders, will be enough to counter powerful impulses in Libya that could overwhelm the mood of euphoria greeting advancing rebel forces, and push the country to a darker future of political, tribal and sectarian strife.

What a bunch of petulant losers Cameron, Sarkozy, and Obama are. Don’t they know we won? It’s all over now, and Libya is the land of milk and honey! THE INTERTRONS TOLD ME SO!

At any rate, here is another thread for you to throw up your Mission Accomplished! comments, call me Jonah Goldberg, or whatever else since I am insufficiently hip to the cause. I swear I’ll change the color of my blog if you ask nice.

Reader Interactions

110Comments

  1. 1.

    drkrick

    Off topic, but hilarious: A McMeghan post about how bad an idea it is to exile Republicans who won’t rule out the possibility of global warming turned, from the first comment, into a discussion of why evolution isn’t scientifically valid. As Robin Quivers has said to Howard Stern from time to time: “There’s your audience.”

  4. 4.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    The danger is certainly real, but as one who was 51/49 against this action, one key difference is that in Libya we sided with an organic uprising; in Iraq we tried to create one with daisy-cutters. The western countries have more credibility (he typed hopefully) with the Libyans.

  5. 5.

    Villago Delenda Est

    Geeze, I dunno. I was saying shit yesterday like what happens when Qaddafi is gone, and being lambasted as heartless in the face of all that Libyan bloodshed.

    Beats the fuck out of me what is going to happen, but if history is any sort of guide, it will not be all roses and ice cream.

  6. 6.

    trollhattan

    BTW, something happened in Libya? I was offgrid for several days, until last night. When I left the Dow was well over 11k, the rebels were fiddling with some other small city on the coast and Michele was threatening her hubby with a corndog.

    How things change.

  10. 10.

    Samara Morgan

    @Cole

    does it change my opinion that we know literally nothing about the rebels who appear to be winning? No.

    im still confused. Do you or do you not believe in democracy?

  14. 14.

    John Cole

    im still confused. Do you or do you not believe in democracy?

    You aren’t confused, you’re fucking stupid. Of course I believe in Democracy. In my democracy, I think we should act in OUR national interest, and one of the things that is in our national interest is not ushering in a regime that is just as bad or worse than the old one.

  15. 15.

    Mnemosyne

    That whooshing sound you hear is the point whizzing past Cole’s head for about the hundredth time …

  16. 16.

    taylormattd

    Well, you should at least retract your silly “WE R DOING THIS FOR OIL” allegation, given you just posted below what Juan Cole had to say on that issue:

    10. This was a war for Libya’s oil. That is daft. Libya was already integrated into the international oil markets, and had done billions of deals with BP, ENI, etc., etc. None of those companies would have wanted to endanger their contracts by getting rid of the ruler who had signed them. They had often already had the trauma of having to compete for post-war Iraqi contracts, a process in which many did less well than they would have liked. ENI’s profits were hurt by the Libyan revolution, as were those of Total SA. and Repsol. Moreover, taking Libyan oil off the market through a NATO military intervention could have been foreseen to put up oil prices, which no Western elected leader would have wanted to see, especially Barack Obama, with the danger that a spike in energy prices could prolong the economic doldrums. An economic argument for imperialism is fine if it makes sense, but this one does not, and there is no good evidence for it (that Qaddafi was erratic is not enough), and is therefore just a conspiracy theory.

  17. 17.

    jfxgillis

    John:

    You’re so cute when you get mad.

    But seriously. And I mean seriously seriously. The thing that ties both your old Iraq and new Libya opinions together, and it’s a creditable thing, is that you’re grounding them in principles.

    But in international affairs, principles do not matter except insofar as they exactly coincide with national interests.

  18. 18.

    hsquared

    Dude, don’t let a weak ego make a fool of you. You’ve made your position clear; was it predicated on whether or not Obama’s “popping the bubbly”?

  19. 19.

    CaliCat

    John, we were all scarred (in some way or another) by the war in Iraq, however, many of us were still able to see the stark distinctions between Iraq and Libya with respect to U.S. military engagement. Sorry, but you can’t be against the action the Obama Administration took in Libya and still be pleased with the outcome. You can’t have it both ways simply because you are too stubborn to admit you were wrong.

  20. 20.

    Samara Morgan

    @John Cole: But what about THEIR democracy? If the Libyan people vote, what does it matter what we think about their choice? They may vote for the LIFG candidate, or an MB candidate.
    its consent of the governed, they can elect who they like in a representative government, right?

    oh, and one place where Iraq and Libya are just alike– both are 97% muslim.
    :)

  21. 21.

