This blog explores the contemporary political and cultural trends from a distinct perspective
OBAMA IS TREADING ON DANGEROUS WATERS
Published on April 8, 2011 By Bahu Virupaksha In Current Events

Libya was  the last major territory to be seized by the Roman empire and the first to escape from its clutches along with Parthia. The Libyans faught long and hard against the Italians when they conquered the desert land in the 1930's. The fact is that Col Qaddaffi who was recently rehabilitated in the affections of Western powers after spending more than 30 years as an international paraiah is not a military and political pushover. In spite of the Lokerbee bombing he was able to get the main conspirator freed from a Scottish prison during the Labour regime because of the vast oil revenues that he holds.

The USA together with France has imposed a no-fly zone over Libya. UInder the pretext of enforcing a no-fly zone NATO jets are bombing Libyan government and civilian positions. A no-fly zone would aanly mean that if case the Libyan airforce attempts to land in rebel held areas, then NATO can enforce compliance of the UN resolution 1973. The Obama Administration and Sarkozy's France have chosen to interpret this resolution as a mandate to intervene and impose regime change in Libya: regime change is not implied in the UN resolution. On the first day of baobing US rained 110 Tomahawk missiles on Libya and UIS B-52 bombers dropped 45 1000 kilo bombs in the first day itself. Was such a massive attack justified? Is this not a savage and brutal act of war against unarmed civilians? Already in Iraq and Afghanistan, US intervention has caused untold suffering and there is no count of the casulities. What makes the matter even worse is that the war heads carried depleted uranium warheads making these attacks a nuclear attack on civilian target violating all lawa of civilised warfare.

The US, UK and France are keen to see the oil rich region around Bengazi is brought undetr direct rebel control. Like Chablis in Iraq, the US has propped up a quisling called Khalifa Heftir,a "CIA asset" of many years. It seems that the USA will not learn a lesson from its own recent history. The town of Sirte, the tribal area from which Col Qaddaffi come has borne the brunt of the bombing and there is just no military or political justification for this. The ragtag rebel troops are being finnced by the Saudis and the brutal Saudi regime is being hailed as an exemplar of democracy. Even the US Admiral James Stavridis has admiotted in Congress that the rebels are being infiltrated by Al Qaeda elements. It appears that the US policy is to strengthen the forces that are bent on destablaising the region. Though the Libyan Government assets of nearly 45 billion US $ have been frozen by the Western Governments, the so-called "interim transitional national council" has been permitted to acess these funds which are being used to fiance the NATO bombing of Libya. So we have Libyan money being used to kill Libyans in their own land.

The po;icy of Obama is bound to fail. USA cannot afford another long tern engagement in the deserts of Libya and the longer the war and rsistance continues the easier it would be for Col Qaddaffi to cling on to power.


Comments (Page 2)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Apr 20, 2011

Bahu Virupaksha
Lancet and Nature are generally regarded with great respect.

No they are not.  You need to get out and read more.  Nature has been proven to be nothing but a PR rag, and lancet is about as accurate as a broken clock.

Bahu Virupaksha
There are nemerous instances--mahamoudiya and again the case of the helicopter firing in Baghdad--both seem to me to be dark deeds.

I take it you mean "numerous", and I know you can find some.  Now find the other hundred grand you allege.

Bahu Virupaksha
And Abu Gharaib need not be brought out as even the US acknowledges that the whole thing wasd a mess.

Good - because that was not about death - but humiliation.  BIG difference.  Or is it ever time you are humiliated you die?  You are a whacked one.

Bahu Virupaksha
In Iraq the USA is seem as a hated occupying armey as in Afghanistan.

Citations (again).  And please form accurate sources, not PR rags and broken clock journals!  But save yourself the time.  Your statement is patently false.  I have no doubt that some do hate us (Saddams cronies are still there as well as Al Qaeda), but your blanket statement is not only wrong, but stupid.

Bahu Virupaksha
Why not say bluntly that the two unpopular presidents are using Libya to boost their electoral chjamces. It is early days as far as Obama is concerned, but that Sarkozy fellow will lose and he will be soundly defeated.

