Prepare for a new civil war in Libya


There are more and more fresh signs that Libya is heading towards another civil war. American Embassy staff have already been evacuated from Tripoli and there is a travel warning in place. On top of this the British Embassy are following the same example. In recent months there was a bomb explosion outside of the French Embassy.

The present strife seems to be the militias that had refused to be disarmed. They have been demanding that all Gadhafi era officials resign from their positions. Among those officials there are men who had almost nothing to do with the actual regime, but they had jobs relating to the oil industry etc. The mobs have been gathering in Tripoli and they have successfully shut down both the Justice and the Defense ministries.

If the mob is successful where those demands are concerned, then it is plausible that there will be a takeover by those associated with either/both Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists. At the present time neither group has a majority in the Libyan Parliament. Those in charge come from a more moderate background. (Yes I know this is contrary to what a lot of people believe, but Magarief is neither Muslim Brotherhood or Salafist, and the same goes with his Prime Minister).

The militias have been a constant and collective pain in the butt since the end of the civil war. There has been a lot of infighting with these people in the centre of the fights.

A word of caution here: Gadhafi armed those who were loyal to him. Although these people are not aligned to Gadhafi loyalists, there is always the possibility that the Gadhafi loyalists will seize the opportunity to strike as the present strife escalates. This would give the remaining Gadhafi children the opportunity to stage a comeback in the country…. and that would be very bad.

What I forsee is that there is big trouble ahead and that the strife in Bengahzi and Tripoli will end up causing another civil war.

Advertisements

6 responses to “Prepare for a new civil war in Libya

  1. jordan2222

    I continue to say we need to mind our own business. Laissez faire has long been my policy, which also helps define my own beliefs about government intervention in the affairs of other countries.

    Like

    • If there is a new civil war in Libya, then there should be no help forthcoming.

      As I have explained previously, the Libyans had been the good guys up until Gadhafi seized power. Libya is separated into 3 “states” and during the second world war two of those “states” helped the Allied Command to defeat the Italian Fascists and Nazi Germany. I think it should be sufficient to say “Rommel, Tobruk, and the Rats of Tobruk”. Libyans in Tripoli including Gadhafi family members remained loyal to Italy. The trade off for Libyan king Idris had been that he would help the British and they would help him against the Italian colonials. This took place and Libya gained its liberty. The second pay off for this debt of gratitude was the help given in the overthrow of Gadhafi.

      Right now the stakes have changed. What is taking place is what the original NTC feared – that Al Qaeda elements would take advantage of the situation and begin to infiltrate Libya. This is taking place right now and that is partially the reason for the deterioration in the conditions which makes Libya a very dangerous place to be right now.

      Any civil war will end up being something that is tribal and it will be based upon local loyalties to some extent. However, the presence of Al Qaeda is going to complicate matters to the point that we do not want to get involved.

      The Libyan situation was never the same as that of Syria, Egypt, Yemen, Tunisia etc. This is because when the war broke out there were people siding with each other where they would normally be “enemies”. The beginning of the story tells the real tale of how peoples minds were changed and they ended up supporting those who were constantly fighting Gadhafi. The initial conflict was more nationalist that some recognize.

      Syria on the other hand is Sunni vs Shia and this is brought home by the fact that Iran got involved and supports Assad. The last raid by Israel tells the story because there were casualties and those casualties were not Syrian – they were Iranian Republican Guard. In an odd way Israel helped their Sunni enemy with that raid.

      Assad belongs to the minority Alawite tribe. They are vicious individuals and that is how the Assad clan has maintained control for so long in Syria. At the same time Iran has been backing the Assad regime, and through Assad, Iran has been supporting Hezbollah. Syria has been the conduit for the missiles that are now owned by Hezbollah in Iran, thus it is in Israel’s interests that those weapons are destroyed.

      Even if it is proved that chemical weapons have been used, there is no real way of knowing whether they were deployed by Assad (the State) or by the rebels.

      What I do know is that in Libya, after the civil war was finished, the NTC fully co-operated in regard to any cache of chemical weapons. Assad will never co-operate and I have no idea what could happen within any rebel force.

      Syria is dangerous, for a variety of reasons, and another of those reasons is that Russia backs Syria. I have a very real fear that Russia could attempt to intervene in Syria and such intervention will not satisfy the rest of the world… leading us even closer to the outbreak of another world war.

      Like

    • jordan2222

      Clearly you know your stuff including history. Thanks for such a detailed lesson.

      I was once that way, too, but became disillusioned as we continued to involve ourselves in that part of the world.

      I trace our current issues to the time when we first set foot on the Arabian peninsula. I still believe an offshore presence worked fine. All we have done is create people who now hate us.

      Since I am “part Libertarian” and and devoted Originalist:

      http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2009/09/the-originalist-perspective

      (as Scalia “SAYS” he does) I am adamantly opposed to ANY unconstitutional war and also think we should avoid ALL armed conflicts unless approved by Congress and only then when the public supports it.

