Libya: Benghazi unrest, to Civil War, to a new government and Gaddafi's death.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Libya already has the highest death number in a very few days. 84 dead people in 6 days, and yesterday we were only at about 20. And this is only from HRW which only has some observers in a very few cities in Libya.

Images from Tobruk (close to Egyptian border) were quite strong yesterday, big gathering and people making fall symbols of the regime, which would show that, like in other Arab countries, the fear has fallen, that remains in the East though, traditional region of protest, the fact to make pass those videos all over the Internet might make people more motivated in other parts of the country, but, indeed, yesterday night, Internet has been cut.

And I just hear that it become quite nasty in Benghazi, police opened fire on crowds during a mourning, 15 dead people, some report that some antiaircraft missiles have been used.

Events in Libya certainly prove again why anti-Western dictatorships are more likely to hang on than pro-Western ones. Since countries like Libya don't depend on good relations with the West anyway, they don't need to care whether crushing the protests by force is gonna annoy their non-existing allies in America/Europe. So, let's just put the protesters against the wall and be done with it...

[Middle-aged Europe]

Trivia: With 41-and-a-half years in office, Gaddafi is currently the longest serving non-royal head of state in the world (and the third-longest serving if we count monarchs).

[Middle-aged Europe]

Yeah, time to waste the f**ker.

[Middle-aged Europe]

He basically said that he won't give up power and rather die a martyr. He then went on to refer to the protestors as "cockroaches".

[Middle-aged Europe]

In an example of epic fail, the European Union has announced that they've stopped their arms exports to Libya.

(No word yet whether any European heads of governments will be prosecuted for aiding and abetting murder though. )

[Middle-aged Europe]

Gaddafi is sounding like Glenn Beck these days.  I'm surprised he didn't come out with a chalkboard and pictures of Karl Marx.

More like Bin Laden, since Gaddafi is blaming everything on al-Qaeda. Including Western journalists who, according to Gaddafi, are also working for al-Qaeda. Or something.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Do we really want to get rid of King Muhammad though?

I mean compared with most of these other guys he's f**king Mikhail Gorbachev.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Do we really want to get rid of King Muhammad though?

I mean compared with most of these other guys he's f**king Mikhail Gorbachev.

Look what happened to Gorbachev.

That wasn't my point though. Would it be desirable?

[Middle-aged Europe]

Gaddafi is out, obviously. Kind of tragicomical how the international community only joins the bandwagon once it is 100% clear that the Libyan people has done the job on their own.

Well, if he pulls through, we'd still need his oil, wouldn't we?

[Middle-aged Europe]

Reminds me of former Stasi head Erich Mielke who publicly declared his love for all the people in East Germany during a speech in November 1989.

[Middle-aged Europe]

If some countries attack Libya, Austria will not be among them:

A new Gallup poll shows 70% of Austrians are against a military intervention by our army.

http://www.oe24.at/welt/libyen/Oesterreich-kauft-Oel-von-Gaddafi/19530504

I wasn't even aware that it was an issue... I mean as a NATO non-member and all.

[Middle-aged Europe]

ECD Iserlohn (nowadays Iserlohn Roosters) ice hockey jersey, advertising Muammar Gaddafi's "Green Book" (worn in a single game against Rosenheim on December 4, 1987).

[Middle-aged Europe]

France recognizes Libya's rebel leadership in Benghazi as the official government of Libya, and will soon exchange ambassadors with them:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/11/world/europe/11france.html

Portugal too, I heard.

[Middle-aged Europe]

     Preventing semi-genocides isn't so horrible, though I think that imposing a no-fly zone crosses over into aiding the rebels, which is interference in Lybian internal affairs.

You don't think Qaddafi is going to have a jolly old Tea Party with those rebels, do you? The only thing standing between us and some nasty massacring in Lybia is the possibility of an intervention.

     There are different kinds of interventions that exist. I surmise it would be possible to dispatch a multinational humanitarian taskforce to assure the proper treatment of rebels & rebel sympathizers without directly assisting them in their war against Qaddafi's government.

LOL

[Middle-aged Europe]

Well, now we can say honor is (partly) saved. Except for Germany which should really go f-ck itself now, what a disappointment.

Let's just hope it's not too late...

Hey, Merkel already has it hands full explaining why she was for nuclear energy before she was against it. She can't need another unpopular military intervention at this point (since any form of military action for any reason is inherently unpopular here). After all, there are elections this and next sunday. At least there were no dead German soldiers in Afghanistan this week.

[Middle-aged Europe]

The no-fly zone resolution (and Germany's position regarding it) caused a small, but interesting debate here that certainly transcends party lines. Angela Merkel, Guido Westerwelle, and the leaders of SPD, Greens, and Left almost unanimously oppose military action, while medium-level representatives often vigerously disagree.

A German politician who had already voiced support for a no-fly zone last week was conservative CDU youngster (and foreign policy spokesman) Philipp Mißfelder. Today, harsh criticism came from one of the more prominent representatives of the SPD's left wing, Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul: "There can't be abstentions when dealing with despots."

From what I can assess, the most "hawkish" top-level politican on the issue seems to be Renate Künast, parliamentary co-leader of the Greens, with some cautious support for the UN resolution. The statement of Green co-chairwoman Claudia Roth sounded a bit different though. I sense some conflict here.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Does nothing:

Germany

The position of the German government doesn't even make sense, because it seems inconsistent with earlier policies. Angela Merkel was also much more supportive of the invasion of Iraq  than she is now regarding the establishment of a no-fly zone over Libya. Seems like she doesn't feel like it. Or maybe she does in fact try to keep the issue out of the ongoing state election campaigns. Otherwise it's a course of action that causes some serious head-scratching.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Not surprising that Germany, as usual, opposes military intervention.