Why not?  Why?  You are wrong again.  Obama is a blundering fool in this one, and it is not "2 presidents", but a president and PM.  Had Bush made the decision to go in, we would be in, and there would only be guerrilla fighting left.  But of course all of the deaths then would be our fault, but there would be a lot fewer of them.  Had Bush decided on a no fly, there would be a no fly, but not a "no veiled" alliance with the rebels (who will spit on Sarkozy, Brown and Obama when it is done anyway).

instead, we have a pussy whipped president (by 3 of them no less) who did not know what to decide, when to decide it, and when it was decided, what to do.  So no one knows what the mission is, what the goal is, or what the exit strategy could possibly be.  France and GB intend staying as long as they are needed to pump the oil out.  The US cannot even claim that much vision.

on Apr 21, 2011

Had Bush made the decision to go in, we would be in, and there would only be guerrilla fighting left. But of course all of the deaths then would be our fault, but there would be a lot fewer of them. Had Bush decided on a no fly, there would be a no fly, but not a "no veiled" alliance with the rebels (who will spit on Sarkozy, Brown and Obama when it is done anyway).
I have no doubt that some do hate us (Saddams cronies are still there as well as Al Qaeda), but your blanket statement is not only wrong, but stupid.
Now find the other hundred grand you allege.
No they are not. You need to get out and read more. Nature has been proven to be nothing but a PR rag, and lancet is about as accurate as a broken clock.

Just rhetoric.

The US occupation and actions in Iraq go against the very grain of peaceful international behavior.  Now thwe same thing in Libya. The USA decides along with Western countries that the Col has to go and starts bombing. The thin legitimacy provided by the Arab League has worn thin.

You maust be Neverland to think that USA is respected and popular anywhere in the Asian world.

Are you saying that Bush would have done things differently.

on Apr 21, 2011

Bahu Virupaksha
Just rhetoric.

Yes yours are.

Bahu Virupaksha
The US occupation and actions in Iraq go against the very grain of peaceful international behavior

No, that is what nations do when provoked.  2004 was not a new war, it was just a continuation of the 91 war that was never declared over.  If you remember (you probably do not), Iraq invaded Kuwait and that went against the grain as you call it.  That is history not your empty rhetoric.

Bahu Virupaksha
Now thwe same thing in Libya.

not even close.  I am sure the USA is responsible for the 2004 Tsunami in Indonesia, the Earthquake in Japan this year, and the crucifixion of Christ in your mind.  But that is a sad mind indeed since reality has no place in your world.

Bahu Virupaksha
The thin legitimacy provided by the Arab League has worn thin.

Tell that to Brown and Sarkozy.

Bahu Virupaksha
You maust be Neverland to think that USA is respected and popular anywhere in the Asian world.

Show me where I ever said they were?  Again your delusional self is trying to attribute statements to me that I have not made in order to bolster your illusions of self importance.  But I will caution you about your use of Absolutes.  You wil always be wrong when you use them (even if your idea may have merit - which is irrelevant).

 

And yes. I am saying that Bush would have done things differently.  Love him or hate him, one thing Bush was not was indecisive.  The opposite is true of Obama.

on Apr 23, 2011

Nitro ... is it really possible that you can be this naive? I cannot remember the last time our Government came a calling and asked me what I thought of foreign policy. And since we live in the freest most righteous nation this earth has ever produced(?), I do not think many Iraqis were quarried for their opinions either… nuff said my arse.

on Apr 23, 2011

Doc, why all the names? I am sure in your state controlled mindset, you must find it difficult to believe the Government or the MSM would lie and misrepresent things ... but it is a real fact, sorry. From past reading, you are want to use derogative terms like "delusional self” among many others, whenever you are incapable of sustaining your arguments, a shame that.

JU for some reason seems to attract people who are incapable of actually rebutting anything, without picking articles apart … key-word by key-word and phrase by phrase.  My recent past ‘religious experiences’ has taught me that there are many people whose main requirement for solidarity is that you agree with them. Democracy at its best I assume?

