"Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind." - George Orwell
Used to love these cartoon in high school IB history as my teacher would use them to break up the globs of information he laid on us. Reminiscing aside I like this one. It points out how over the top we took it to Libya with all that ammo attached to the plane. I also like how it points out that we went to libya and not any of the multiple countries that desperately need our help.
Personally I don't think we should be involved in any of these dealings. Why is it America's place to step into the middle east when there is issues. It makes me wonder if this is some type of Oil play similar to what happened with the Iraq war. At a time when America is literally in shambles due to economic woes and the future looks grim as we face our unstoppable dept growth, then the last thing we should do is get involved in more wars. Wars cost a country money and lead them into more debt.
I'd like to hear your opinion on the matter as to if we should be getting involved here as you probably follow this closer than I do. Awesome cartoon.
Fundamentally, I think the principle flaw with the War in Libya is the discrepancy between the legal foundations for intervention, and the otherwise stated policy in Libya, which from my understanding is the ouster of Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi from his reign. If you watch the video by Dr. Anthony Cordesman at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, you can hear a more nuanced understanding of the political dynamics in attaining international consensus.
I am not convinced by the argument that it was necessary to avert a humanitarian disaster. The terms rebels and civilians are used interchangeably. The distinctions are more out of convenience.
The difficulty in Libya arises from a limitation of action in fulfilling our country's desires. The No-Fly Zone achieves little in removing rulers from power. In Serbia, Milosevic only relinquished power after Russia removed him from his client position. Similarly, in Iraq, Sudaam Hussein only left office after Coalition forces invaded the country.
Hence, what a No-Fly Zone has created is a stalemate in violence. We see the rebel forces and the government skirmishing between Ras Lanuf and Brega without any clear overtures of victory. In this situation, with the limitations of the UN Security Resolution, the best options are to negotiate a cease-fire and establish a proactive means to see Qaddafi leave power, even if that means having his son Saif al-Islam come into power.
Used to love these cartoon in high school IB history as my teacher would use them to break up the globs of information he laid on us. Reminiscing aside I like this one. It points out how over the top we took it to Libya with all that ammo attached to the plane. I also like how it points out that we went to libya and not any of the multiple countries that desperately need our help.
ReplyDeletePersonally I don't think we should be involved in any of these dealings. Why is it America's place to step into the middle east when there is issues. It makes me wonder if this is some type of Oil play similar to what happened with the Iraq war. At a time when America is literally in shambles due to economic woes and the future looks grim as we face our unstoppable dept growth, then the last thing we should do is get involved in more wars. Wars cost a country money and lead them into more debt.
I'd like to hear your opinion on the matter as to if we should be getting involved here as you probably follow this closer than I do. Awesome cartoon.
Fundamentally, I think the principle flaw with the War in Libya is the discrepancy between the legal foundations for intervention, and the otherwise stated policy in Libya, which from my understanding is the ouster of Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi from his reign. If you watch the video by Dr. Anthony Cordesman at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, you can hear a more nuanced understanding of the political dynamics in attaining international consensus.
ReplyDeleteI am not convinced by the argument that it was necessary to avert a humanitarian disaster. The terms rebels and civilians are used interchangeably. The distinctions are more out of convenience.
The difficulty in Libya arises from a limitation of action in fulfilling our country's desires. The No-Fly Zone achieves little in removing rulers from power. In Serbia, Milosevic only relinquished power after Russia removed him from his client position. Similarly, in Iraq, Sudaam Hussein only left office after Coalition forces invaded the country.
Hence, what a No-Fly Zone has created is a stalemate in violence. We see the rebel forces and the government skirmishing between Ras Lanuf and Brega without any clear overtures of victory. In this situation, with the limitations of the UN Security Resolution, the best options are to negotiate a cease-fire and establish a proactive means to see Qaddafi leave power, even if that means having his son Saif al-Islam come into power.