53
   

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

 
 
georgeob1
 
  2  
Reply Sat 26 Feb, 2011 05:29 pm
@spendius,
I guess I have lost track of the various sub threads here.

It appears to me that some who argued vociferously about the illegality of our interventions in the affairs of another sovereign country (Iraq) with a vicious dictator who too was killing his people and had been experimenting with mass destruction weapons, are arguing now about the moral imperative that we do something about the potential for chaos in Libya. It was a difficult and sometimes painful process for me to finally come to the conclusion that our interventions in Iraq (both of them, starting with the Gulf War) were serious strategic errors, costing us a great deal, getting us little benefit, and providing fodder for an increasingly hostile world. To the extent that is true the underlying principles certainly also apply in Libya.

I now believe we should let Libyans slaughter themselves as much as they like, and that the Europeans who were so angry with us about our refusal to accept the jurisdiction of the International Court should be given full reign to dicover how effective their favored cautious (limp) remedies might be to deal with situations like this one. (My strong impression is the bluster of the European powers - in the rare situations in which it occurs - is something they do only in the shadow of presumed stronger action by the United States. I believe it would be therapudic for them to instead be left to fend for themselves on these issues.)

All this might lead to some temporary dislocations in the petroleum supply, but I am aware that the dictators selling the stuff, fron Gadaffi (or whoever may succeed him, to the Saudis and even the esteemed Hugo Chavez, need to sell us the stuff even more than we need to buy it. Besides we have lots of developable reserves here and it might motivate our idiot government to deal seriously with that issue.

I suspect this won't satisfy the crypto authoritarians and America haters of this world like Msolga, but also recognizethat satisfying such creatures is a pointless chore. They should instead be left to stew in their own vile juices. They will fault whatever we do and their views are therefore not worth considering.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Sat 26 Feb, 2011 05:39 pm
@georgeob1,
I've always maintained that the neighboring countries had more at stake than the US in the Middle East, but especially Europe who also depend on ME oil. Talk is cheap; we've contributed our soldiers and treasures too often for crisis that isn't only our problem, and in a world where we are criticized often.

See if they put up or shut up.
georgeob1
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 26 Feb, 2011 05:42 pm
@cicerone imposter,
They are likely to do neither.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Sat 26 Feb, 2011 06:22 pm
@georgeob1,
But George- your saying that the interventions you refer to got you "little benefit" is an assertion and then the idea that they were "serious strategic errors", being based upon the assertion, is of a similar value to the assertion. With an assertion you are proving your own point. Who exactly is "us"? Not Haliburton eh? And the recipients of its dividends?

I think that the Libyans might well slaughter each other as much as they like no matter what you believe. Or escape to Italy and other places. Italy is nearest.

Quote:
Besides we have lots of developable reserves here and it might motivate our idiot government to deal seriously with that issue.


Yeah. Drill, drill. drill like Mrs Palin says.

I think a principled stand on not satisfying Ms Olga is the route to celibacy and she is addressing blokes who are young enough to be not ready for that "just yet".
georgeob1
 
  0  
Reply Sat 26 Feb, 2011 07:20 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

But George- your saying that the interventions you refer to got you "little benefit" is an assertion and then the idea that they were "serious strategic errors", being based upon the assertion, is of a similar value to the assertion. With an assertion you are proving your own point. Who exactly is "us"? Not Haliburton eh? And the recipients of its dividends?


That it got us little direct benefit and fed the general animosity is an illustration of some of the reasons the interventions were strategic errors. Us in my lexicon is the U.S.a. if which Haliburton is but a very small part. I'll agree though that had we not intervened the French would be developing most of Saddam's oil fields, particularly those in the north - they after all were the promised spoils due to them in the 1914 Sikes Picot agreement with the UK.

I don't think Msolga is at all an inducement of the sort you infer. Quite the opposite.

