53
   

Tunesia, Egyt and now Yemen: a domino effect in the Middle East?

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 11:33 am
@JPB,
Always felt Obama lacked proper communication skills; the topics and timing are all missing from this president.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 11:38 am
There's a discussion now on Al Jazeera about Lash's very point. Is Obama's lack of response a demonstration of ineptitude or would a strong statement from Obama cause more problems than it would solve?

The speaker just said that he finds Obama silence disappointing and a demonstration of the US being bogged down in it's own problems. Then, just seconds later he said that the international community shouldn't be involved - that the Arab League and the African Union need to step up and get involved. This one speaker sounds conflicted within his own views.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 11:42 am
I don't often think much of our Canadian prime minister, but I thought his comment had the right tone (and wasn't too long).

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/02/21/libya-canada-react.html

Quote:
"We find the actions of the government firing upon its own citizens to be outrageous and unacceptable," Harper told reporters in Vancouver on Monday. "We call on the government to cease these actions immediately."
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 11:53 am
@georgeob1,
Fbaezer thinks you wrote a good post, as does Lash. Proof positive that it was full of drivel, full of your usual, things that would be better if they were aimed for the gutter or the toilet instead of these threads.

Let's look at some of your nonsense.

Quote:
Indeed even a very palpable threat of action didn't do anything to reduce the killings Saddam inflicted on the Iraqis.


He was your boy, Gob, bought and paid for, supplied with biological and chemical weapons by the USA. As bad as he was, the US has managed to slaughter more Iraqis than Saddam.

Quote:
Consider, for a moment the ghastly killings in Croatia and Bosnia following the breakup of the former Yugoslavia, and how long it took and how much effort was required to induce the European powers to do something about the ethnic cleansing going on in their own backyards.


As everyone knows full well by now that you are a liar of monstrous proportion, Gob. This will just add to the tally.

The US was fully responsible for the terrible situation that developed in Yugoslavia. Blaming Europe is only one of the terrible lies that regularly issue from the US government and media and scum like Gob.

Quote:
The depiction of the war in the international media maximized the impression of European Union powerlessness to settle a major war on its borders without America's intervention.


The US got involved in Yugoslavia, yet again, for the express purpose of extending its control over new oil resources. The US, yet again, with its massive Nazi like propaganda wing, led the world to believe that it went into that little foray for humanitarian purposes, to stop the genocide.

Quote:
The economic heat was being turned up on the tiny but strategic Balkan country, and the Bush administration was doing the turning. In 1992 Washington imposed a total economic embargo on Yugoslavia, freezing all trade and plunging the economy into chaos, with hyperinflation and 70 per cent unemployment as the result. The Western public, above all in the United States, was told by the establishment media that the problems were all a result of a corrupt Belgrade dictatorship. The American media chose rarely if ever to mention the provocative Washington actions, or the IMF policies which were driving events in the Balkans.

...

In November 1990, under pressure from the Bush administration, the U.S. Congress passed the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act. The new U. S. law provided that any part of Yugoslavia failing to declare independence from Yugoslavia within six months of the act would lose all U.S. financial support. The law demanded separate elections, supervised by the U.S. State Department, in each of the six Yugoslav republics. It also stipulated that any aid go directly to each republic, and not to the central Yugoslav government in Belgrade. In short, the Bush administration demanded the self-dissolution of the Yugoslav Federation. They were deliberately lighting the fuse to an explosive new series of Balkan wars.


The very definition of terrorism. The US used its considerable clout to forcibly dissolve a European nation. That is a war crime! That is terrorism on a monumental scale!

The US set up the situation knowing full well that there would be this reaction. The US engaged in the same genocidal actions that it, yet again, hypocritically blamed others for.

Quote:
The road to the Dayton Accords reveals this dynamic. The peace agreement was signed only after Croatia, supported by the U.S. and having its military forces trained by retired U.S. military officers, drove 200,000 Serbs from their homes in the Serb Krajina area of Croatia. This ethnic cleansing campaign, called Operation Storm, combined with a massive NATO bombardment of Bosnian Serb territory and a successful Croat-Muslim offensive that retook 20 percent of Bosnia from Serb forces, brought Serbia to the negotiating table.

Western officials justified this policy on the grounds that only ethnic cleansing by Serbs counts as ethnic cleansing. U.S. Ambassador to Zagreb, Peter Galbraith, said of Operation Storm that it did not constitute ethnic cleansing because "ethnic cleansing is the specialty of the Serbs."

Then-European Union mediator in the former Yugoslavia, Carl Bildt, made a revealing statement after Operation Storm:

If we accept that it is all right for Tudjman to cleanse Croatia of its Serbs, then how on earth can we object if Yeltsin cleanses Chechnya or if one day Milosevic sends his army to clean out the Albanians from Kosovo?