    General Stuck

    What a bunch of petulant losers Cameron, Sarkozy, and Obama are. Don’t they know we won? It’s all over now, and Libya is the land of milk and honey! THE INTERTRONS TOLD ME SO!

    I’ve seen very few comments that would fit this description, as most of them fully realize it all could turn to shit, but that the Libyans at least have the opportunity to make something better for their country. And the reason for all of this remains as in response to an emergency situation of an imminent humanitarian disaster that the only world body we have to maybe stop one or two genocidal actions, got together and did this. With the US playing a reduced role than from the past. Albeit a critical one.

    You are perfectly entitled to dissent on this action, either on principle or facts in evidence, you don’t have a right to make shit up to defend your position. So, once again, what is your position? Because if you oppose this one for reasons of being done incompetently, or any other reason, in this particular case. Or, is it a genuine principled position of non intervention , no matter the circumstance?

    You know, any of us might get hit by a truck tomorrow, but it is our choice to sit around all day on the blogs worrying about it.

    And take that “team USS, fuck yea shit” from the last thread on this

  22. 22.

    Enhanced Voting Techniques

    I think Kadaffi waving the flag of liberation against the colonist oppressors is a harder sell when it’s Lybians doing the occupying so I don’t see the Saddam parallel. It sort of comes to down to how fractured is Lydian society between Tripolians and Cyreians. If it’s so bad civil war ensures maybe a east and west Lybia is the solution.

  24. 24.

    schrodinger's cat

    BTW did anyone read Chunky Bobo in NYT this morning.
    Shorter CB aka Ross Doughboy

    I ar in ur NYTimes pimping Rick Perry.

  25. 25.

    trollhattan

    I’m listening to the BBC interviewing President McCain as I type, being asked, “You must feel vindicated.”

    “We now have control, uh, rebel forces do….”

    Now, I’m worried.

  27. 27.

    Villago Delenda Est

    @John Cole:

    You aren’t confused, you’re fucking stupid.

    As I mentioned the other day, I think “obtuse” is a better word.

  29. 29.

    Baud

    @General Stuck: Well said. The really odd thing about Cole’s post is that it implies Obama was hasty and reckless in his decision to support the Libyan rebels, ignorant of the potential consequences. Whether you think of Obama’s actual decisions, it’s hard to take seriously any suggestion that he doesn’t weigh his decisions very carefully.

  33. 33.

    Emerald

    I have to ask (and this hurts because normally I love you, John):

    I know in your previous post you said that saving all the lives of the people Gadaffi promised to slaughter was just a “pretext,” but

    do you think it’s a good thing that we saved all those people? They are real people. Actual human beings. Tens of thousands who would have been killed.

    We can’t always take actions like this, but sometimes we can. This time we could. We saved those people.

    My question: Are those people important? Could it even be worth the risk Obama took in taking this action?

  34. 34.

    Mnemosyne

    @Enhanced Voting Techniques:

    The Juan Cole article below has an interesting bit about the possibility of a “divided” Libya — basically, he says it’s BS coming from Western commentators who are still shell-shocked by how fast the Balkans separated. Wikipedia seems to indicate that the “Tripolian” and “Cyreian” split may have been created by the Italians when they invaded in the early 20th century and is not a historical split.

    Hopefully Prof. Cole is right, but it’s wait and see at this point.

  35. 35.

    joe from Lowell

    I stopped reading this piece of shit blog because John had been turned into a frothing imbecile by the Libya operation, and every post had become GOD DAMMIT I WASN’T WRONG! HOW DARE YOU SAY I WAS WRONG!?!

    I clearly haven’t missed anything.

  36. 36.

    Villago Delenda Est

    @CaliCat:

    Sorry, but you can’t be against the action the Obama Administration took in Libya and still be pleased with the outcome.

    Actually, you can say “this turned out better than expected.”

    Well, you could, if we actually had some perspective on what the “outcome” is, because it is WAY too early to tell how this will play out. It’s hopeful at the moment, mainly because it seems that Qaddafi is finished, but then again, we don’t know that for fact, and we don’t know that the rebel government will hang together with Qaddafi gone.

    On one hand, we’ve got these “liberal” figures who are nominally in charge, promising a lot of great stuff that sells well in the Western media, and on the other hand, our resident(insert heavy-duty sarcasm tags here)expert on the Middle East claims that the Muslim Brotherhood is pulling the strings and calling the shots.