Yeah, 'drill, drill. drill - something like the Brits, Dutch & Norwegians in the North Sea.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Feb, 2011 09:59 pm
@georgeob1,
Just as there is no accounting for taste, so too there is simply no accounting for ignorance.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Feb, 2011 10:01 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
we've contributed our soldiers and treasures too often for crisis that isn't only our problem,


You've contributed your tax dollars so that a tiny portion of the US can enrich themselves by plundering the wealth of other countries, CI.

I remember hearing a US professor tell of his research that shows that the middle class just keeps lining up, time after time, so that they can get shafted by the upper class.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Feb, 2011 10:06 pm
@JTT,
That may be so, but what I contributed in taxes is a small price we paid for having had the opportunity to attend school and find jobs in this country.

Most of the complaints I have is not for "us," because we have been blessed with good family, good jobs, and good friends. I've been retired since 1998, and have traveled to over 161 countries during my adult years. If you're interested, you can visit my travelogues at travelpod.com. Search for me as c.i.222.
0 Replies
 
Irishk
 
  3  
Reply Sat 26 Feb, 2011 11:12 pm
HEROIC OIL COMPANIES OFFER TO FLY LIBYAN OIL TO SAFETY

TRIPOLI (SatireWire.com) – As chaos mounts in Libya, concerned petroleum firms across the globe have made a courageous pledge to fly all of Libya’s oil to safety.
http://www.satirewire.com/content1/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/oil-passengers.jpg
Oil barrels await their plane ride to safety.

“We have watched the events in Libya unfold in horror, and we cannot stand idly by and allow billions of innocent barrels to be in harm’s way,” said CEO James Mulva of ConocoPhillips, one of 10 firms to send planes and ships to rescue oil from Libyan leader Muamar Gaddafi.

Energy companies said they were particularly alarmed after rumors spread that Gaddafi plans to destroy oil fields, much as Iraq’s Saddam Hussein did during the Gulf War. Executives said they were shocked and saddened the admittedly ruthless dictator would stoop so low.

“Gaddafi used to be someone you could count on,” said BP spokesman Keith Hart. “Yes, he was behind the Pan Am 103 bombing, which killed 280, and the French airplane downing that killed 170, and the Berlin disco bombing that killed and wounded 200, and he funded the Irish Republican Army, which killed thousands. But he always treated oil with dignity.”

Libya produces 1.6 million barrels of oil a day, or roughly 2 percent of the world’s output. Gas and oil prices have surged as the continued violence threatens to interrupt operations. This makes any rescue attempt dangerous, but the risk is worth the effort, said Hess CEO John B. Hess.

“Two percent may seem small, but put it in perspective,” Hess said. “If 2 percent of the world’s population were in danger, we would be talking about 120 million people.

“That would be a frightening number,” he added. “If people were as valuable as oil.”

According to energy firm officials, millions of barrels of oil are stranded in Libya, many cowering in fear as they await liberation from the widening crisis. Billions more are laying low, untapped and underground, hoping for a chance to escape to Europe and the West.

In Spain, energy company Respol says it has been scrambling to get information on its oil’s whereabouts.

“We have not seen or been in contact with any of our oil for the past two days and we are very concerned for its welfare,” said company spokesman Xavi Torres. “The situation is chaotic, but we will do everything we can to free the oil from this barbarous dictator. Unless he remains in power, in which case please replace ‘barbarous dictator’ with ‘valued ally.’”

Italian firm ENI, meanwhile, has set up a toll-free number for anyone who has seen its oil. German company Wintershall has posted flyers across the country with pictures of its missing product. “Have you seen this barrel?” the caption reads.

In anticipation of rescue, thousands of barrels of oil have packed into Tripoli’s airport, competing for space with foreign nationals who also hope to escape the widening crisis. The fight for seat space has proven volatile as passengers protested, with many chanting “People first, oil second!” Repeated attempts by oil company officials to correct their math were rebuffed.

“I have a first-class ticket out and I want to sit next to my husband, not a barrel of crude oil,” said British national Helen Gerrard, hoping to make it back to her home outside London.

