I hold no brief for Cameron; I'll be happy to see the Tories defeated at the next general election, but at the same time, I happen to think that the NATO-led intervention in Libya was the right thing to do, given the situation at the time, and I also think that a NATO-led intervention in Syria would be the right thing to do, given the situation there now. Is the new Libyan government perfect? No; would a new Syrian government be perfect? No again, but then in both cases probably better than Qaddafi or Assad, and some degree of democracy is more than they have now. A lot of the criticism of Libya after the fact seems to be based on the fact that some of the new Libyan ruling council's actions are somewhat questionable, but honestly? Qaddafi was worse, and short of having imposed an occupation government there's not really a lot that the West can do (and I don't think that would have been the solution either).

In this one Qaddafi was better, in fact much better. And so is Assad. And they both are
certainly better than that exemplar of morality Cameron in that they at least limited
their killings to actual terrorists operating within their countries borders and didn't send
their militaries half-way across the world to perform mass killings of foreign civilians
like Cameron did. That clown got some balls to preach morality to others.

Or starts executing his political opponents and has a network of spies and informers to rat on anyone who expresses "disloyalty". Sorry, you're full of it.

it over and held its citizens captive. As well he should, he would be a traitor to his country if he
didn't. Or do you suggest under the circumstances he should step down and hand UK over to those
terrorists instead as he insists Assad should do?

The Syrians started out as peaceful protesters. In fact, even today, there are hundreds of peaceful protesters, daily, all over the country being met with bullets.

Syrians started arming themselves to protect women and children against Assad's thugs, and bought their weapons on the black market. Eventually arms started coming in from Libya, with some Libya fighters.

The UK and US are NOT arming the Syrians; Qatar announced this week that they would start.

Protesters were supported from outside with money and ammunition in - SOUTH AFRICA, ZIMBABWE, NAMIBIA and MOZAMBIQUE against tyrant governments. They are all now free - WON BY THE PROTESTERS - through negotiations. (Only one of them has not turned out OK - ZImbabwe.)

The Syrians are doing nothing different against a brutal, tyrannical Assad regime, that killed 40,000 people in cold blood in 1982. Assad Jr is trying to do the same.

People who decry people who seek freedom in a selective manner are often comparing apples and oranges.

And BTW, the Canadian General in charge of NATO was careful to target only military installations. There were mistakes, in which less than 100 civilians were killed. A charge of slaughter is a blatant lie. This is what one Libyan tweeter had to say about such critics:

THANKU4THEANGER ? @Thanku4theAnger
And one last thing, all of you who were against Nato involvement in Benghazi & Libya ... **** YOU

The only people who can decide what NATO did for them are the Libyans themselves.

"Peaceful protests" my ass, that whole thing was a foreign planned, financed and conducted
regime change operation from day one. Just like it was in Libya. The reason it took longer in
Syria to turn violent is simply because Qataris and Saudis lacked resources to handle two at
the same time, so they had to finish Libya first and only after that put their full effort into
Syria. Your list of successful armed liberation movements is a good one as it makes my point
for me - all those movements were supported with money and arms by USSR and opposed
by US/NATO who instead supported the brutal dictatorships in those countries. And that was
a pattern established and held over several decades. And now I am supposed to believe that
US suddenly saw the light and started to care about other people's freedom more than about
their own selfish interests?

and tanks is hardly a very effective way to limit your killing to "actual terrorists" unless you believe that everyone who lives in Homs is a terrorist or that everyone who demonstrates against Assad is an actual (or potential?) terrorist.

Cameron would not be an "exemplar of morality" if he turned his military loose and started shelling Liverpool (even if "actual" IRA "terrorists" were hiding there), so Assad hardly qualifies as such simply because he turned the weapons of his army and security forces on Syria's own people.

Add to that the children killed by Assad's military and 'ghost' militia snipers. Not even 'collateral damage' can explain or justify children being targeted by snipers.

children too. "Activists" report it, so it must be true.

It's on video, too--even if major media say they can't verify it. Makes it easier for you to justify the bloodbath.

there was no "pro-Assad snipeers targeting women and children" in it. Your "major media" is so
full of it, it is not even funny. What objective observer would call an armed insurgent "an activist"?

Libya urged to thoroughly investigate 1996 mass prison killings
The families of the victims have repeatedly called on the authorities to reveal the truth

Amnesty International has called on the Libyan government to thoroughly investigate the killing of up to 1,200 inmates of Abu Salim Prison in Tripoli on 29 June 1996, to bring those responsible to justice and to provide adequate reparation for families.

The Libyan authorities, who only acknowledged in 2004 that any disturbances had occurred at all, have claimed that the deaths took place during an exchange of fire between guards and prisoners following an escape attempt.





http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/report/libya-urged-thoroughly-investigate-1996-mass-prison-killings-2010-06-29

and NATO is blocking any investigation of its "humanitarian intervention" in Libya.

____

AMY GOODMAN: Late last year, the United Nations Security Council rejected a probe into the deaths of civilians during the NATO bombing of Libya. At the time, the Russian ambassador to the United Nations, Vitaly Churkin, said a probe is needed to determine the exact toll.

AMB. VITALY CHURKIN: The matter of civilian casualties, we believe, is particularly—from the bombing campaign, is particularly important, because we need to have a serious analysis. Some members of the Council, I can share with you, thought that somehow it was a diversion from Syria, from—coming from us, asking why we’re not discussing Syria. I gave a very simple response: because today we are discussing Libya. It is on our agenda. So it’s a matter coming out of the situation in Libya. So, this is where it stands now.

AMY GOODMAN: The United States refused to allow a U.N. Security Council probe into Libyan civilian deaths. In response to the proposal, U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice accused Russia of trying to distract from its opposition to a measure condemning the Syrian crackdown.

snip

You know, you have to keep in mind that when the U.N. human rights chief, Navi Pillay, wanted to speak about Libya, the U.N. General—the U.N. Security Council said, "You can present your report on Syria, but it must be done—on Libya, but the Libyan report must be done in a closed session." The Syrian report produced by human rights chair, Navi Pillay, could be done in an open session. In other words, it seems as if the West and NATO, in particular, does not want to have a discussion about Libya in public, but it wants to utilize human rights as a way to start wars, not a way to evaluate what has happened in a society.

http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1330096316.html

It's OK when it's done by the West

By Ali Shuaib | Reuters – Sat, Feb 25, 2012

Snip

"We are working on amending laws to stimulate the private sector, as well as change the national banking structure," he said. "We have formed a committee to re-revise the law. We are also about to complete our preparations regarding Islamic banking regulations."

Mustafa Abdel Jalil, chairman of Libya's ruling National Transitional Council (NTC) said in October Libya's new rulers were working on an Islamic banking system.

Elkaber said the Islamic banking proposal would be soon handed to the NTC for approval, but gave no other details.

Speaking in his office in central Tripoli, Elkaber said it was still to early to formulate a policy to award new licenses to foreign banks.

http://news.yahoo.com/libya-amending-bank-law-attract-foreigners-143947395.html

Sixty civilians were killed and 55 wounded in NATO airstrikes last year in Libya, said a UN report prepared by a commission that probed human rights abuses and war crimes in the North African state.

The international NATO-led military operation in Libya began on March 19, 2011, two days after the approval of a UN resolution on "targeted measures" to protect civilians from ongoing clashes between forces loyal to former leader Muammar Gaddafi and rebels seeking his overthrow.

The report said that NATO “conducted a highly precise campaign with a demonstrable determination to avoid civilian casualties,” but the commission noted incidents of civilian deaths and damage to civilian infrastructure as a result of NATO airstrikes.

On the whole, the commission said in its report that crimes against humanity and war crimes were committed by both the troops loyal to the former leader, Gaddafi, and the rebel forces that fought against him. “Acts of murder, enforced disappearance and torture were perpetrated within the context of a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population,” the report said.

http://en.rian.ru/world/20120303/171698294.html

There's a story in the New York Times on the same report.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/03/world/africa/united-nations-report-faults-nato-over-civilian-deaths-in-libya.html

"NATO has not sufficiently investigated the air raids it conducted on Libya that killed at least 60 civilians and wounded 55 more during the conflict there, according to a new United Nations report released Friday."

are the order of the day and torture is systemic. The government barely exists.