0
   

Rice: "Lybia is an important model"

 
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 May, 2006 07:29 am
mysteryman wrote:
I thought this was exactly the kind of diplomacy you say we need more of.

I thought wanted more diplomacy and less force.
Now,we have a serious diplomatic move,and you are complaining about it.

Exactly what do you want?


Wait a second ! You misspelled a-p-p-e-a-s-e-m-e-n-t.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 May, 2006 10:16 am
FWIW

(that's Lybian and Middle-Eastern activists, btw, not the DailyKos variety):

Quote:
Activists criticize strengthened U.S. ties with Libya

May 16, 2006

By Salah Nasrawi Associated Press

CAIRO, Egypt ?- Activists in the Middle East said Monday the U.S. decision to restore diplomatic ties with Libya undermined Washington's drive for democracy and signaled that the Bush administration was turning its back on dissidents in the country.

Cairo-based Fayez Jibril, spokesman for the Libyan National Congress opposition group, said Moammar Gadhafi, whose regime was removed from the U.S. list of nations that sponsor terrorism by Monday's decision, would use the American opening to further crush dissent.

"Colonel Gadhafi will most certainly use this to tighten his hold on the Libyans who aspire for such simple things such as freedom of expression and freedom to have a constitution," said Jibril.

Mahmoud Shamam, a leading Libyan activist, voiced similar concerns about the wider effects on the region.

"This was the final and fatal bullet fired by the administration into its initiative to spread democracy and reforms in the Middle East," he said in a telephone interview from Washington. "Everybody in the area will now ask if the United States is after promoting the principle of democracy or its oil interests." [..]

Opposition figures pointed to what they saw as a double standard, noting the State Department's latest human rights report, which called Libya an "authoritarian regime" whose "performance remained poor, although it took some steps to improve its human rights record."

The department's latest look at human rights under Gadhafi noted "problems" in 14 areas, including torture, poor prison conditions, arbitrary arrest and detention and "severe restrictions" on freedom of speech, press, assembly, and association.

"This is an indication that the United States has never been serious about calls for reforms and respect of human rights in the region," said Bahy El-Deen Hassan, head of the pan-Arab Cairo Center for Human Rights. [..]
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 May, 2006 06:30 am
I am a bit confused Nimh, do you support the start of diplomatic relations with Libya or not? Do you still think the US, or the west in general, should not have interactions with governents that have proven ties with terrorist organizations?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 May, 2006 10:13 am
McGentrix wrote:
I am a bit confused Nimh, do you support the start of diplomatic relations with Libya or not? Do you still think the US, or the west in general, should not have interactions with governents that have proven ties with terrorist organizations?

To be honest - not to minimize the harm done by support to terrorist organisation, thats obviously also Very Bad - but I'm more interested in the human rights track record of the regime domestically. It affects far more people (wrecks more death).

Confused? Yes, that may be right. I'm uncertain about this - one of the reasons I started this thread.

At first blush, I certainly sympathise with the Lybian opposition group quoted in the article above though. I'm no fan of war, as will be known, but actually expressing support for a dictatorship and holding it up as a "model" is too much of the opposite to my taste.

If I'd had it my way, we'd freeze every brutal dictatorship out of all support, funding etc. Consistently apply all means of pressure short of war. In general, what I'd really like is for this shizophrenic lurching from cuddling dictators to sabre-rattling against them (and back again) to be replaced by a consistent line of isolating the regime and supporting the democratic opposition (if available). Wherever dictatorships rule (and whichever political colour they are).

My uncertainty comes from realising that for any kind of carrot and stick approach to work, you have to be able to flex a little way this or that, engage in some wheeling and dealing with the baddies. But when I hear about Lybian oppositionals feeling betrayed, I can see where they come from.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 May, 2006 04:23 pm
Quote:
If I'd had it my way, we'd freeze every brutal dictatorship out of all support, funding etc


Thats been tried,and many on the left raised hell about it.
Remember the economic sanctions against Iraq?
The sanctions against Cuba?
Or North Korea?

Every time that is tried,many on the left raise hell and start screaming that we are killing the children by cutting off funding or food shipments to dictatorships.

It wasnt very long ago that people were saying that thousands of kids were dying in Iraq because we wouldnt ship any economic aid or food aid to Iraq.
We tried cutting off supplies and aid to NK,to get them to the table to talk,and That was also railed against.

The embargo against Cuba has been railed against and condemned by many on the left since it was first implemented.

So,if we cant go to war,and any attempt at an embargo to dictatorships is going to be condemned and railed against,what is the alternative?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/11/2026 at 11:51:53