Bombing Libya into democracy

From today's Toronto Star:

"The West’s war against Libya has overstepped its bounds. It was billed as a military action aimed at protecting civilians. But it has evolved into a bombing campaign that threatens the very civilians it claims to support...

... for no particularly good reason, we are at war with Libya. We invaded that country not because Gadhafi is unusually monstrous but because we thought he would be an easy mark.

The French and British wanted war for domestic political reasons; the U.S. hoped to get on the front end of the Arab Revolt.

Everybody wanted a piece of Libya’s oil wealth — but without having to endure Gadhafi’s feckless and arbitrary demands. And Canada? Our reasons were the most craven. We wanted to show we were big shots."

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/996852--walkom-the-libyan-war-that-should-not-have-been?bn=1

For the record, I'm on record as saying this is exactly what would happen, and being chastised severely by the DU stay-on-message crew for saying so.

They're making sure that only the Western imperialists control Libyan oil.
Anything else they tell us is propaganda.

despite the changiness.

I ask because I assume that control over oil is a given in all western foreign policy, but I there was no serious problem with control over Libya's (limited) supplied of oil prior to the decision to bomb Gaddafi.

It seems to me that something additional must be at work here. I personally suspect the additional bits include venality, over-reaching, lack of understanding, and really ill-informed decision-making by the bombers.

Now, at this point, these leaders are locked into a conflict they themselves probably know is counter-productive and stupid.

I assume they'll just keep bombing until they kill Gaddafi, or otherwise find a face-saving exit strategy.

The Libyan War, American Power and the Decline of the Petrodollar System

Peter Dale Scott

http://japanfocus.org/-Peter_Dale-Scott/3522