According to a poll which was released today, 62% of the German population support the "Coalition" air strikes against Libya, with 65% opposing a participation of German military in the strikes.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Apparently, Canada is sending 6 bombers in Libya. They left Canada on Thursday

But they don't do anything until they decide if they will be based in France or in Italy.
Great, if it take two days to take that decision... no wonder why people laugh of Canada.

Well, we have a reactionary idiot leader, a cabinet of clowns and incompetents, a defense minister who looks like a village idiot, a joke environmental policy made by oil lobbyists, a navy which is the butt of all jokes and an attitude both politically/culturally/economically which makes us look like idiots or jokes.

Makes sense, as they won't feel alone in an alliance comprising France and Italy.

In a way, Silvio Berlusconi plays the role of this war's Joseph Stalin.  He's a criminal previously allied with the one that is now fought.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Also for the record, in Italy everyone supports the operation except the Northern League. But the problem is that the Northern League can let this government fall whenever they want, so that explains why Italy is playing the part of the buffoon in this operation.

And in Germany there's no party that officially supports it...

The Realo half of the Greens (Künast/Özdemir) support the no-fly zone. We don't know yet what they think about "further measures" though. The Left half of the party is certainly not so happy about it. But that's the old "protect human rights at any cost" vs. "keep the peace at any cost" conflict that exists in the party since Joschka Fischer withdrew from the pacifist consensus over Bosnia in the mid-90s.

[Middle-aged Europe]

^^

To be precise, paragraph 4 of the resolution states:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Middle-aged Europe]

It is interesting to note that the neocon warmongers are silent about the rebels' use of civilians as human shields in Misrata.

Not really.

It's interesting though that the only source for this claim seems to be Libyan state television.

[Middle-aged Europe]

While it is certainly debatable whether the NATO air strikes are actually going to achieve anything worthwhile, it is also interesting to note that "the rebels may be worse than Gadaffi" is continued to be used as a moral justification to take a fully neutral stance on events. I mean, it's f**king Gadaffi we're talking here about. In order to be worse than Gadaffi the rebels would need to be on the same level as the Khmer Rouge or something.

We know that the leader of the National Transitional Council is Gadaffi's former justice minister. We also know that he was considered as something of a reformer even before all hell broke lose in Libya. His deputy was a known human rights lawyer. The prime minister of the rebel government formerly served on Libya's "National Economic Development Board", but was also seen as one of the more reform-minded representatives of the regime. While the council certainly can't fully vouch for what individual rebel units may do or not do in the field, it is a reasonable assumption that the rebels are at worst the lesser evil compared to Gadaffi's regime.

[Middle-aged Europe]

We know that the leader of the National Transitional Council is Gadaffi's former justice minister. We also know that he was considered as something of a reformer even before all hell broke lose in Libya. His deputy was a known human rights lawyer. The prime minister of the rebel government formerly served on Libya's "National Economic Development Board", but was also seen as one of the more reform-minded representatives of the regime. While the council certainly can't fully vouch for what individual rebel units may do or not do in the field, it is a reasonable assumption that the rebels are at worst the lesser evil compared to Gadaffi's regime.

And some in the transitional council participated in the torture of the Benghazi six. At least Gaddafi delegated this to subordinates.

Except that this link doesn't contain any information in support of your claims.

[Middle-aged Europe]

We know that the leader of the National Transitional Council is Gadaffi's former justice minister. We also know that he was considered as something of a reformer even before all hell broke lose in Libya. His deputy was a known human rights lawyer. The prime minister of the rebel government formerly served on Libya's "National Economic Development Board", but was also seen as one of the more reform-minded representatives of the regime. While the council certainly can't fully vouch for what individual rebel units may do or not do in the field, it is a reasonable assumption that the rebels are at worst the lesser evil compared to Gadaffi's regime.

And some in the transitional council participated in the torture of the Benghazi six. At least Gaddafi delegated this to subordinates.

Except that this link doesn't contain any information in support of your claims.

Never mind... I googled it myself. It seems to me that your claim is entirely based on the Bulgarian government's position not to recognise the National Transitional Council because it contains former regime members (such as Gadaffi's former justice minister as the council's chairman) who were supposedly involved with the infamous "HIV trials" against the Bulgarian nurses a couple of years ago. However, the idea that council members personally tortured anyone back then is apparently completely fictional.

As for the Bulgarian government's claims that ex-justice minister/rebel leader Mustafa Abdul Jalil was responsible for any mistreatments of the Bulgarian nurses: The Bulgarian nurses were imprisoned in Libya from 1999 to 2007. Jalil didn't become justice minister of Libya until 2007. So far there's no evidence whatsoever that he had anything to do with this case... except maybe that he presided over the nurses' release early in his tenure (I was unable to obtain a specifc date when Jalil became minister in 2007, so it's hard to say whether the Bulgarians were released before or after).

At this point I'm not sure whether the Bulgarian government is just being hysterical with a tendency for hyperbole or if they're flat-out lying and if so what their motives are for doing so. I'm willing to give them the benefit of a doubt and will assume that the former is true. The line of reasoning would be something like: Rebel council contains former regime officials + the Libyan regime has tortured Bulgarians = Rebel council members are responsible for the tortures. Probably a logical fallacy.

Of course, one could say that an political institution which contains former officials of Gaddafi's regime is inherently flawed. That would be a legitimate position. It's actually one of the reasons why some members of Libya's opposition were unhappy with Jalil becoming chairman of the Transitional Council. But again, there's no evidence that former regime officials who now belong to the rebel leadership were directly tied to any human rights violations under Gadaffi. (In fact, Mustafa Abdul Jalil was praised by Western observers that he pressed for the release of political prisoners during his tenure as justice minister.)