      It’s been going on since Viet Nam and we have not “won” one yet.

      I am a 66 year old disabled vet. I see veterans every week at our clinic and hospital. It is now rare to find any who support war.

      We have gotten ourselves into a never ending mess and it really is our own damn fault. I have come to believe that there are many so called “terrorists”VVV already here in the U.S.

      I do not have a sure fire solution but if we don’t change, we are going to see schools, banks, malls and other public places being bombed without warning.

      If you ever visit Veterans Today, you will see things from a military perspective but be mindful of the conspiracy theory folks over there.

      http://www.veteranstoday.com/

      You may notice a very strong dislike of Israel since many veterans still want revenge for the unproved attack on the USS Liberty by Israel.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

      I often wonder what would happen if Iran and Israel did actually come to blows and we got involved to support Israel.

      I am reminded of the officer’s oath which is different from that of enlisted soldiers.

      Officers DO NOT swear allegiance to the President – as a safeguard against a usurper commander-in-chief. They swear allegiance only to the Constitution

      “I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God.” (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)

      If you are an enlisted soldier, whose orders are you going to follow? 

      Sorry for getting carried away.

      I

      Like

  2. jordan2222

    Sorry but I meant

    still want revenge for the UNPROVOKED attack on the USS Liberty by Israel.

    Like

  3. Vietnam is rightfully the war that has many being disillusioned. It happened when I was growing up, a young teenager at the time. It ended around the time I was in my late teens at university. At no time did I ever participate in the demonstrations and the moratoriums of the period.

    When I was at school, I read a book, required reading called “Deliver us from Evil”. One of the girls at my school had a brother who was a Captain in the Army and I remember that he came to speak to us about what was taking place. However, back to the book. It was written by a priest who had been in Vietnam and it told about the horrors that were being imposed upon the population. It told about the torture of children that were caught praying. It was a book that was all about the evil that is the Viet Cong. I had no qualms in accepting the requirement to get rid of something like the Viet Cong… then along came Jane Fonda. Then we heard about the Napalm that was dropped, and about the My Lai massacre.

    My cousin was in Vietnam and he was not able to father children. I have always wondered why he could not have children…..

    I know that many call the involvement in Libya illegal but that is not quite true. The Vietnam War saw the introduction of legislation that limited the powers of a President to go to war without permission from the Congress. There was however, a window of opportunity when the engagement itself was short. That does not excuse the actions of Barack Obama over the situation that was increasingly obvious in Libya. He did in fact have sufficient time to take it to Congress and gain the necessary permission but he decided to usurp the power of Congress. The assistance given by NATO was not illegal. It was in fact sanctioned by the United Nations. I think that this is one point that those opposed to the action fail to accept….. there was a resolution in place that stated that NATO could take whatever action was required to stop Gadhafi killing his own people.

    When the French began the bombing of Gadhafi’s air fleet, and tanks, it was at a point where Gadhafi had been using his army and air force against the people of Benghazi. They were under seige and Gadhafi was killing them. (I happened to be one of the people who spotted that something was going on, when I was reading about Egypt and spotted a news item about Gadhafi returning “home” from a trip in Africa. The whole thing was very sudden. The next thing I read about was the start of a rebellion in Benghazi and yes I followed it from the beginning in the Februrary). Gadhafi had lined up mercenaries to kill the people of Benghazi, and the rest is history. The people of Benghazi were the ones seeking help. Nothing that NATO did was in fact illegal. If anything I would have said that Obama’s decision to draw back and for the US not to take a lead was a bad decision that helped to prolong the war. It seemed like he wanted to play behind the scenes and in my view that was less than healthy. On top of that Gadhafi was lying about the so called victims of bombing raids. He was killing his own people in Tripoli, Benghazi and a number of other towns, then he was using their bodies as though they had been killed in air raids. Yes, it really was that sick.

    I do think it was necessary to go into both Afghanistan and Iraq. I was opposed to the Iraq action until I saw the reaction of the people when the troops came. I also think that we should have gotten out a lot earlier. Once Baghdad was taken we should have been on the way out, but we stayed in order to train the people to take care of themselves. The war itself had ended within a very short time. We simply have no need to be involved. Australians have also been in Iraq until recently. Then there is Afghanistan and I have come to the same conclusion with regard to Iraq. Once the Taliban were defeated we should have departed and left it to the Afghan population to sort out their politics. Karazai is corrupt so why should we be propping up a man who remains our enemy even as he uses our troops in Afghanistan. He should be training his own forces. We should leave the Afghan people to sort it out for themselves. If they are dumb enough to elect the Taliban into power again, then let them suffer the consequences.

    Like

    • jordan2222

      I hear you loud and clear. Without picking apart your post, we are just going to have disagree about some of this. I stand by my last post.

      Again, you obviously keep up with all of this, and I no longer do, at least on your level.

      Like