    My position is let these guys first, actually demonstrate that Qaddafi is in custody or an ex-parrot, then we’ll see in a few months how the provisional government works things out.

    I’m hoping for a good outcome, but being a student of history, I know that revolutions often do not turn out exactly as advertised.

  39. 39.

    Roger Moore

    @Samara Morgan:

    If the Libyan people vote, what does it matter what we think about their choice?

    I think there’s still a serious question about whether the Libyans will vote. One of the points that is regularly missed by people talking about Libya is that the anti-dictator stance of the rebels is mixed up with old tribal rivalries. There’s no guarantee the rebels will institute anything resembling a democracy, and plenty of reason to be skeptical that they will. I, for one, won’t be celebrating the glorious replacement of a dictator with democracy until after the democracy is successfully functioning.

  41. 41.

    schrodinger's cat

    Question for everyone, what is the correct way to speak Gaddafi? I have seen elebenty different versions of it.

  43. 43.

    Arclite

    Could Libya, like Iraq with its dictator removed, descend into bloody fratricide and civil war? And would the West, careful thus far to limit its military involvement mostly to aerial strikes, get drawn into the chaos?

    Juan Cole suggests this is an unlikely scenario, with the possible exception of the Sirte region:

    There was nothing like the vicious sectarian civilian-on-civilian fighting in Baghdad in 2006. The revolution began as peaceful public protests, and only when the urban crowds were subjected to artillery, tank, mortar and cluster bomb barrages did the revolutionaries begin arming themselves. When fighting began, it was volunteer combatants representing their city quarters taking on trained regular army troops and mercenaries. That is a revolution, not a civil war. Only in a few small pockets of territory, such as Sirte and its environs, did pro-Qaddafi civilians oppose the revolutionaries, but it would be wrong to magnify a handful of skirmishes of that sort into a civil war. Qaddafi’s support was too limited, too thin, and too centered in the professional military, to allow us to speak of a civil war.

  44. 44.

    sapient

    I think some of the people making a distinction between Libya and Iraq were talking about other things, rather than the outcome, which is as yet uncertain in Libya (and in the rest of the world, outcome being uncertain until the end of the world). Other things being: whether a lie was told to promote involvement, being involved unilaterally rather than a result of a UNSC resolution and working with NATO, being asked to come in by a number of human rights organizations, putting US troops on the ground (not to mention Republican’s 20 something children in charge of major enterprises in the country), etc., etc., ad nauseum.

    But, sure, the Libyan outcome remains unknown, and I’m hoping for the least bloody, most productive, democratic and prosperous outcome for the Libyan people.

  46. 46.

    No One of Consequence

    Cleek deserves more than I paid him for his script. FF6 and fuggin’ beyoootiful pie all around as opposed to the steaming piles of troll scat.

    Dayum, this is a new lease on life for this blog (for me anyway). The GoS lost me with the last revision and the pie fighting and the Hamsherdance, etc. BJ has been a welcome haven for me to get some news, some interpretation, some dialogue. Been really shit-and-miss lately, and I am so glad I now can see lovely pie instead.

    Made my fuckin’ day.

    – NOoC

  47. 47.

    Samara Morgan

    @Jinchi: why?
    Cole just said “MY democracy”. he doesnt give a shit about the Libyans want, does he?
    and we do know who is in the NTC. the libyan muslim brotherhood in exile and the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, for a couple entities.

  48. 48.

    Elie

    @Villago Delenda Est:

    well said… time will tell…

    but then that is life and really for all things…No one seems to have patience or understanding that not all parts of the “wheel” hit the ground at the same time. There is still plenty of time or the “I told you sos” to still happen about Libya policy..

  49. 49.

    Culture of Truth

    Yikes – the probable overthrow of Qaddafi seems to have really fired John Cole up. It’s not that terrible, is it?

  55. 55.

    JPL

    @Samara Morgan: This is way ot but I remember my mother buying my father a tie and he said I will not wear a pink tie. She responded it’s not pink it’s fuschia and he wore the tie proudly.

  57. 57.

    DarrenG

    @Samara Morgan:

    Cole just said “MY democracy”. he doesnt give a shit about the Libyans want, does he?

    So many fallacies, so little time…

    – You incorrectly conflate not wanting to engage in an illegal war of choice (even one with a potentially good outcome) with not giving a shit about [what] the Libyans want.

