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

...and you learned nothing from such experiences? I hope we stand by and allow them self-determination.

Like the Iraqis?
You now believe the US & its allies should never have invaded?
Or "intervened", if you prefer that term.

I learned plenty, but I didn't invade Iraq after the fact.

Invasion and arming a group in the mideast are two different issues.

But, I guess in the face of such hypocritical opinions, you'd want to try to change the subject. So, you now support arming a group in the mideast with no guess about who will eventually lead them, and in what direction?

Neither did I.

Obviously.

That's something of a misrepresentation - Saddam wasn't the opposition when the US gave him weapons, he was the leader of Iraq. Maybe a better example would have been the weapons the US gave to the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan in their struggle against their Soviet occupiers. Didn't that work out well?

Anyone see Alison Stanger on the Daily Show last night. Double face palm moment.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-march-2-2011/allison-stanger

Wouldn't be a fair fight otherwise..

I have a dear friend, now a US citizen who, as a Mujahadeen, fought the USSR with CIA support. Most of his family was executed by the Taliban so the CIA brought him to Denver Colorado.

Hi Dys, do you know if your friend concurs with the thoughts in the denouement of Charlie Wilson's War? Where the film depicts the concern expressed by Charlie and Gust that Afghanistan was being neglected in the 1990s, following the Soviet troop withdrawal. In one of the film's final scenes, Gust dampens Charlie's enthusiasm over the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan, saying "I'm about to give you an NIE that shows the crazies are rolling into Kandahar."

George Crile, author of Charlie Wilson's War, the book on which the film is based, wrote that the mujahideen's victory in Afghanistan ultimately opened a power vacuum for bin Laden: "By the end of 1993, in Afghanistan itself there were no roads, no schools, just a destroyed country -- and the United States was washing its hands of any responsibility. It was in this vacuum that the Taliban and Osama bin Laden would emerge as the dominant players. It is ironic that a man who had almost nothing to do with the victory over the Red Army, Osama bin Laden, would come to personify the power of the jihad."

There are traps everywhere, regardless of whether you're wary or unwary.

I don't know much but my friend really really hated the taliban and bin Laden.

I don't see it as anything significant, either positive or negative. Ghadaffi is as close to a friendless despot as the world has seen in a very long time. No one, from the other authoritarian Arab & Muslim states, to China, Russia, the EU or the USA sees him as either important or a useful ally. He is utterly isolated and friendless - an eminently suitable subject for disposal through something as innocuous as the ICC - or any other garbage disposal system. General agreement on anything at all by such a wide and disparate group of nations is a very rare thing indeed. That Ghadaffi can be the subject of this general agreement is more than anything a demonstration of his irrelevance on the world stage. I'm sure the British are seriously embarassed for selling themselves out to him so cheaply last year.

Had any of the aforementioned powers considered that Ghadaffi had any real potential to continue exercising power in Libya, I'm quite sure no such agreement would have occurred.

Saddam was the opposition of Iran, who we liked a whole hell of a lot less when we armed Saddam.

And that parallels Libya how?

Interestingly, I helped a middle schooler write a biography of his dad, who lived in Nicaragua during the rebellion there. His brothers were murdered by the government for refusing to take up arms against the resistance...or freedom fighters. It is a heroic story in his family - how his dad made his way to America.

I remember Reagan being a bit unpopular in these parts for helping the resistance there...

Giving arms with good intentions can bite you in the ass later.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/03/03/uttm/london_comment/main20039098.shtml
UK + Qaddafi

Powerful members of the Security Council, who are not themselves signatories to the ICC, supported the referral to the ICC.
Making it a unanimous Security Council vote regarding human rights violations in Libya.
Surely also an endorsement of the validity of the role of the ICC by those non-signatory countries?

Idi Amin died in August of 2003 of kidney failure. He was admitted to a hospital in Jiddah, Saudi Arabia already in a coma. He was believed to be 80 years old. Experts believe that Idi Amin suffered from severe mental illness. Specifically, they believe he suffered from hypomania. Hypomania is a form of manic depression, which is characterized by irrational behavior and emotional outbursts

Oh, I agree with that. I will also agree that the event does lend some stature to the ICC - but very little. I believe it all has much more to do with the observable fact that Ghadaffi is a friendless despot at the end of his rope, and not that nations such as China, Russia, or even the United States are willing to accept the jurisdiction of something like the ICC over anything important to them. Ghadaffi is no longer useful to anyone, and can be disposed of with as little effort or risk as possible.

I am reminded of Kissinger's old quip about why disputes involving academic rivalries in Universities such as Harvard are fought with such persistent tenacity... "Because the stakes are so low", he opined.

Now if the ICC were to make an inquiry about political rights in China that would be an indication that the world has elevated itself to a new plane, as I believe you may be suggesting. However, I doubt that will happen under any circumstances.

Please don't conclude that I believe your hopes for a better universal government are wrong in themselves. I'll readily agree they represent something potentially far better than what we have. However, the real "international community" that appointed Ghadaffi's government to head the UN Human Rights Commission is worlds away from from the altruistic community I believe you have in mind. Moreover, I don't see anything in human history that suggests that will change - ever.

One is reminded of Edward Fitzgerald's wonderful translation of the Persian poet's quatrains...

Ah, Love! could thou and I with Fate conspire
To grasp this sorry Scheme of Things entire,
Would not we shatter it to bits--and then
Re-mould it nearer to the Heart's Desire!

It was already a very old dilemma when it was written seven centuries ago.