Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27

Thread: WikiLeaks documents shed light on US-backed intervention in Libya

  1. #1
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    WikiLeaks documents shed light on US-backed intervention in Libya

    US diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks expose some of the real reasons and diplomatic tensions behind NATO’s ongoing bombardment of Libya. Far from initiating a “humanitarian” intervention to protect civilians against Muammar Gaddafi’s government, Washington backed the NATO intervention for one reason only—the installation of a regime that better serves the strategic interests of the US, as well as the operations of the giant oil and gas companies.

    The cables date back to 2007, some three years after the Bush administration had lifted sanctions and formally re-established relations with the Gaddafi regime in a bid to secure access to Libya’s highly prized resources. Until the outbreak of revolutionary uprisings across the Middle East this year, Gaddafi was welcomed with open arms in Washington and internationally.

    As the cables show, as recently as August 2009, US Senator John McCain led a high-profile bipartisan congressional delegation to meet with Gaddafi. McCain characterised the “overall pace of the bilateral relationship as excellent”. Senator Joe Lieberman said “we never would have guessed ten years ago that we would be sitting in Tripoli, being welcomed by a son of Muammar al-Qadhafi,” before calling Libya an “important ally in the war on terrorism.”

    Read more at: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/ju...wiki-j27.shtml

    Thoughts?
    Comments?
    Response?


  2. #2
    Educator U.S. Socialist.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    04-18-12 @ 04:55 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    913

    Re: WikiLeaks documents shed light on US-backed intervention in Libya

    Well is anyone actually surprised by this? I mean it happens all the time. This is Imperialism the highest and special stage of capitalism. If you want to read a good work on it I suggest this: Lenin: Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

    Re: WikiLeaks documents shed light on US-backed intervention in Libya

    Quote Originally Posted by U.S. Socialist. View Post
    Well is anyone actually surprised by this? I mean it happens all the time. This is Imperialism the highest and special stage of capitalism. If you want to read a good work on it I suggest this: Lenin: Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism
    I seem to recall socialist and communist countries doing the exact same thing. Once again, if it's wrong, it's wrong no matter who does it.

  4. #4
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: WikiLeaks documents shed light on US-backed intervention in Libya

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    I seem to recall socialist and communist countries doing the exact same thing. Once again, if it's wrong, it's wrong no matter who does it.
    I agree. We should not be in the business of regime change. Period.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

    Re: WikiLeaks documents shed light on US-backed intervention in Libya

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    I agree. We should not be in the business of regime change. Period.
    I wouldn't go that far but it would be far more limited. I had no problem with removing Saddam. He had tried to assassinate our president. That alone should be reason enough to take him out. We did that long ago though.

    Qaddafi should have been taken out after his handywork in Lockerbie. (but that isn't why we are doing what we are doing)

    We have no business with a full out war in Afghanistan. I'd have no problem with random targeted strikes aimed at those who had a hand in 9-11 though.

  6. #6
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: WikiLeaks documents shed light on US-backed intervention in Libya

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    I wouldn't go that far but it would be far more limited. I had no problem with removing Saddam. He had tried to assassinate our president. That alone should be reason enough to take him out. We did that long ago though.

    Qaddafi should have been taken out after his handywork in Lockerbie. (but that isn't why we are doing what we are doing)

    We have no business with a full out war in Afghanistan. I'd have no problem with random targeted strikes aimed at those who had a hand in 9-11 though.
    I might have had no problem (or less problem) with removing Saddam had we done so when he did those things. Same with Qaddafi (Lockerbie). We agree there. And I agree with Afghanistan, though I think nearly any US president would have went in after OBL. I would hope anyone other than Bush, regardless of party, would have done so more competently and with less nation building.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

    Re: WikiLeaks documents shed light on US-backed intervention in Libya

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    I might have had no problem (or less problem) with removing Saddam had we done so when he did those things.
    Yes, it's far less controversial.

    Same with Qaddafi (Lockerbie). We agree there. And I agree with Afghanistan, though I think nearly any US president would have went in after OBL. I would hope anyone other than Bush, regardless of party, would have done so more competently and with less nation building.
    I understand going in. I don't understand a full out war 10 years later.

  8. #8
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: WikiLeaks documents shed light on US-backed intervention in Libya

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    Yes, it's far less controversial.



    I understand going in. I don't understand a full out war 10 years later.
    Once you start something, and present a premise that too many accept, and all that we have to win business, it is hard to back up. But I'm with ya.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  9. #9
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: WikiLeaks documents shed light on US-backed intervention in Libya

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    I understand going in. I don't understand a full out war 10 years later.
    It wouldn't have came to this had GWB not taken his eye off the prize. We had a change to take out OBL in the hills of Tora Bora long ago but looked the other way.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Everywhere and Nowhere
    Last Seen
    03-07-12 @ 03:28 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,692

    Re: WikiLeaks documents shed light on US-backed intervention in Libya

    Wikileaks is stating the perfectly obvious... but at least now there is undeniable proof.

    Why else would we be meddling with such backward governments? This is ALL about our energy economy.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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