    – You seem to assume that “the Libyans” all share a common goal, that you know what this goal is, that it is a laudable one, and that the U.S. is morally obligated to facilitate its achievement.

    Assuming your vision of a democratic Libya is, in fact, realized in time, is it morally necessary for us to start bombing every country on Earth without a democratically-elected government?

  58. 58.

    Jinchi

    @Samara Morgan:

    Cole just said “MY democracy”. he doesnt give a shit about the Libyans want, does he?

    He doesn’t know what Libyans want and neither do you. The point he’s been making is that he didn’t think we should get involved with the fight in Libya. That’s a question of American interests and of our democracy, not Libya’s (not-yet existant one).

    If it’s not in our national interest then we shouldn’t do it. That’s a pretty reasonable argument and it has nothing to do with whether he wishes them well or not.

  59. 59.

    John Cole

    Cole just said “MY democracy”. he doesnt give a shit about the Libyans want, does he?

    No, I only presume to have a say in MY FUCKING DEMOCRACY.

  60. 60.

    FlipYrWhig

    So I guess you can never go wrong predicting disaster. If disaster occurs, you were right, and if it doesn’t, you were still right, because it still might go wrong, because the future is infinite.

  61. 61.

    soonergrunt

    @Samara Morgan: No, you stupid shit. He’s saying “Democracy for us, and Whatever Works For You for you.”
    See, he’s saying we shouldn’t force democracy (or anything else) on those people at the point of a gun.
    It’s consistently been your dumb ass saying that Islam and democracy were incompatible.
    You really ought to get a whiteboard so you can keep track of what your various personalities say from one day to the next.

  63. 63.

    someguy

    Everything is going to be just fine in Libya. Oil revenues will pay for the reconstruction. A risk of factionalism and civil war? No way! We’ll be greeted as liberators, I assure you. Mission accomplished!

  65. 65.

    Derf

    Knew it was only a matter of time before you went after this angle. What with it being such a succulent looking cup half empty scenario. And yea, a very real possibility.

    Frankly I’m surprised you did not jump on this low hanging fruit sooner. My guess is that this is what Greenwald told you to think today. Assuming he is not hiding under some rock somewhere like the rest of the professional Obama whiners.

  66. 66.

    Samara Morgan

    @soonergrunt: Islam and missionary democracy with freedom of speech are incompatible. Islam and democracy are just fine.
    actually the Quran says rulers should govern with the consent of the people.

    @John Cole: No, I only presume to have a say in MY FUCKING DEMOCRACY.

    then why did you say this?

    does it change my opinion that we know literally nothing about the rebels who appear to be winning? No.

    it sounds like you want to vet the NTC. but i could be wrong.
    However it is untrue that “we know literally nothing” about the rebels.
    The LIFG and the Libyan MB in Exile are part of the NTC.

  67. 67.

    No One of Consequence

    Dear SammySam:

    I love you, my sweet little churlish shitstain. You were the impetus to place my feet on the path to the Code of Cleek. Now, in the sweet blessed Now, I can no longer hear you, until you change your little punk-ass handle again, until I know it’s you… and then **BAM!** there you go back to spewing pie.

    Again, thanks Cleek. You have set me free. And thanks to you too Little Sam’witch, without whom I would still be carefully side-stepping through the commenturdy that is your bile (and Duh Derf, and MC 900-Foot Jesus and whomever the hell else wants to come on to BJ and be a total dick to the owner and the community). Find some other picnic basket to void your bladder in.

    Now, kindly, Fuck Off and Die in the manner you would (personally) find the absolutely Most Horrible.

    One last bit of advice, little Trollettes, which I am sure you will not heed:

    Karma is not instant. It is however, relentless.

    Consider that, and the reward you are so busy preparing for yourself with your behaviour. Never have, and never will understand people like you.

    – NOoC

  68. 68.

    Mnemosyne

    @Arclite:

    AFAICT, Libya is almost entirely Sunni, which means that the sectarian tensions in Iraq of Sunni vs. Shi’a pretty much wouldn’t exist (especially since those tensions in Iraq were exacerbated by the long Iran/Iraq War). There could easily be tribal issues, but the religious tensions of Iraq don’t seem to be present in Libya.

  69. 69.

    Samara Morgan

    @DarrenG: im just trying to unnerstand what Cole said….

    does it change my opinion that we know literally nothing about the rebels who appear to be winning? No.

    it sounds like he wants to vet the NTC. or hes clutching his pearls over the islamists in the NTC.
    im not sure which.
    heres his link.

    what if al-Q was part of the NTC? and what if there was an al-Q candidate in the first Libyan election?
    wouldn’t it be the sworn duty of America the Democracy Promoter to let the Libyan people vote for who they want?

    that is my point.
    do you believe in democracy or not?

