[pjw] INFO: US plans new intervention in Libya (Interept 1/27)

Peace and Justice Works pjw at pjw.info
Sun Feb 7 15:18:34 EST 2016

There have been a number of articles over the last few weeks warning of a 
current US presence and planned military intervention in Libya.
For example:

Below is Glenn Greenwald's take on it, which of course points out that the 
2011 intervention led to the complete destabilization happening there now.

Guess we'd better dust off the old signs and get ready to march again.

The U.S. Intervention in Libya Was Such a Smashing Success That a Sequel
Is Coming
    [22]Glenn Greenwald   2016-01-27T11:50:14+00:00

    The immediate aftermath of the NATO bombing of Libya was a time of
    [23]high [24]gloating. Just as Iraq War advocates pointed to the
    capture and killing of Saddam Hussein as proof that their war was a
    success, Libya war advocates pointed to the capture and brutal killing
    of Muammar el-Qaddafi as proof of their vindication. War advocates such
    as [25]Anne-Marie Slaughter and [26]Nicholas Kristof were writing
    columns celebrating their prescience and mocking war opponents as
    discredited, and the New York Times published [27]a front-page article
    declaring: ÒU.S. Tactics in Libya May be a Model for Other Efforts.Ó It
    was widely expected that Hillary Clinton, one of the leading advocates
    for and architects of the bombing campaign, would be regarded as a
    Foreign Policy Visionary for the grand Libya success: ÒWe came, we saw,
    he died,Ó Clinton [28]sociopathically boasted about the [29]mob rape
    and murder of Qaddafi while guffawing on 60 Minutes.

    Since then, Libya Ñ so predictably Ñ has all but completely collapsed,
    spending years now drowning in instability, anarchy, fractured militia
    rule, sectarian conflict, and violent extremism. The execution of
    Saddam Hussein was no vindication of that war nor a sign of improved
    lives for Iraqis, and the same was true for the [30]mob killing of
    Qaddafi. As I [31]wrote the day after Qaddafi fled Tripoli and
    Democratic Party loyalists were prancing around in war
    victory dances: ÒIÕm genuinely astounded at the pervasive willingness
    to view what has happened in Libya as some sort of grand triumph even
    though virtually none of the information needed to make that assessment
    is known yet, including: how many civilians have died, how much more
    bloodshed will there be, what will be needed to stabilize that country,
    and, most of all, what type of regime will replace Qaddafi? É When
    foreign powers use military force to help remove a tyrannical regime
    that has ruled for decades, all sorts of chaos, violence, instability,
    and suffering Ñ along with a slew of unpredictable outcomes Ñ are

    But the much bigger question was when (not if, but when) the
    instability and extremism that predictably followed the NATO bombing
    would be used to justify a new U.S.-led war Ñ also exactly [32]as
    happened in Iraq. Back in 2012, I [33]asked the question this way:

      How much longer will it be before we hear that military intervention
      in Libya is (again) necessary, this time to control the anti-US
      extremists who are now armed and empowered by virtue of the first
      intervention? U.S. military interventions are most adept at ensuring
      that future U.S. military interventions will always be necessary.

    We now have our answer, [34]from the [35]New York Times:

      Worried about a growing threat from the Islamic State in Libya, the
      United States and its allies are increasing reconnaissance flights
      and intelligence collecting there and preparing for possible
      airstrikes and commando raids, senior American policy makers,
      commanders and intelligence officials said this week. É ÒItÕs fair
      to say that weÕre looking to take decisive military action against
      ISIL in conjunction with the political processÓ in Libya, [Joint
      Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Joseph] Dunford said. ÒThe
      president has made clear that we have the authority to use military

    Just as there was no al Qaeda or ISIS to attack in Iraq until the U.S.
    bombed its government, there was no ISIS in Libya until NATO bombed
    it. Now the U.S. is about to seize on the effects of its own bombing
    campaign in Libya to justify an entirely new bombing campaign in that
    same country. The New York Times editorial page, which [36]supported
    the original bombing of Libya, [37]yesterday labeled plans for the new
    bombing campaign Òdeeply troubling,Ó explaining: ÒA new military
    intervention in Libya would represent a significant progression of a
    war that could easily spread to other countries on the continent.Ó In
    particular, Òthis significant escalation is being planned without a
    meaningful debate in Congress about the merits and risks of a military
    campaign that is expected to include airstrikes and raids by elite
    American troopsÓ (the original Libya bombing not only took place
    without Congressional approval, but was ordered by Obama after
    Congress [38]rejected such authorization).

    This was supposed to be the supreme model of Humanitarian Intervention.
    It achieved vanishingly few humanitarian benefits, while causing
    massive humanitarian suffering, because Ñ [39]as usual Ñ the people who
    executed the ÒhumanitarianÓ war (and most who cheer-led for it) were
    interested only when the glories of bombing and killing were
    flourishing but cared little for actual humanitarianism (as evidenced
    by their almost [40]complete indifference to the aftermath of their
    bombing). As it turns out, one of the few benefits of the NATO bombing
    of Libya will redound to the permanent winners in the private-public
    axis that constitutes the machine of Endless Militarism: It provided a
    pretext for another new war.

23. http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2011/0915/Sarkozy-Cameron-visit-Libya-for-victory-lap-pep-talk
   24. http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Cost+of+%22Victory+Parade%22+Made+Public.-a0287517655
   25. http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/18cb7f14-ce3c-11e0-99ec-00144feabdc0,Authorised=false.html?siteedition=intl&_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F18cb7f14-ce3c-11e0-99ec-00144feabdc0.html%3Fsiteedition%3Dintl&_i_referer=&classification=conditional_standard&iab=barrier-app#axzz3IkzBJYTa
   26. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/01/opinion/kristof-from-libyans-thank-you-america.html
   27. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/29/world/africa/29diplo.html?pagewanted=all
   28. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/clinton-on-qaddafi-we-came-we-saw-he-died/
   29. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/globalpost-qaddafi-apparently-sodomized-after-capture/
   30. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/globalpost-qaddafi-apparently-sodomized-after-capture/
   31. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/story/2011-08-25/Was-Libya-a-victory-for-Obama-NATO/50137822/1
   32. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/10/obama-speech-authorise-air-strikes-against-isis-syria
   33. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/sep/24/cnn-journal-libya
   34. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/23/world/africa/us-and-allies-said-to-plan-military-action-on-isis-in-libya.html
   35. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/23/world/africa/us-and-allies-said-to-plan-military-action-on-isis-in-libya.html
   36. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/29/opinion/29tue1.html
   37. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/26/opinion/opening-a-new-front-against-isis-in-libya.html?_r=0
   38. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/house-rejects-authorizing-us-libya-threatens-cut-funding/story?id=13923365
   39. http://www.salon.com/2012/05/02/the_fraud_of_humanitarian_wars/
   40. https://theintercept.com/2015/02/16/hailed-model-successful-intervention-libya-proves-exact-opposite/

More information about the pjw-list mailing list