Sarkozy, Gates and Libya


I have been very critical of the Gadhafi regime and it is for a good reason. I certainly do believe that it is not appropriate for any dictator or leader to kill his or her own people. My attitude towards Libya is the same attitude that I have relating to other countries where there has been suppression of the population in such a violent manner. Taking a walk back in time, to 1956 the Russians invaded Poland. This was the year in which the Olympic Games were held in my home city of Melbourne, Australia. As a result of the invasion of Poland the water polo matches got a bit bloody. I have no memory of those games, but my parents did remember and from time to time I hear it mentioned on the radio or on the TV (but it is rare these days). A few years later Russia invaded Czechoslovakia, and yes I can barely remember hearing about that invasion on the radio. In later years it was things like Tianemen Square where students were mowed down. However, these situations in the past were nothing compared to the suppression in Iran in 2009, followed by the bloody events this year in Egpyt (few actually died), Yemen, Tunisia, Libya, Syria and Bahrain.

As I have pointed out on numerous occasions, the situation in Libya is different from the situation in the other M.E. countries. This is because the people in Benghazi, when they overcame the military, quickly formed themselves into an alternative opposition to Gadhafi. On top of that they had stated that they were pro-Western, and they asked for the implementation of the no-fly zone. No such requests had been made in any of the other M.E. countries. There are other differences, but the only way to understand Libya is to do the historical research. Moammar Gadhafi has never been a friend of the West, and I might add that he had always been a terrorist. He has been a sponsor of terrorism for a very long time. He had chemical weapons and he was supposed to dispose of these weapons but he had not completed that task.  Whilst Bush was the President he had been cowered but Østupid gave him renewed vigor for his previous activities. He was not afraid to go ahead and attempt to suppress his people.  Once Gadhafi is gone, then we will have to wait and see what happens next in Libya, and we will just have to hope that AQ does not attempt to fill any void.

That being said, I spotted a news article on the Reuters site that refers to comments made by the French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, and what he has stated supports what I have been saying with regards to who is providing the major role in Libya. It is not the USA, which is fulfilling a support role. Sarkozy actually backhands Gates over his rather snide comments towards the European members of NATO. This is the main thrust of those comments:

French President Nicolas Sarkozy assailed outgoing U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates for remarks this month criticizing EU nations for lacking military muscle.

“It was particularly inappropriate for Mr. Gates to say that, and what is more, completely false, given what is going in Libya,” Sarkozy told reporters at an EU summit in Brussels.

“There are certainly other moments in history when he could have said that, but not when Europeans have courageously taken the Libyan issue in hand, and when France and Britain, with their allies, for the most part, are doing the work.

In a June 10 valedictory speech, Gates said the Libyan campaign had exposed limitations, with an air operations center designed to handle more than 300 sorties a day struggling to launch about 150.

“I think his retirement may have led him to not examine the situation in Libya very closely because, whatever people want to say, I don’t have the impression that the Americans are doing the bulk of the work in Libya,” Sarkozy said.

The writing really does appear to be on the wall for Gadhafi, and something that I have noticed about this report, and others that have been similar, is that there has been a little bit of a switch in the “talk”. By this I mean that there is more talk of a Gadhafi exit in the possible near future. The defections by the military and others has continued. According to this same Reuters report another 19 members of the military were on a boat that arrived in Tunisia. This is on top of the 150 who defected recently. These defections are having an impact on the Libyan regime:

In the latest of a string of defections, 19 police and army officers were among a group of Libyan refugees who arrived in Tunisia by boat on Thursday, Tunisian news agency TAP reported.

Gaddafi allies have denounced such defections.

“Anyone who defects or refuses to take up arms is an apostate … and this applies to all Libyans,” preacher Mohamed al-Matri said in a live broadcast of the Friday sermon from Cordoba mosque in the town of Sirte.

It is quite obvious that the imam in Sirte is a regime goon, probably because he is a part of the Gadhafi tribe (Sirte is Gadhafi’s home town, so one would expect this kind of statement coming from the imam). However to call these people apostates because they refuse to kill their own actually goes against their Koran, or at least that is what a majority of Muslims will tell us.

Advertisements

One response to “Sarkozy, Gates and Libya

  1. Hurriyya Freedom

    This was really good, I dont like Gaddafi either, I believe he is a terrorist as well however some people believe he portrayed wrong I reply: “The media cant portray a killer wrongly, he’s either evil or hes not” but still its an endless debate!
    I really like this article and the link between Poland, Russia, Czechoslovakia- to how you compared it to Libya and Guddafi’s rule.

    Like