  70. 70.

    i hate illinois nazis

    Am I losing it, or did Balloon Juice just cite an evidence-free story by John Burns in which he uses his mind-reading powers to discover that, in a remarkable coincidence, a bunch world leaders think exactly like John Burns?

  71. 71.

    Mnemosyne

    @Jinchi:

    He doesn’t know what Libyans want and neither do you.

    I dunno, the fact that they’ve fought a months-long revolution, established a provisional government, and written a preliminary constitution kinda points me in the direction of them wanting to be rid of Qaddafi and create a democracy in whatever way it is that the Libyan people define “democracy,” but YMMV, I guess.

    After a certain point, you have to accept that people are actually telling you what they want even if you don’t want to hear it.

  72. 72.

    Samara Morgan

    this is not a stupid question, or a troll question.

    i genuinely want to know.
    Do American “interests” basically conflict with a belief in global democracy?
    Because islamic democracy is not ever going to be covalent with American interests.
    we can see that in Iraq.

  74. 74.

    Mnemosyne

    @FlipYrWhig:

    You just know that it’s killing Donald Rumsfeld and his merry band of “shock and awe” proponents to have NATO proving him (even more) wrong right out there in public where everyone can see it.

    Heh.

  75. 75.

    Comrade Dread

    Democracy for me but not for thee?

    No, the position is, it’s not our job to be the world’s policeman or Democracy Fairy running about granting super happy fun Freedom bombs to the people of the third world.

    First, because we can’t afford it, and if we’re going to spend a fuckton of money on something, hows about we spend it here at home helping our own poor and unemployed.

    Second, because most people in Washington who make these decisions know jack-all about the parts of the world they’re engaging and the fallout from their decisions is often worse than the consequences of leaving it alone.

    Third, most of our recent wars haven’t been about our national interests at all.

    Fourth, most of the war planning involved usually boils down to:

    1. Air Strikes
    2. ?????
    3. Mission Accomplished
    4. Er… now what? Fuck, let’s just throw a lot of money at it and hope it all works out.

  78. 78.

    Omnes Omnibus

    At any rate, here is another thread for you to throw up your Mission Accomplished! comments, call me Jonah Goldberg, or whatever else since I am insufficiently hip to the cause. I swear I’ll change the color of my blog if you ask nice.

    The vast majority of people who were/are posting comments in favor of this intervention, then and now, don’t fall into that category. Yeah, there are some people posting stupid triumphalist shit, but a lot of people looked at the situation on the ground in Libya, saw that there was reasonably legitimate group forming a rebel government, saw that the Arab League requested help for the rebels, saw that the UN approved a mission, saw that NATO was going to running the show, saw that heavy US involvement was likely to be short term, and decided that on balance this was more to be favored than opposed. I am one of those people. I can also understand how one could look at the situation and come to a different conclusion. But go ahead and nutpick; it’s your blog.

  80. 80.

    Brachiator

    At any rate, here is another thread for you to throw up your Mission Accomplished! comments, call me Jonah Goldberg, or whatever else since I am insufficiently hip to the cause. I swear I’ll change the color of my blog if you ask nice.

    Really? This is what you descend to? People in Iran, Syria and elsewhere put their lives on the line to try to change their government, and you fall back on a reference to what? the green thumb/finger thing.

    And you mock people?

    And then, what, fall back on the thing again that it is only bad when Americans kill brown people, but otherwise everybody else is on their fucking own?

    You can certainly be against the intervention in Libya. I am not gung ho for it either, not by any means.

    But what else are you offering than a variation of the smug “It got mine, fuck you” shit that is canned conservatism?

    So let’s see. We buy all kinds of stuff from China. Pay good money so we can live nice and cool. The Chinese take a chunk of that money, beef up their arms industry, sell a shitload of arms to Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankans in turn crush the ever loving shit out of the Tamils. Wipe them the fuck out. Not an even fight at all.

    And then people post shit here about how we should never “intervene” in another country’s affairs.

    And then make fun of people who fight back and get crushed.

    Damn.

  81. 81.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @Samara Morgan: You are being deliberately obtuse. I disagree with Cole’s position on the intervention and what I perceive to be the thinking behind it, but, for fuck’s sake, that statement of his was not ambiguous nor was it hard to understand.