Numbers can actually be discussed civilly, but slanders and libels cannot. But the problem with numbers is a loss of context for which the numbers stand. You make some meaningful distinction between 500,000 civilian casualties and 200,000 because you have already accepted and then disregarded the fact that there were 100’s of thousands of needless killings … just so you can argue numbers and demand ‘citations’.  

One last thing here Doc. How favorably do you think Americans would respond when queried on their own Governments stupendous work over the last 10 years or so, domestically or internationally? You need to learn to make a distinction between the people and the government of a country … just as you have to here.

Bahu Virupaksha, my advice is to go on to another article as nothing reasonable can be expected here now. You will just continue to argue about anything and probably everything except … AMERICAN IMPERIALISM.

on Apr 24, 2011

Bahu Virupaksha, my advice is to go on to another article as nothing reasonable can be expected here now. You will just continue to argue about anything and probably everything except … AMERICAN IMPERIALISM.

I received the same response when I carried out a wide ranging discussion on the iRaq war and if you go back to my posts you will see that I was right each and every instance. Once again I beleive that USA will regrest its decision to wage war in Libya. Only oil makes the Americans interested and by propping quislings USA is not helping its own interests. Anyway there are still reasonable and courageous people like you and that is certainly encouraging.

on Apr 24, 2011

Bahu Virupaksha - I could not agree more. I was not questioning your facts ... I was just saying that this forum is not likely to visit you with much reason or logic ... you are wasting your time with most of these folks. The prevailing winds at JU seem to be a deep rooted desire to shred anyone they perceive as supercilious. In this case, that includes anyone with an opposing point of view. The difference between the
truth and the capacity for humans to allow themselves to become the brainwashed pawns in a game they will not even acknowledge exists, is unbelievable to say the least.

I am interested in fighting the injustice visited first of all on the American people (MY AMERICA) and not very secondly, the peoples of the world who have died in the millions just because they were statistics, pawns in the bigger scheme of things. The buzz word for the past 75 years has been ‘the communists’ are coming to take you away, haha. But the usefulness of that ploy was extinguished with the end to the cold war (nothing but an economic battle I assure you) … and now, they are our ‘best friends’. Isn’t it amazing how the loyalties of the U.S. Government shift like the sands in the wind?

A new buzzword was necessary … so low and behold … TERRORISM came into the picture to promote more fear for continued exploitation of the World … and I am talking about people here. Doc seems to be under the impression that the war in Iraq was nothing more than a continuation of Bush’s Pappy’s failure, poppycock. I have asked many times how we got from 9/11 to Iraq in less than a year and a half … but have had no serious takers. There will never be.

Now, we have another word and it supersedes all the rest of them … NATIONAL SECURITY! If there is a war on terror … where is it? Surely the most hated Nation on this planet … you know the one with open borders … yea, that one, should be facing the wrath of Allah by now …
somewhere? Where is it? I remember reading of several groups of want-a-bees who were all supplied by our own government (remember-no one was actually in danger). We are still talking about a Mosque, how silly is that?

Due to the nature of sheeple, we have given our ‘benign’ USA Government the power to take anyone anywhere in the world for whatever reasons they deems necessary, rightly or wrongly … which side of the equation do you think our government is on?  Here and around the world, all human rights are forfeit at some bureaucrat’s whim … as long as the term “NATIONAL SECURITY” is used. As altruistic as many are want to be, we have done absolutely nothing, since 9/11 to fight this fictitious foreign threat besides hamstring the American people.

on Apr 25, 2011

BoobzTwo
Doc, why all the names? I am sure in your state controlled mindset, you must find it difficult to believe the Government or the MSM would lie and misrepresent things ... but it is a real fact, sorry. From past reading, you are want to use derogative terms like "delusional self” among many others, whenever you are incapable of sustaining your arguments, a shame that.

I love how you read my mind.  Tell me - what am I thinking now?  If the answer is not correct, then stop putting words into my mouth or attributing ideas to me.  Neither are correct.  My arguments are sustained, but I suffer fools badly.  To merely revert to "I said so" in a debate gets me to start trying to figure out the defect that caused the other to forgo intelligent discourse and resort to the "oh yea? sos yours" mentality that bahu has done.