The US did in Yugoslavia what it has done numerous times around the world. It set in place policies that were aimed to turn one group against another. It did what it always does, it foments trouble where none exists so that it can ride in on the white horse and with the aid of a pliant media and, in this case, pliant NATO partners, pretend that it has to save the day.

Lash's "we're damned if we do and we're damned if we don't" is another of those oft repeated specious lies. I've often asked for examples of another specious lie, "Look at all the good the USA has done in the world" and none has been forthcoming.

This canard is simply repeated so often, without any regard to the fact situation that it's no wonder people actually think it's true.

The truth of the matter is that the USA doesn't do anything for altruistic purposes. If it did, it wouldn't be the stingiest country on the planet. This is particularly egregious considering its vast wealth.

===============

Quoted material from the following sources:

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Yugoslavia/Yugoslavia_ShockTherapy.html

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Yugoslavia/Bosnia_NewModelColonialism.html

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Bloody_Road_Empire.html












0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 12:00 pm
@ehBeth,
Obama could have used the same theme for a speech in a timely fashion.
JTT
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 12:02 pm
@ehBeth,
Quote:
Steven Harper: We find the actions of the government firing upon its own citizens to be outrageous and unacceptable. We call on the government to cease these actions immediately.

We don't, however, find the actions of the US regularly having its proxies or troops fire on citizens, rape, torture or murder the same, outrageous or unacceptable, ... or at least we don't say so, ... ummm, out loud that is.

In fact, we have joined them in doing so to the Afghan people. We did this because though we knew that such an invasion was illegal and immoral, we didn't want to piss the Americans off too much ... we didn't join them in Iraq or Vietnam, you see and, well, we thought that they might start to get a little testy. You know how they can be and all.
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 12:24 pm
The latest from the White House (while aboard Air Force One)

Q On Libya, can you tell us what is going on behind the scenes at the White House? And also, is there concern that unlike in Egypt, there is nothing that you can really do, there’s no real ties with Libya and there’s very little the administration can do in that situation?

MR. CARNEY: Well, first let me point you to the fact that on Friday, while we were on this plane, the President issued a statement condemning the violence in Libya, the use of violence against peaceful protesters in Libya as well as two other countries. Yesterday, the Secretary of State issued a very strongly worded statement condemning the violence and expressing our great alarm at the violence used against peaceful protesters. We offer our condolences to the families of the victims in Libya of this appalling violence. And the Secretary of State will speak again today at approximately 2:30 p.m. where she will address some of these issues.

Q Will the President speak about this today?

MR. CARNEY: I don’t anticipate that, but we’ll see.

Q Are there, do you think, measures that -- the Security Council is meeting today on Libya -- are there international measures that the U.S. can take with its partners to try and affect what’s going on inside Libya, or is it a question of lacking substantial leverage?

MR. CARNEY: There is activity at the United Nations Security Council today. We are participating in meetings. We look forward to working with the international community so that the international community speaks with one voice in condemning the violence. And we feel like when the international community speaks with one voice, it can be most effective, so we are obviously participating fully in that.

Q Is the White House having any conversations with other world leaders about -- the President himself having any conversations with world leaders about Libya?

MR. CARNEY: I have no announcements on presidential conversations right now.

Q Oil is at a two-year high. How closely is the President monitoring the situation in Libya?

MR. CARNEY: Well, as you know, when there is unrest in the world and specifically in that region, that can affect oil prices. We are closely monitoring that situation, but I would not speculate on where oil prices would go in the future.

Q Do you think the events of the last few days have shown perhaps that the attempts to kind of rehabilitate Qaddafi -- particularly the Europeans sort of took part in it the last administration as well -- were a mistake?

MR. CARNEY: What I’ll say, Steve, is that the future of Libya needs to be decided by the Libyan people. As is the case throughout the region, our policy is -- pertains in Libya or towards Libya as it did -- does to Egypt, to Bahrain and other countries, which is that we call very strongly for an end to the use of violence against peaceful protesters. We call for respect for the universal rights that these -- peoples of this region, as peoples all around the world, have: the right to peaceful assembly, to freedom of expression. And we recognize their legitimate aspirations.

We call on the governments of the region to listen to and respect the legitimate aspirations of their people and to reform accordingly.
whitehouse.gov
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 12:46 pm
@JPB,
Quote:
We call for respect for the universal rights that these -- peoples of this region, as peoples all around the world, have: the right to peaceful assembly, to freedom of expression. And we recognize their legitimate aspirations
Clinton said this as well, and from where I sit it is chicken ****.......we should be hearing from Omama that America recognizes the right to people to choose their government, but all we get is the right to gather and talk.

