Foe, Friend, Foe, Corpse
by lizard
The US empire is a fickle friend indeed. With news of Gaddafi’s death this morning, I could only shake my head, reading the celebratory tweets and examining the grizzly death-porn on my twitter-feed. How many people recall how, just two years ago, US politicians like John McCain were giving this alleged monster accolades:
A U.S. diplomatic cable released Wednesday by the website WikiLeaks reportedly shows that Senator John McCain promised to help Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi obtain U.S. military hardware and become one of the United States’ partners in the war on terror.
The agreement took place on Aug. 14, 2009 and included Senator Joe Lieberman, Senator Lindsey Graham, Senator Susan Collins and Senate Armed Services Committee staffer Richard Fontaine.
According to the cable, McCain opened the meeting by saying that Libya’s relationship with the U.S. was “excellent.” Liebermann added, “We never would have guessed ten years ago that we would be sitting in Tripoli, being welcomed by a son of Muammar al-Qadhafi.”
The cable also says, “Lieberman called Libya an important ally in the war on terrorism, noting that common enemies sometimes make better friends. The Senators recognized Libya’s cooperation on counterterrorism and conveyed that it was in the interest of both countries to make the relationship stronger.”
What a difference two years makes. With the trumped up charges that Gaddafi was planning a slaughter on Benghazi, NATO embarked on a US blessed “humanitarian intervention” to allow the opposition forces to do this to Gaddafi’s hometown, Sirte:
The big question is why? Why did a former foe, turned friend, get recast as a monster to justify a violent regime change?
The cover story is a joke, and I’m frankly tired of having the same arguments with the same imperial apologists. There are too many examples of the US supporting brutal dictators as long as those dictators go along with the program for the noble humanitarian intervention meme to mean much. What will it take for them to finally understand US foreign policy doesn’t give two shits about human suffering?
US foreign policy is concerned with one thing and one thing only: projecting US hegemony, and whether it uses institutions like the IMF and the World Bank, or NATO, the goal is the same.
So what did Gaddafi do to cause the humanitarian bombs to begin raining down on Libya? My “educated” guess is Gaddafi made the same mistake Saddam Hussein made: he fucked with the Petro Dollar.
I’ve waded through this muck before, looking for answers, and though it puts the complicated geopolitical posturing of nation-states into a compelling context, I remain skeptical.
What I do know is how little we simple citizens really understand about what drives global conflicts around the world, and while we focus on our spoon-fed narratives of bad guys versus good guys, the reality of power and control exists outside that simple binary, in a nefarious realm us simple citizens can’t fathom.
-
1
Pingback on Oct 21st, 2011 at 12:27 pm
[...] more intelligent and knowledgeable people out there writing much more cogent analysis, but it’s hard to ignore the reflexive criticism of all things Obama that comes from certain elements of the principled [...]
Leave a Reply
-
Recent Comments
JC on Memorializing War Swede Johannson on Memorializing War Swede Johannson on Rape is not “knucklehead… 
larry kurtz (@larry_… on Memorializing War larry kurtz (@larry_… on Memorializing War Turner on Liz’s Weekly Poetry Seri… lizard19 on Memorializing War
October 21, 2011 at 12:51 am
And we think we’re so clever and classless and free,
October 21, 2011 at 6:34 am
Peter principle, I think. Gaddafi’s replacement could not be promoted with him in the way. Without elections, or some other turnover mechanism, loyal incompetence is not always so easily rewarded. He may have been simply too competent and disloyal to hierarchical structures in Europe and the U.S. to stay on. As I recall they did try to fire him, but he refused to leave.
October 21, 2011 at 7:37 am
Well, since he’s dead now, I guess you can forget about your Fair Play for Gaddafi effort. But at least you and the Republicans can make maximal use of that photo of Obama shaking hands with your friend.
Go nuts with it.
October 21, 2011 at 7:44 am
do you have anything substantive to say? how about you explain for me why politicians from both sides of the isle were giving Gaddafi props two years ago? or you can just insinuate i’m acting like a republican, like others have done.
would you have preferred a picture of John McCain shaking hands with this monster?
October 21, 2011 at 12:02 pm
I can hardly wait for your spin on Obama’s announcement that we’re pulling our troops out of Iraq at the end of the year.
Let’s see. Maybe he was too slow pulling them out? Maybe it’s just so he can redeploy them against Iran or against the OWS folks?
But I know you’ll manage to come up with some argument, pallatable to at least a few of your friends, to tear him down.
October 21, 2011 at 12:23 pm
so because you don’t have an adequate answer as to why, in just two years, US politicians have switched form handshakes to precision bombs, you will fall back to the predictable tactics of evasion and ridicule.
October 21, 2011 at 4:31 pm
There was rioting and disorder from this thing called the arab spring (or occupy # bengazi if you prefer). It was no longer good for business and general orderliness of things for him to stay on. So we showed him the door. How do you explain the contradiction in your support for the US Spring / Occupy Wall Street but not for the arabs in Libya trying to do something similar? US foreign policy is hypocritical and not about human rights..im not saying that…but in this instance the US and European security and economic interests seem to have coincided with the interests of the movements you generally support. So in theory you should have the outcome you seek even if you still dont like the reason it happened. Why so sad?
