NO-FLY ZONE IN LIBYA, ARAB LEAGUE PETITIONS U.N.

The situation in the middle east and northern Africa is not a case of identical rebellions against identical governments. Egypt's government is a corporate military government. Getting rid of Mubarak wasn't easy, but the essential government was left intact. There was no regionalism, no tribalism in the take over by the Free Officers movement in 1952. (General Naguib, the front man for the rebellion was Sudanese, and he was eventually ousted by Nassar, but otherwise, there were no tribal rivalries in the rebellion, which was a strictly an operation by the military.) Nassas was succeeded by Sadat, and Sadat by Mubarak because these officers had moved up through the government ranks. The ouster of Mubarak has left the Egyptian government intact.

Sadam Hussein al-Takriti was a tribal leader as well as an operative in the Ba'ath Arab Socialist Party, and he represented the dominant tribe around the city of Takrit. The Ba'athist were, however, a Sunni organization in a nation in which Sunnis were the minority. If we had enforced the 1991 no-fly zone in Iraq, and the Shi'ites had looked like beating Hussein, the Ba'athists would have dropped him like a hot rock, intent on assuring their survival as the Sunni-dominated political party.

Got-Daffy is also a minority tribal leader. However, there is no political structure in place such as was evident in the Egyptian Free Officers movement, or the Iraqi Ba'athists. The only "political party" is the apparatus which Got-Daffy has created to prop up his power. It's an all or nothing situation. If he is toppled, power will be up for grabs. As long as he looks like winning, many members of the military will probably continue to support him--but there's no reason to think they have a particular loyalty to him unless they are members of his tribe. I doubt that there is any love for the mercenaries he has bought. If it looks like he might lose, i believe a significant number of men in the armed forces may desert him, even if they don't actually turn their coats to support the rebellion.

Certainly there are no guarantees. But a successfully implemented no-fly zone could go a long way to toppling this piece of ****, who really only has power from the barrel of the guns he can hire. I say it's time to act.

Great idea... When you can't afford two wars; start a third.. As bad as Kadafi is, the can of worms we might open out of the desire to see him gone might cut the supply of oil out of that place indefinetely... The people with the most problem with him are militant in the hatred of us... We need more of that sort in power; but if given enough time and money, they too can be corrupted...

Libya's oil goes to France and Italy, it wouldn't mean much to the United States. There is no reason to assume that there is militant hatred of the United States on the part of anyone in Libya except those in the Got-Daffy's band of brigand. The Libyans are the ones asking for this. Do you read the news?

It does not matter where it goes... Our oil from the North slope goes to Japan, but shut off the tap some place and they have to open another some place else... And there goes your price structure and stability all in one mad rush...

Srsly? Whatcha smokin', Fido?

I don't think it matters much where it goes. Just as Libya mostly sends oil to France and Italy, but cut off that source and they get oil destined for somewhere else. France and Italy will pay a bit more, and so will the somewhere else. The word fungible might well have been invented to describe the international oil market.

Well; I heard it from some wonk, and he has been often right... Why not give me the facts if you think you know them...

Essentially, this statement is correct. Not absolutely all of the petroleum from the north slope goes to Japan, but the lion's share does. The crude from the north slope is of a very low quality, and much of it is only fit for what is known as bunker oil--the oil which is burned to heat boilers for either a reciprocating steam engine (very rare these days) or a steam turbine. For that reason, and with the price so low, Japanese ships, even including oil tankers, will steam to Valdez in Alaska to fill up with bunker oil before steaming on to their destination--even if that means turning around and heading back more or less in the direction from which they came. In fact, the bunker oil from north slope crude is so cheap that an oil tanker from Japan headed for the Persian Gulf to pick up the high quality light, sweet crude produced there will first steam to Valdez to fill up on cheap bunker oil before turning around and heading across the Pacific to the China Sea, down the China Sea to the Straits of Malacca, then into the Indian Ocean.

Not all north slope crude or products from north slope crude go to Japan, but so little goes elsewhere as makes no difference.

There are many sources that dispel the myth of your statement that 'our oil from the North Slope goes to Japan'. Snopes rates your statement as 'false'.

A CRS paper agrees.

You proved my point better than I did myself... Looks like we get a fraction of our own oil, and Asia, if not Japan gets most of it... Where are they getting their oil now??? And where are we going to get it now that we have plundered our resources to make a few of our rich richer, and to feed industry abroad???