So if you want to create a strawman of government and MSM beliefs, you are free to do so, but unless you are jeanne Dixon, do not associate them to me.

BoobzTwo
JU for some reason seems to attract people who are incapable of actually rebutting anything, without picking articles apart … key-word by key-word and phrase by phrase. My recent past ‘religious experiences’ has taught me that there are many people whose main requirement for solidarity is that you agree with them. Democracy at its best I assume?

If you want to write a self portrait, fine.  But if you read the comments, while I do not have to "pick apart" the article point by point (since I do agree with some), I have chosen the points to pick apart.  Care to rebut them?  or make more outrageous claims about psychic powers or casualties?

BoobzTwo
Numbers can actually be discussed civilly, but slanders and libels cannot. But the problem with numbers is a loss of context for which the numbers stand. You make some meaningful distinction between 500,000 civilian casualties and 200,000 because you have already accepted and then disregarded the fact that there were 100’s of thousands of needless killings … just so you can argue numbers and demand ‘citations’.

Words mean things.  Your claims are akin are worthless without proper citations and are meant to only incite and shock when there is nothing left of your arguments.  If you want to discuss rationally, do not start throwing nonsensical numbers around as it does not leave a basis for a rational discussion.  When pointed out that your numbers are inflammatory, you then revert to chastisement?  And that is rational how?  Back up your numbers and stop lecturing of your own sins.

BoobzTwo
One last thing here Doc. How favorably do you think Americans would respond when queried on their own Governments stupendous work over the last 10 years or so, domestically or internationally? You need to learn to make a distinction between the people and the government of a country … just as you have to here.

Changing the subject also does not behoove an intelligent discourse.  As I made no statements (other than rebuttals) concerning the who or what.

BoobzTwo
AMERICAN IMPERIALISM.

And so again you cast aspersion without facts, basis in facts, or merit.  And then simply change the subject to play the victim.  Sorry, I asked you long ago to back up this claim.  You never did.  Even when given an out by Leauki, you failed to grasp it, and instead reverted to victimhood.

on Apr 25, 2011

Bahu Virupaksha
I received the same response when I carried out a wide ranging discussion on the iRaq war and if you go back to my posts you will see that I was right each and every instance.

And Boobz chastised me for delusions?  Well at least I got a good laugh for a Monday morning.  bahu, some of what you write has basis in facts, and some is pure fantasy.  That which is based in reality may or may not come true (you re no Nostradamus), but you are hardly infallible, and therefore even getting some right does not make you right in "each and every instance".

BoobzTwo
Bahu Virupaksha - I could not agree more. I was not questioning your facts ..

I would.  I question all claims of outlandish numbers.  Yours and Bahu's seem to be purely mythical as you have made sure the US - or someone - has killed the population of the civilized world many times over.  To accept blindly the "facts" of another is not critical thinking - it is a religion.  And here I thought you were atheistic.  Perhaps you just traded in The God for another.

You come here infrequently and have yet to respond to even a significant body of political postings, yet you sit there and again make claims with no basis in facts or reality.  I am glad you picked up on my term (not slander or name calling - a descriptive term recognized by even the AMA) of delusional.  For you seem to now have elevated yourself above mortal man, not needing to read the body of evidence before passing judgement. In other words, you are delusional to think you know it all.

And guess what?  As this is blogdom, you are free to do so.  But do not expect to be taken seriously.

on Apr 26, 2011

So if you want to create a strawman of government and MSM beliefs, you are free to do so, but unless you are jeanne Dixon, do not associate them to me.

I think there is a lot ofmerit in the argument that US interventions in various parts of the world have brought in disasters. I sdo not think iMperialism has anything to do with it except the Anglo_Saxon drive for complete cdomination over the Middle East and oil. If a no fly zone can be imposed on Libya why not on the Gaza Strip where daily air raisds and killings are taking place. I suppose such areumentrs are "self delusional".

on Apr 26, 2011

Yours and Bahu's seem to be purely mythical as you have made sure the US - or someone - has killed the population of the civilized world many times over.