Marathon Oil spokesman Lee Heardly, however, promised passengers this would not happen. “Only refined oil will be in first class,” Heardly said. “Crude oil will fly economy. Obviously.”

On the political front, governments from the United States to Italy have been criticized for not speaking out stronger on Libya. Many, including President Obama, have threatened sanctions against Gaddafi and come out in support of Libya’s people, but nothing more.

“Frankly, we are disappointed that the President of the United States and other leaders have not clearly demanded that Libya’s oil be free,” said Ray Irani, CEO of Occidental Petroleum, America’s fourth-largest U.S. oil company. “What do we pay these people for?”
msolga
 
  2  
Reply Sun 27 Feb, 2011 12:27 am
@georgeob1,
Please excuse this post, those of you of (like me) who actually consider the topic of this thread important.

I know it is a distraction from the thread subject, but I want to say this anyway ...

As no one else appears to have noticed, I have been the recipient of some pretty grubby recent comments on this thread.
Curious, considering that I have not contributed here for quite a while & have made no such comments myself, to anyone ....

Quote:

I don't think Msolga is at all an inducement of the sort you infer. Quite the opposite.


I simply want to say this publicly to to you, George .. & to spendius too..

George, you & I are at polar opposites in our political views.
But so what?

But to resort to such thoroughly unpleasant comments does you absolutely no credit.

I think I have lost all respect for you.
I think you have behaved as a coward & a bully.

Tell you why: I have seen all variety of quite personal & derisive comments thrown at you, in response to your posts.
By MEN, mostly from the US.

But have you responded by speculating about their masculinity, their appeal to the opposite sex? Whether their arguments might appeal to women (pubescent or adult) or not?

No, of course not.

Because you would have received exactly the response you would have expected.

Would you have directed such pathetic personal attacks on Joe from Chicago?

No, of course not.

I repeat George, you are a coward and a bully.

You owe me a public apology.
That is, if you have any integrity at all.
Though I will not exactly be holding my breath, going by your recent posts.

If you don’t like or agree with anything I’ve posted on A2K, then, by all means, counter what I’ve said. With better arguments than mine.
Where are those arguments, George?

This is the 21st century. It is considered OK by most men, all over the planet, that women have opinions & they are actually free to express them.
I think you are in some weird, ugly time warp.

OK, rant over.
I needed to say that.

Please continue now ...
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Feb, 2011 01:30 am
Quote:
Q&A: What next for Gaddafi – and his oppressed people?
By David Randall, John Rentoul, Susie Mesure, Maryrose Fison, Mark Leftly, Matt Chorley and Jonathan Owen
Sunday, 27 February 2011


As the beleaguered – and increasingly deranged – dictator plans his next move, The Independent on Sunday examines and explains the rapidly changing situation.

Clinical psychiatrists may differ in their diagnoses, but by the standards of the rest of us, he is undoubtedly deranged. His speeches of the past few days are ample evidence. On Thursday he blamed the uprising on a combination of Osama bin Laden and teenagers maddened by hallucinogenic pills dropped into their coffee "like Nescafe". On Friday, he told a crowd in Tripoli: "Do as you please. You are free to dance, sing and celebrate in all squares throughout the night. Muammar Gaddafi is one of you. Dance, sing, rejoice!"

Can the United Nations do anything meaningful?

The UN could, in theory, take action. In 2006 its Security Council even endorsed the doctrine of its "responsibility to protect" people from their own governments. In practice, the council has explicitly authorised the use of military force only twice (Korea, 1950, when the Russians made the tactical error of boycotting it, and Kuwait, 1990). In the short term, expect words only.

Will Gaddafi survive?[/b]

Unless he has more forces in reserve than he has so far deployed, and is prepared to kill on an even more grotesque scale, the answer is ultimately no. And, much as some wish him to stand trial, the chances of him getting out alive are low. He eventually will die by his own hand, that of rebels, or of his own praetorian guard which finally turns against him. But the denouement may not come soon. Professor David Anderson of Oxford University told us: "If he were to have two or three army units that supported him, and he wanted to retreat to the south, he could hold out for quite some time."
size=150]Where could he go and where is his money?[/size]


With President Hugo Chavez practically the only ally he has left among world leaders, Gaddafi is most likely to seek sanctuary in Venezuela. Closer to home, he might make a visit to his old friend Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe. Despite attempts being stepped up to freeze billions in Libyan assets worldwide, Gaddafi secretly deposited £3bn with a London-based private wealth manager last week.

Who – or what – will replace him?

In rebel-controlled areas, some sort of authority is being exercised by citizen committees, largely composed of lawyers, doctors, tribal elders and army officers. Nationally, opposition has been stifled for so long that there is no obvious grouping or individual in the wings. But many leading officials and diplomats have defected to the rebels in the past few days, and one or more of these could return to join an interim authority, and eventually run for office. Islamic conservatives are not – so far – much in evidence. Professor Anderson said: "It is not clear that there is a political opposition that can come in and take over. It is not clear the army has the wherewithal to do so either. So there is a power vacuum here, and I think there could well be a period of quite difficult attrition with different army units seeking to get control, and it could be quite destructive."

Which will be the next regime to fall?

Yemen, Algeria, Sudan and Djibouti all look very vulnerable at the moment. Widespread demonstrations have been taking place in Yemen and Algeria over the past three weeks, with tens of thousands of protesters taking to the streets to demand regime change. Years of civil strife in Sudan culminated in a referendum last month resulting in a decision to partition the country in July. There is some speculation as to whether Sudan's President, Omar Hassan Al-Bashir, will hold on to power until then. Djibouti has seen similar unrest in the past few weeks, with demonstrations in city centres.

What about Saudi Arabia?

Its oil wealth meant ageing King Abdullah could sign a near $36bn social benefits package last week. Those subjects who can't be bought will stage their own "Day of Rage" on 11 March. Never say never.

Just how badly hit are oil suppliers?


Most oil companies have shut down or suspended their operations. Libyan industry relies heavily on black, immigrant labourers who have deserted the country in their thousands and are unlikely to return until a stable government is formed. Many major firms, including BP, are at very early stages of drilling, so much production has been delayed indefinitely rather than stopped.

So, Mr Megrahi, do you wish you'd stayed in Scotland?


A decade after Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was convicted for the 1998 Lockerbie bombing, the 58-year-old's hero status in Libya continues. Released from a Scottish jail in August 2009 on "compassionate grounds" with supposedly just three months to live, he returned to Tripoli to a hero's welcome and Gaddafi's warm embrace. Last week, Mustafa Abdel-Jalil, Libya's former justice minister, claimed to have proof Gaddafi ordered the bombing. Tensions remain high between the Gaddafi regime and Megrahi's Magariha tribe, which was angered by the original decision to hand him over for prosecution. On the whole, he'd be safer in Greenock


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/qampa-what-next-for-gaddafi-ndash-and-his-oppressed-people-2226893.html
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Feb, 2011 01:51 am
Quote:

Libya: UN Security Council votes sanctions on Gaddafi

27 February 2011 Last updated at 04:34 GMT

The UN Security Council has voted unanimously to impose sanctions on Muammar Gaddafi's Libyan regime for its attempts to put down an uprising.

They backed an arms embargo and asset freeze while referring Col Gaddafi to the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity.

US President Barack Obama has said the Libyan leader should step down and leave the country immediately.

Discussions on forming a transitional government are reportedly underway.

Mustafa Abdel-Jalil - who resigned as justice minister in protest against the excessive use of force against demonstrators - said a body comprising military and civilian figures would prepare for elections within three months, Libya's privately-owned Quryna newspaper reported.

Libya's ambassadors to the United States and UN have both reportedly voiced their support for the plan, which was being discussed in the rebel-controlled eastern town of Benghazi.

The UN estimates more than 1,000 people have died as Col Gadddafi's regime attempted to quell the 10-day-old revolt.

The global body's World Food Programme has warned that the food distribution system is "at risk of collapsing" in the North African nation, which is heavily dependent on imports. ...<cont>


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12589434
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Feb, 2011 02:01 am
@msolga,
Quote:
Analysis
Barbara Plett BBC UN correspondent

The most controversial debate over the Libya resolution was whether to refer the government crackdown to the ICC for an investigation.

This is a very sensitive issue: some Council members view the ICC as a threat to national sovereignty, and worry that referrals may set a precedent which could be used against them.

A day of intense negotiations saw three positions emerge: Strong opponents (China), strong advocates (UK, France and Germany) and those in between (almost everyone else).

The middle ground eventually swung behind the proposal, leaving China the only holdout. In the end Beijing joined the consensus.

The Council has only referred one other country to the ICC (Sudan in 2005) and that vote was not unanimous. Analysts said the speed and strength of Saturday's decision was due to reports of excessive regime brutality in Libya.

Strong condemnations by the Arab League and African Union also had influence, as did clear support for the ICC referral from Libya's UN Mission.
0 Replies
 
aidan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Feb, 2011 02:18 am
@Irishk,
Good one IrishK. It'd be even funnier if it weren't so sad and true:

HEROIC OIL COMPANIES OFFER TO FLY LIBYAN OIL TO SAFETY

Quote:
TRIPOLI (SatireWire.com) – As chaos mounts in Libya, concerned petroleum firms across the globe have made a courageous pledge to fly all of Libya’s oil to safety.



Quote:
Gaddafi used to be someone you could count on,” said BP spokesman Keith Hart. “Yes, he was behind the Pan Am 103 bombing, which killed 280, and the French airplane downing that killed 170, and the Berlin disco bombing that killed and wounded 200, and he funded the Irish Republican Army, which killed thousands. But he always treated oil with dignity.”

Yeah, not so different from heads of other governments in that respect is he?

Quote:
“Two percent may seem small, but put it in perspective,” Hess said. “If 2 percent of the world’s population were in danger, we would be talking about 120 million people.

That would be a frightening number,” he added. “If people were as valuable as oil.


Yeah - and now on the other thread we've got people saying that people are the same (in inherent value) as field mice and voles...what's the going rate on a barrel of field mice on the open market these days? Laughing Laughing

But you know what - though I wouldn't classify myself as conservative (politically at least)- I'm beginning to agree with Georgob when he says - let everyone else try to fix it from now on.

America and by association Americans are damned if we don't and damned if we do.
If it turns out wrong, bad, unsuccessful, whatever - oh - that pesky American intervention.
No one believes in American methods or motivation anymore (except for when they stepped in to get the Chilean miners free).
Not even me - and I'm American.
I think we should give it a rest and see what happens.
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Feb, 2011 07:40 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
You seem to have a problem, not only with cliches, but with intelligent interpretation.


I had to look up what the word "clich" means. I looked it up, the only word which come close is "cliche" which means a word overused which renders it stereotype. Very smart. You must be right about my ability with intelligent interpretation as well because I am not sure of your meaning as regards to myself. But nevermind.

revelette
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Feb, 2011 08:04 am
Quote:
It appears to me that some who argued vociferously about the illegality of our interventions in the affairs of another sovereign country (Iraq) with a vicious dictator who too was killing his people and had been experimenting with mass destruction weapons, are arguing now about the moral imperative that we do something about the potential for chaos in Libya. It was a difficult and sometimes painful process for me to finally come to the conclusion that our interventions in Iraq (both of them, starting with the Gulf War) were serious strategic errors, costing us a great deal, getting us little benefit, and providing fodder for an increasingly hostile world. To the extent that is true the underlying principles certainly also apply in Libya.


I can't answer for all those who were opposed to the Iraq war, but the reason I was opposed was because I didn't' see an imminent need to intervene. I was for the first gulf war because Saddam invaded Kuwait, I thought we should have stayed with it when Saddam retaliated against the uprisings, but we ignored it. In 2003, we were in midst of a war with Afghanistan chasing the real people who attacked our country. That invasion by the US was a distraction for no justifiable reason at the time since there were ongoing inspections at the time of invasion.

On the other hand, Gaddafi's so far that I have read and know about has killed at least 1000 of his own people for protesting. This is an ongoing situation. It is nothing about strategic advantage or oil but simply addressing human lives being lost or hurt. I don't think we should strike out on our own but simply address the situation with the UN and NATO like they are doing and go from there.
spendius
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 27 Feb, 2011 08:24 am
@revelette,
If you want an intelligent interpretation of the abilities of a person called revelette might I point you towards Sir Almroth Wright's Alethetropic Logic and his The Unexpurgated Case Against Woman Suffrage.

He was knighted for services to medicine with his pioneering work on vaccination.

The UCAWS was an attempt to take issue with the fashionable notion that there is no specific psycho-physiological difference between men and women. It was an eminent scientist's view of the matter.

It expresses the view that the femine mind, over-influenced by individual instances, ---

Quote:
accepts the congenial as true, and rejects the uncongenial as false: takes the imaginary which is desired for reality, and treats the undesired reality which is out of sight as non-existent, building up for itself in this way, when biased by predilections and aversions, a very unreal picture of the external world.


Those who think that is a criticism of women are the real misogynists. That's what women are like and evolution has made them like that for a purpose on the division of labour principle. Women should be admired and respected for what they are rather than being hypnotised and browbeaten into congruence with what the fantasies of real misogynists wish them to be in order to render them more amenable to their uses.

The "dizzy blonde" exactly coincides with Sir Almroth's description and Ms Monroe played her to perfection. Possibly too much.
JPB
 
  2  
Reply Sun 27 Feb, 2011 08:44 am
Zawiyah (30 miles from Tripoli) is now controlled by opposition forces. Today's live blog

2:09pm GMT: I've been in touch with Peter Beaumont again, who has been taken to a pro-government demonstration - the stuff the Gaddafi regime wants foreign journalists to see. But as he tells me, the message the regime wants to get out - that things aren't as bad as reported - backfired spectacularly when foreign journalists saw with their owns eyes the city of Zawiyah clearly under control of the opposition.

1:36pm GMT: The Italian foreign minister thinks Gaddafi is finished. "We have reached, I believe, a point of no return," Frattini told Sky Italia television. Asked whether Gaddafi should leave power, he said: "It is inevitable for this to happen." Italy has the closest ties to Libya among EU countries, but Frattini says a friendship and cooperation treaty between Libya and Italy was "de facto suspended".
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  2  
Reply Sun 27 Feb, 2011 09:51 am
@spendius,
Spendius, I am not really going to on a defense of my gender since I feel that both genders have their ditzy blonds regardless of hair color.

I am not denying that oil and/or strategic concerns is a factor, but it should not and I really don't think it is for the most part, a part of any decision making going on right with countries in regards to Gadhafi's. If it was, then we would just continue to support Gadhafi since he has shown himself to be a friend of western interest in recent years.



How Gaddafi came in from the cold

Yet rather than continuing to support such an "reformed ally" in the name of protecting our interest in oil and strategic advantage, the UN an NATO have been having meetings and yesterday Obama has said, Gadhafi must step down.

President Barack Obama on Saturday said Moammar Gadhafi has lost his legitimacy to rule and urged the Libyan leader to leave power immediately.

The only change between then and now has been the uprising by the Libya citizens and Gadhafi's response to it.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Feb, 2011 12:23 pm
@revelette,
I was offering a compliment to your gender revelette and that you think otherwise is because you have been hypnotised and browbeaten by misogynists of the very worst sort.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 1.99 seconds on 11/23/2024 at 11:38:04