  82. 82.

    Comrade Dread

    @Samara Morgan:

    1. If they choose the wrong leaders, they won’t have a democracy, they’ll have another authoritarian president who gets 90+% of the vote.

    2. Assuming they do vote, they won’t be the sole arbiters of who runs the country. Expect a lot of NGOs, foreign dollars, and dictates from the countries that helped institute regime change. And given the anti-Western feelings pervading the Middle East and Muslim worlds, I’m fairly sure Europe and the United States will be doing as much as they can to subvert a pure democratic vote.

  84. 84.

    Samara Morgan

    @Omnes Omnibus: well…can you explain what Cole meant since you understand?

    it sounded to me like he was suspicious of the NTC and what the post Qaddafi government would be.

    and can you answer my question, because i do not think Cole is gunna?

    Do American “interests” basically conflict with a belief in global democracy?
    Because islamic democracy is not ever going to be covalent with American interests.

    For example, we can see that in Iraq. In Iraq right now the Iraqi people want the Americans to leave. America wants to stay so the Saudis dont freakout.

    Press TV: Why is Leon Panetta jumping the gun when it comes to announcing an agreement that is yet to be agreed or is it a smart propaganda move to pressure the Iraqis – Can this backfire on the Americans?
    __
    Michael Maloof: I think it is a form of pressure and that the US appears to be very anxious to extend beyond the December 31 deadline. The reasons for that is not that because they want to do training and they fear the Iraqi security forces need more training.
    __
    I think the reason the pressure is there is because of what they see is Iran’s influence emerging more and more into Iraq and that’s becoming a real problem for the US – Especially in light of what the US believes they have accomplished with the Syrians and causing so much disruption there given the relationship of Iran to Syria.
    __
    And I think what the US is fearful of is a Shiite crescent actually emerging from all this given that Prime Minister Maliki is Shiite and is close to Iran and that bothers the US tremendously.
    __
    Press TV: You’ve touched upon this a bit, but I’d like you to expand on this – Obama has never really stood by the reasons the US went to war against Iraq – Why is he so motivated to stay in Iraq now?
    __
    Michael Maloof: I think it’s because of the changing circumstances; and you’re only talking 10,000 troops; it’s supposed to be a token amount, or they might agree to the extension of the 40,000 that are there.
    __
    But it’s not going to really matter in terms of what effectiveness they can accomplish. I think the US is also under increasing pressure from the Saudis. It’s my understanding that the Saudis have decided to go on their own – they no longer trust the US – to basically create their own army; a rapid reaction force if you will and they’re very much concerned about the plight of the Sunnis in Iraq.
    __
    And so they’re going to put pressure on the US to at least maintain some kind of presence there in order to in effect try to disrupt the forward motion of Iranian influence in what is an Arab world in that region and also because of the concern the Saudis have over the plight of the Sunnis there.
    __
    So I think the US has seen, and everything in the Middle East has shown, the ineffectiveness of US policy. And I think they’re groping and grasping at straws.

    Iraq has to get rid of America, because they want to ally themselves with Iran, and Iran and America are enemy nations.
    If America leaves 10k troops in Iraq, Sadr will kill them.
    He has said this repeatedly and I believe him.
    The Shiite Crescent is a very real possibility. Muqtada is positioning himself to become the next Grand Ayatollah, and Sistani is 86 and in poor health.

  85. 85.

    CaliCat

    I apologize for my earlier lack of clarity. My comment should have read: You can’t be against the action the Obama administration took in Libya and still be pleased with the ousting of Gadhafi (made possible by the actions the Obama administration took in Libya) WITHOUT ADMITTING YOU WERE WRONG.

  86. 86.

    Samara Morgan

    and i think Iraq is a classic example of American interests conflicting with Iraqi desire for autonomy and self-government.

    So, is it always thus?

  87. 87.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @Samara Morgan: No, I won’t explain. As I said, it was a pretty straightforward statement, and, to be honest, I think you are playing games with it.

  88. 88.

    dmbeaster

    So much illogic. To just focus on the most recent one by CaliCat – let me explain the fallacy in a simple way. My son thought the best way to prepare for his finals was to first spend the weekend in Vegas, which I thought was a big mistake. He then went on to get an A on his final. I am pleased with the result. And in saying I am pleased, I dont have to admit I am wrong in objecting to the Vegas weekend before the final exam.

    I would also note that there is a reason why we keep getting into wars of choice on flimsy pretexts – its because of reasoning like CaliCat’s that when things work well, that always means military interventions are the way to go.