I half way wonder if he is not doing this because he does not want to lend credibility to the gathering calls to shrink and depower the government he leads....
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 01:09 pm
@JTT,
you missed the part where I said the length of his comment was enough



(also, Afghanistan has its own thread or three)
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 02:27 pm
Well, here is the Arab League stepping up.

6:37pm: The Arab League has suspended the participation of the Libyan delegation, Al Arabiya television is reporting.

If confirmed, this would be a massive blow to Gaddafi and signal a distancing of other states in the Arab world from his regime.

7:28pm: This remains unconfirmed also, but Sultan Al Qassemi
has tweeted about Al Hurra being told by eyewitnesses that two battleships are shelling Benghazi.

In case you're unfamiliar with it, Al Hurra is a US government-funded Arabic-language satellite TV channel, meaning "The Free One".

7:40pm: The safety and well being of Americans has to be our highest priority, Clinton said, in response to the first question.

"The [UN] Security Council is meeting today to assess the situation and determine whether there are steps the international community can take," she added.

"As we gain a greater understanding of what is happening, because communication has been very effectively shut down.... we will take appropriate steps in line with our policies, our values, our laws, but we are going to have to work in concert with the international community."

8:06pm: Libya's interior minister has announced his defection and urged the army to join the people and respond to their "legitimate demands" al-Jazeera has just reported
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 02:52 pm
@JPB,
JPB wrote:
• Qatar condemned the use of military aircraft and machine guns against unarmed protesters and called for an emergency meeting of the Arab League.

More. more. more.

Pile it on. I said global response, it never had to be the US. I'm glad to see steps like this.

Thanks for the update.

A
R
T
0 Replies
 
Irishk
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 03:01 pm
Meanwhile in Russia...

President Dmitry Medvedev is predicting decades of instability in the Arab world if protesters whom he called fanatics come to power. He states no such scenario will be permitted at home.

Sounds like he means business.

Quote:
Any attempts to repeat the unrest in Russia would be quashed, he said.

failures art
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 03:06 pm
@Irishk,
Wow. That was completely off my radar! I wonder what prompted this? Is the Russian Federation afraid that this will spread all the way to them?

Sure Medvedev said it, but Putin probably wrote it.

A
R
T
0 Replies
 
Ceili
 
  3  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 03:13 pm
Russia's worried about the Chechens.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 03:29 pm
@ehBeth,
You missed the fact that it was bullshit, the same kind of bullshit that is regularly dispensed and regularly swallowed by the very gullible.

Quote:
(also, Afghanistan has its own thread or three)


You've also missed the fact that all these events are inextricably linked.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 03:33 pm
@hawkeye10,
We have heard "gathering calls" many times before hawk for the government to shrink and depower and everytime they get to where the action is as a a result of their calls having gathered enough votes they go native and set about expanding and empowering themselves. They usually start by setting up a commission of one sort or another to investigate how shrinking and depowering what is now themselves can be accomplished and by the time it has 10,000 bureaucrats beavering away to solve this riddle it no longer dare solve it because the Commission would be no longer required and its staff all be transferred to the Decentraling Executive Liason Committee which would be charged with implementing the solution and capable of sprouting branch offices everywhere where there is more the three log cabins.

It's a bit the same with condemnations. At least Gaddafi can do them. And he's been holding together three or four potentially warring tribes one of which has a throttle on water, another one on oil and I don't know about the others, for forty odd years and pumping us a decent amount of our energy transfusions.

Not that I'm defending him. I'm just stating facts. There might have been a large number of deaths without him doing that, North African style deaths, and he might think there will be a large number of deaths in the future if he loses his grip.

I don't know. Nobody does. He might be the best judge though. He knows more about Libya than we can fit in our heads. And then some. If he has saved a large number of deaths by holding together the powerful centrifugal forces in Libya he cannot point to them as we can when we see these deaths.

It's a question of whether him believing such things is a madness or wisdom.

And I don't know. He looks mad. Sounds it too. And yet?

Only the future will decide.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 03:34 pm
@JPB,
From JPB's post:
Quote:
"As we gain a greater understanding of what is happening, because communication has been very effectively shut down.... we will take appropriate steps in line with our policies, our values, our laws, but we are going to have to work in concert with the international community."


This is the proper way to handle these types of problem.
Irishk
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 03:48 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Ironic that the 'international community' voted overwhelmingly to elect Libya to the United Nations Human Rights Council less than a year ago. By secret ballot, Libya received 155 votes. Only 97 were needed.

Libya has more than two years yet to serve.
roger
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 04:07 pm
@Irishk,
Wow. I think I knew that, but had clearly forgotten.
Irishk
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 04:09 pm
@roger,
It was in the news because many, many NGOs were opposed and their protest letters were being published in the media.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 05:41:43