Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 61 to 62 of 62

Thread: U.S. Evacuates Embassy In Libya Amid Clashes

  1. #61
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: U.S. Evacuates Embassy In Libya Amid Clashes

    Why Gaddafi had to go.

    Michael Hughes: Libyan Regime Change: U.S./NATO Hypocrisy Knows No Bounds


    From Huffpo, normally accused of sheltering Obama.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  2. #62
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    11-28-17 @ 04:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,690

    Re: U.S. Evacuates Embassy In Libya Amid Clashes

    Already, some are calling for U.S. military intervention to save Libya's embattled central government. In an op-ed in The New York Times, Karim Mezran, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council wrote:

    A three-pronged approach should begin with a threat, issued by the United States and European countries, of a limited military intervention to force the warring sides to withdraw from the two major cities and cease firing upon civilians and installations; militias that disobey the order should be targeted with airstrikes.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/01/op...don-libya.html

    Just as had been the case preceding the U.S.-NATO regime change military operation, the U.S. lacks compelling interests and there is little tangible evidence that this situation will change. First, the government Mr. Mezran wants the U.S. to rescue has not distinguished itself as fundamentally more favorable to U.S. interests than the Gadhafi government. It rejected a U.S. request to extradite the Lockerbie Bomber, who is now deceased. It condemned U.S. operations to seize one of the key suspects in the Benghazi terrorist attack. Second, it has not taken the kind of measures required to address differing tribal interests. Much of today's emergent conflict is the result of that government's failures. There is no credible and concrete evidence that giving the current Libyan government a "do over" of sorts would lead to stable governance. Third, Libya's government has not made any serious efforts concerning oil revenue sharing with its regions. Fourth, the Muslim Brotherhood plays a significant role in the current government.

    In short, I do not believe the U.S. should wade into Libya's growing sectarian conflict with military forces. Regime change had created a destabilizing power vacuum. The successor government's ineffectual performance amplified the risks associated with that power vacuum. The government's policies and membership did not become materially more compatible with U.S. interests. A better role would entail a willingness to help mediate among the parties without taking sides in the multi-faceted internal conflict.

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •