Hailed as a Model for Successful Intervention, Libya Proves to be the Exact Opposite--The Intercept
Hailed as a Model for Successful Intervention, Libya Proves to be the Exact Opposite
By Glenn Greenwald
When Saddam Hussein was captured in 2003 by U.S. forces, Iraq War advocates boastfully celebrated the event as proof that they were right and used it to mock war opponents (Joe Lieberman and John Kerry, for instance, gleefully exploited the event to demand that Howard Dean admit his war opposition was wrong). When Muammar Gaddafi was forced by NATO bombing in August 2011 to flee Tripoli, advocates of U.S. intervention played the same game (ThinkProgress gleefully exploited the occasion to try to shame those who objected to the illegality of Obamas waging the war even after Congress voted against its authorization: as though Gadaffis fleeing could render legal Obamas plainly illegal intervention).
Once Gadaffi was brutally killed by a mob, advocates of intervention threw a giddy party for themselves, celebrating their own rightness and righteousness and declaring Libya a model for future Western interventions. Upon Gadaffis fleeing, The New York Times, which editorially supported the war, published a front-page article declaring: U.S. Tactics in Libya May be a Model for Other Efforts. While acknowledging that it would be premature to call the war in Libya a complete success for United States interests, the paper noted that events had given Obamas senior advisers a chance to claim a key victory for an Obama doctrine for the Middle East that had been roundly criticized in recent months as leading from behind.
Leading war advocates such as Anne-Marie Slaughter and Nick Kristof celebrated themselves as humanitarian visionaries and chided war opponents for being blinkered and overly cynical about the virtues of American force. British and French leaders descended upon Libya to strut around like some sort of conquering heroes, while American and Canadian officials held pompous war victory ceremonies. Hillary Clinton was downright sociopathic, gloating and cackling in an interview when told about Gadaffis death by mob: We came, we saw, he died. Democratic partisans were drowning in similar bravado (Unlike the all-hat-no-cattle types we are increasingly seeing over there, [Obama] may take his time, but he does seem to get his man).
From the start, it was glaringly obvious that all of this was, at best, wildly premature. As I wrote the day after Gadaffi fled, the Democratic claims of vindication were redolent in all sorts of ways of war hawk boasting after Saddam was captured, and were just as irrational: the real toll of this war (including the number of civilian deaths that have occurred and will occur) is still almost entirely unknown, and none of the arguments against the war (least of all the legal ones) are remotely resolved by yesterdays events.
CONTINUED AT:
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/02/16/hailed-model-successful-intervention-libya-proves-exact-opposite/
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)Empire, but we're not. Empire occupies and controls. We just want a shiny new military base or two and let them clean up the political, social, civic mess we created. Good luck, y'all.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)killing and a billion bucks.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)for the MIC.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Burial plan for millions.
Aid program in action - Wadi al-Salaam, Iraq
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)doesn't exist. Even our own soldier's coffins. God forgive us, if possible.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)It was never really about saving lives - mass death, terrorism, and blowback are just acceptable costs attendant to serial regime change. From Iraq to Libya to Syria to Paris to ????, the creation and spread of ISIS was foreseen and considered acceptable to the neocons.
Thank you Hillary Clinton and David Petraeus. True humanitarians, tried and true.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)What lovely Democrats they are!
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Petraeus, who was the most forceful advocate of regime change within the Administration, was fired in the most emphatic way.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Fuckboy never has shit to say before or during a crisis, but he *always* has his "I told you so" column later...
He can keep trying to duck the issue as long as he can, but sooner or later he's going to have to write something about Russia other than how happy Snowden is living his life there....
deurbano
(2,895 posts)Just one example:
http://www.salon.com/2011/03/30/cole_16/
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Last edited Mon Feb 23, 2015, 09:36 PM - Edit history (1)
Or perhaps Greenwald sees that as a "good" example, not worthy to report on?
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Snow-Wald's buddy Putin has been the one killing off investigative journalists...
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Our politicans are. Putin is Russia's problem, ours is assholes like McCain and his ilk.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)And Snow-Wald are (indirectly) fucking up the country by sharing secrets with the FSB as Russia advances militarily and portraying the U.S. as some "great satan" while turning a blind eye to Russia/China/Brazil...
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)And here I thought 99% of Big Media was owned by the same few who profit from the foreign policy "mistakes"
Thanks for clearing that up
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)quadrature
(2,049 posts)2011 - forever...
just wonderful
eridani
(51,907 posts)quadrature
(2,049 posts)and other places.
Syria
hundreds of thousands are dead
millions of refugees and IDPs
KoKo
(84,711 posts)but, then, we are involved with Eurozone and Cross Culteral Aims along with Resources Sharing.
Wall Street, and Mega Corporations and the rest.