Libya-rate us please.

So what’s the story with the “coalition of the willing” bombing Libya?


Yes I know what the UN resolution said, that it was to protect civilians from being killed by Gaddafi’s armed forces, but really is that what is going on here?

So I would be the first to admit that I don’t know much about Libya or about Colonel Gaddafi except what I have read over the years in the media. Their biggest claim to fame seems to be sponsoring the terrorists who conducted the Pan Am bombing over Lockerbie.

A brief review of the history of the country is typical of countries in the area, given that it borders on the Mediterranean it has been tied up with Greek and Roman conquest and all that sort of stuff but more latterly has been a colony of Italy, when African colonies where popular with European powers and then when they got bored with the place they put in place a king who was then the subject of a coup by our old friend Colonel Gaddafi in 1969.

Then with a volatile mix of Muslim fundamentalism and a socialist agenda of some sort he set about being the world’s pain in the butt. Usually such behaviours are short lived but with the handy backing of oil revenues, which I cynically observe the west never deprived him of, Colonel Gaddafi kept up this adolescent acting out for some 30 odd years.

But of recent years he has been behaving and the West has slowly welcomed him back into the old boys club with Britain famously finding an excuse to release the Lockerbie bomber because he was dying of cancer, later miraculously cured by the fantastic medical system in Libya (shouldn’t they send him back now he is better?) And including Libya serving on the UN security council in 2007 and the USA deleting Libya from its list of terrorist states.

However old times appear not to be forgotten, faced with a “popular” uprising (meaning one that is large enough to attract media attention from the journalists that missed out on the Tunisia and Egypt scoop) the “coalition of the willing” has joined in on the side of the “rebels”.

So this is where I come a bit unstuck, yes we know that the government in Libya is unelected, mind you they have never ever had an elected government so I am not sure how that is such a big deal. The country was being reformed through contact and trade etc and Colonel Gaddafi had renounced the use of violence and seemed to be sticking with that, hence the thawing of east west relations. Then because some of the citizens started shooting people (we seem to overlook the fact that although they are poorly organised and not much of a fighting force we are not talking about the rebels being a bunch of peaceful demonstrators) and the government decided to use force to sort them out, the west suddenly took sides and started bombing things and people.

If I were to hit the streets in NZ brandishing a weapon or otherwise making a pain of myself, I too would meet some force. Firstly in the form of the boys and girls in blue and if I and my mates were being too much trouble I may even meet the green crew. Because trying to overthrow the government by force in this country is considered to be treason, much the same as I suspect it is in Libya. Yes, yes I remember they are unelected and so there is no other method of getting rid of the Libyan government, but we aren’t very consistent here are we.

What about Fiji, don’t see any one bombing them. What about the IRA? not too many US jets supporting them (Libya did so that might be the problem). And others besides

And what do these “rebels” stand for? There is no cohesive leadership structure and no one is guaranteeing that they will hold elections either. Some Muslim states don’t have a great track record of supporting freedom of opinion and with or without the Colonel Libya is still a muslim state.

But I guess it is time he got his just deserts for all that trouble he caused for all those years, pity about the peasants that get killed while their leaders play international chess.