    And while it is nice to seem Qadaffi gone, let’s at least wait and see if things actually get better there.

  89. 89.

    Carol

    @Mnemosyne: And I bet Ghadaffi also had a strategy like many dictators of mixing different groups to avoid potential successionist movements ever forming. But in any case, he was so bad that whatever differences they had were put aside in ousting him. And another thing about differences: in a democracy at least people can openly talk about them and there’s a mechanism, no matter how imperfect, to settle them. A dictator doesn’t want them settled-it’s in his interest to keep the pot boiling or suppressed.

    I’m pretty upset at all of the hand-wringing. One thing not noticed is that thanks to all of the repressive regimes and the lack of opportunity, there was a massive diaspora of talent to the West. These people, often highly educated (look at who’s getting PHd’s these days) are familiar with democracy and living under them. The folks who stayed behind have been exposed due to satellite television to a world that is far more relaxed than the one they lived under. While dictatorships suppress political information, they are more partial to the pure bread and circus stuff that has information embedded in it. How many people in the Middle East enjoyed the West Wing, for instance?

    So people know what democracy is and what can do. The battle is over local implementation.

  90. 90.

    clayton

    This is always the problem: you have people who were either 1)conservative for most of their lives or 2) mostly conservative and then suddenly change to progressive.

    It’s why I have never been a fan of any of them.

    Liberals want to save people from mass killings. That’s why Clinton is not a liberal.

    I know Libyans. I know them better than any of the front pagers here. But John Cole seems to think it’s ok to keep his old conservative ideas.

    It’s the same with Greenwald and Markos.

    And don’t tell me to read another blog. That’s what all the wingnut blogs always say.

    I wonder if the current troll to attack is the same one that took Jeff Goldstein down? When was the last time Cole had to defend Goldstein?

  91. 91.

    CaliCat

    dmbeaster’s reasoning is faulty in that he provides the false analogy between his son’s adventures in Las Vegas and the Obama administration’s action in Libya as evidence that my reasoning is faulty. It can be reasonably argued that the latter scenario would more than likely lead to a positive outcome, whereas, the former scenario would more than likely lead to a negative outcome. dmbeaster’s reasoning is faulty in that he is unable to make this distinction thus providing a false analogy.

  93. 93.

    CaliCat

    dmbeaster also makes an enormous, if not bizarre, leap of logic by equating why I think some people should admit they were wrong in this particular situation and the “flimsy pretexts” that countries (in general) use to enter into unnecessary wars of choice. Again, dmbeaster appears to have trouble making obvious distinctions.

  94. 94.

    Samara Morgan

    @Omnes Omnibus: oh copout.
    the problem is….what if the Libyan people want something else than what John Cole thinks is a good government for them? Don’t they get to choose?

    i just can’t get no satisfaction.
    :)

  95. 95.

    Nied

    he told reporters at Downing Street that “stabilization experts” in London had been working for months with the Libyan rebels to plan for a stable transition in Tripoli.
    Measures already in hand, he said, included insistence, in contacts with Mustapha Abdul Jalil, a rebel leader, that the rebels respect human rights and avoid reprisals. He said that the future government promised to make sure that “all parts of Libya can share in the country’s future,” a coded way of saying that the eastern-based tribes who have been dominant in the rebel movement not punish the tribes in the west who have sustained Colonel Qaddafi.

    Sounds more like they’ve been obsessing about these very problems for months. That’s what good leaders do, they game out worst case scenarios and plan accordingly. A very far cry from “approximately ZERO planning for the aftermath” that you were screaming about in your previous post.

  97. 97.

    Nied

    @Comrade Dread:

    No, the position is, it’s not our job to be the world’s policeman or Democracy Fairy running about granting super happy fun Freedom bombs to the people of the third world.
    First, because we can’t afford it, and if we’re going to spend a fuckton of money on something, hows about we spend it here at home helping our own poor and unemployed.

    There’s a difference in how much something like that can cost though. The most recent estimate for the cost of the Libya campaign I can find was from June and puts it at $600 million. Let’s say it’s more than doubled since then to $2 billion. We spend TEN TIMES that much for frigging air conditioning in Iraq every year! And for that we appear to be on the verge of handing Libya off to a democratic or at the very least vastly less oppressive regime.

    That sounds like a god damned bargain to me.

  102. 102.

    AA+ Bonds

    What about the uranium?