In fact the numbers killed in Iraq are staggering and everyday in Afghanistan and Pakistan the drone attacks are stacking up bodies. Let an International War Crime Tribunal do the Math and see what the US record in Iraq is.

on Apr 26, 2011

Bahu Virupaksha
If a no fly zone can be imposed on Libya why not on the Gaza Strip where daily air raisds and killings are taking place.

Hard to shoot down a rocket, now is it not?  Or are you of the delusion they are just like planes?

Bahu Virupaksha
In fact the numbers killed in Iraq are staggering and everyday in Afghanistan and Pakistan the drone attacks are stacking up bodies. Let an International War Crime Tribunal do the Math and see what the US record in Iraq is.

if one death is staggering, then yes the numbers are staggering.  And when you say "bodies piling up", yes again they are by the dozens.  however most of those are caused by the insurgents (I guess you blame the US for the Mosque and IED bombings - typical).

on Apr 26, 2011

DOC’s America … where people are willfully ignorant and revel in being lied to … amazing. Imperialism … let’s try again. My generic dictionary allows me (I know you do not) much leeway here and some of the choices I like are Expansionism, Interventionism, Empire-building, Colonization and Domination … all forms of Imperialism, go figure. If you cannot figure it out from here … yea right huh. You are so easy Doc!

You never seem to get it right … I’ll bet you are cute when you are mad, hehehe. This is why you cannot be reasoned with:

Bahu said “The US occupation and actions in Iraq go against the very grain of peaceful international behavior” … and your response was “No, that is what nations do when provoked”. Can you really be that brainwashed after 8 years? Oh that’s right; you believe this was just a continuation of Desert Storm to finish what Bush1 started … so that would be 20 years for you to have reconsidered.

If you really believe Iraq provoked their own demise, I feel sorry for you … and if you do not, then you need look no further to relieve your silly ‘American Imperialism’ trauma.

I said you have a state controlled mindset (obvious from this article alone) … you say “you love how I read your mind … what are you thinking now” … how quaint.

You ask me if I want to rebut … I am rebutting Doc, dah … but your ignorance and vulgarity bespeaks of a fight, not a discussion, which is how you repeatedly change the subject … unless of course they meet your standards.

You have often made use of the term “Words mean things” … and I have told you as often “they mean many things” and seemingly you just want to be nasty and confrontational, shame on you.

And then you show your frivolity further by telling me “Changing the subject also does not behoove an intelligent discourse” … hehehe, got to Love this stuff. All I did was ask a question … teehee.

The article was about “LIBYA; A NEW WAR IN THE DESERT” and you rant about numbers, demanding “citations” “And please form accurate sources (yours)” and whatever else you feel like demanding … well you know where I think you should shove your demands.

It is really quite easy to be civil: I say “500,000” and you say “That seems too high; I think it is more like 100,000”. I say yea, I was on the high side, but the point is there are too many civilian casualties for anyone to be comfortable with and you say yea, but they were just radical terrorists and they provoked us … and all is well. Then we could go onto your next bit of double-talking nonsense.

Better start reading between the lines Doc or get a life..

on Apr 27, 2011

if one death is staggering, then yes the numbers are staggering. And when you say "bodies piling up", yes again they are by the dozens. however most of those are caused by the insurgents (I guess you blame the US for the Mosque and IED bombings - typical).
said you have a state controlled mindset (obvious from this article alone) … you say “you love how I read your mind … what are you thinking now” … how quaint
Bahu said “The US occupation and actions in Iraq go against the very grain of peaceful international behavior” … and your response was “No, that is what nations do when provoked”. Can you really be that brainwashed after 8 years? Oh that’s right; you believe this was just a continuation of Desert Storm to finish what Bush1 started … so that would be 20 years for you to have reconsidered.

You put in the way that I just cannot because as an Asian I do hedge in using effective and direct language. I fully agree with you and once again thanks for being so honest.

I have always believes that as the poet of Avon once said there is none so visually challenges as one who refuses to see. The facts are there but somehow ideology comes in the way.

Iraq began to unravel only fter the US led invasion and USA has encouraged a revanchist Shia ideology and identity based politics which has only helped Syria to extend its influence in the region.

3 Pages1 2 3