    Suddenly, we DON’T care about the uranium in Libya? FRANCE doesn’t care about the uranium in Libya? What about the Aouzou Strip across the border?

  103. 103.

    Mnemosyne

    @dmbeaster:

    And in saying I am pleased, I dont have to admit I am wrong in objecting to the Vegas weekend before the final exam.

    But, given that your son did get an A on his exam, doesn’t that prove that you were, in fact, wrong? It sounds like he had a study plan that you didn’t understand and therefore disapproved of, not that he didn’t plan at all and just lucked into getting an A.

    I’m not saying that you should recommend a weekend in Vegas to every college student since, after all, you didn’t know what his plan was, but his success does seem to point to him knowing something about himself and his study habits that you didn’t.

  105. 105.

    Ben Wolf

    the problem is….what if the Libyan people want something else than what John Cole thinks is a good government for them? Don’t they get to choose?

    That’s exactly what he said: Libyans should choose their government without American involvment of any kind. I’m glad you’ve come around to our way of thinking.

  106. 106.

    Jinchi

    @CaliCat:

    So, you can’t be against the action the Bush administration took in Iraq and still be pleased with the ousting of Saddam (made possible by the actions the Bush administration took in Iraq) WITHOUT ADMITTING YOU WERE WRONG, either?

    Or is it that we had to admit we were wrong in April of 2003 when the statue of Saddam was pulled down, but we can now claim we were right all along, knowing how badly everything turned out in the end?

  107. 107.

    Atticus Dogsbody

    Step 1: Remove the most evily, evil Gaddafi using military force composed of myriad local groups, many with conflicting goals and historical emnities, assited by western forces despised by a large percentage of the indigenous population.

    Step 2: Unnecessary as Gaddafi is now gone all problems are solved. Q.E. fucking D.

    Step 3: Flourishing democracy, butterflies and rainbows.

    Now, Mr Cole, how could you possibly have any concerns about this plan?

  108. 108.

    Samara Morgan

    @Ben Wolf: LIE.
    He SAID–

    Of course I believe in Democracy. In my democracy, I think we should act in OUR national interest, and one of the things that is in our national interest is not ushering in a regime that is just as bad or worse than the old one.

    That is the Bush Doctrine, or COIN (the BD for villages).

    a policy of spreading democracy around the world, especially in the Middle East, as a strategy for combating terrorism;

    But like i just pointed out, eg Iraq, Iraqi democracy is informed by Iraqi interests, which seem currently to be profoundly anti-pathic to American interests.
    This is because of the deeply stupid Democratic Peace Theory.

    Democratic peace theory (or liberal democratic theory or simply the “democratic peace”) holds that democracies, for some appropriate definition of democracy, rarely, or even never, go to war with one another.

    However, this theory ignores the tendency of “liberal” democracies LIKE AMERICA to war on poor unarmed third world countries in their “interest”.
    Which seems to me to be what Cole is advocating…
    or put more simply,

    democracy for me but not for thee (unless its in our interests)

  109. 109.

    Bill

    @ Samara

    “the problem is….what if the Libyan people want something else than what John Cole thinks is a good government for them? Don’t they get to choose?”

    Yes, they get to choose. All on their own. Without our bombs, or drones, or missiles involved.

    But please forgive those of us who think that if we are going to spend a few billion dollars (that could say be used for unemployment benefits for our own people), we’d like a reult that doesn’t become a training ground for people who want to crash planes in our cities.

    Put me in the camp that didn’t love this war to begin with; is happy the world is down one dictator (although I could have sworn I read quotes from W’s white house about how Ghadaffi wasn’t such a bad guy anymore); and will wait to see if we can label this whole thing a success or not.

  110. 110.

    Grumpy Code Monkey

    Every time I read about how wonderfully things have turned out in Libya, I keep hearing “Won’t Get Fooled Again” in my head.

    There’s reason to hope that things will turn out well in Libya, and that any new government will be at least nominally democratic and tolerant, but it ain’t guaranteed. For all we know, the next guy who takes over will be every bit the tyrannical son of a bitch Ghadaffi was.

    The US doesn’t exactly have a stellar history when it comes to meddling in the affairs of other nations, and if the metric is bringing democracy to the people, then we’ve definitely backed the wrong horse on more than one occasion (the Shah, Ngo Dinh Diem, Noriega, etc.). Hell, Saddam himself was our bestest bud for a while in the ’80s.

    So enough with the “democracy for me but not for thee” crap; we’ve been there, done that, and fucked it up more than once.

Comments are closed.