October 21, 2011 at 6:13 pm
you think the arabs in Libya are “trying to do something similar” as OWS? wow.
the occupiers in this country aren’t being armed and trained by CIA and M16 to overthrow wall street. they don’t get airstrikes against wall street from NATO. and once freed from tyranny, i don’t think the occupiers are planning on targeting African workers as loyalists to a toppled regime.
as for this “humanitarian” intervention serving our economic and security interests, prove it. how did Libya pose a security threat to the US? and how are average americans going to benefit economically?
October 21, 2011 at 1:02 pm
I’m not voting Obama this time Turner although i volunteered extensively and contributed money the last time around. If you don’t like that, tough. It won’t matter because Montana isn’t going to go for Obama whether i vote for him or not. Seriously. Or do you predict a Montana win for Obama this time?
I think you are hurting Obama with your inability to read what you think you want to post and then to reconsider before you actually do post.
Attempting to derail Lizard’s post with your personal political personality obsessions isn’t helping Obama; It’s hurting Obama. You are hurting Obama and you don’t even know it.
When you behave like this, you look like a weenie, and you make all Democrats look like weenies.
I don’t think that is your intent, but that is the effect.
Please consider this.
October 21, 2011 at 1:46 pm
I’m not the one with the personality obsession. It’s Liz, and maybe you, who are obsessed with Obama.
I have no delusions about the man. You do. And your delusions apparently come from some very dark place in your soul.
“Weenie”? What is this, sixth grade?
October 21, 2011 at 2:12 pm
Liz?
I haven’t seen Liz obsessed with personality. At all.
I recall you having a problem with 4&20 because some writers criticized some of Testers votes and they criticized some of his lack of transparency on his mandated logging bill.
You threw a similar fit of “unfair” “unfair”about that. You made the exact same claims regarding criticism of Tester as you are now making about Liz’ article on US policy toward Libya. Back then you claimed everyone was being anti-Tester.
Until last week when you decided that you were going to single-handily take Tester out of the race. How’s your draft Brian campaign going? There is a reason Schweitzer’s office person thought you were a crack pot, like you said.
Have you thought about that reason?
I’m serious, Turner. It’s not just me. It’s also Schweitzer’s office person. Did they have a very dark place in their soul, as well?
Please think and reflect a little bit before you post. It won’t have a bad effect. Honest.
October 21, 2011 at 3:45 pm
In the first part of your attack you accused me of taking positions I’ve never taken. For example, I’ve never written a single word about mandated logging.
And yes, I’d like to primary Tester with someone who can win — that means Schweitzer, I think.
As for unreflective posts, you led this off with “And we think we’re so clever and classless and free,” What in the hell does that mean?
October 21, 2011 at 1:34 pm
I disagree with Pogie in that I think this was done because there was a broad convergence of interests that made this possible.
It was an opportunistic decision by the US instead of a strategic initiative, most likely.
I’ve noticed that every war we ever entered anywhere anytime was based on good sound moral principles. That Pogie chooses to believe those principles in this war says far more about him than about the morality or necessity of the war.
October 21, 2011 at 5:08 pm
Wow, almost the whole way through a comment without amateur psychology. Congratulations.
October 21, 2011 at 6:32 pm
Pogie would like to depict this post as “reflexive criticism of all things Obama”, but oddly enough, besides the picture, Obama isn’t mentioned once. strange, considering i’m supposed to be obsessed.
then Pogie moves on to make this condescending comment where he makes a rather weak semantic distinction:
“overstating” the danger is fair, according to Pogie, but saying “trumped up”, i guess, isn’t. that’s fantastic.
Pogie goes even further, assuming what the “principled” left would say had Obama not intervened. how clairvoyant, Pogie. you are not in a very good position to be chiding Steve for amateur psychology when you are busy telling me what i would think about something that didn’t happen.
it’s convenient to describe how awful Gaddafi was, but to leave out the fact the US had used Libya for extraordinary rendition. just like with Saddam and Bin Laden, as long as they remained useful to US imperial ambitions, then whatever atrocities they committed were just fine. but when they became no longer useful, and it benefits imperial interests to dispose of them, then here comes our military might and whatever cover story will make the violence palatable for domestic consumption.
Pogie ends with this:
i would like to hear more about those things that Obama has done that Pogie absolutely opposes, but those aren’t the kind of posts he writes. no, he’s a good democrat who only puts down the pompoms to pass judgement on morally bankrupt critics from the principled left, like this half-baked reptile.
October 21, 2011 at 8:13 pm
Just curious. Are capital letters oppressive, too? A sign of Western imperialism?
It would seem so.
October 21, 2011 at 8:25 pm
yep, you’re scraping the bottom of the barrel now, Don. why don’t you go back to your intelligent discontent if that’s all you got left.
October 21, 2011 at 6:52 pm
Hell, that is Aretha Franklin in the photo, just after she sang at Obama’s inauguration.
October 21, 2011 at 8:52 pm
Liz, the people of libya were seeking to change the oppresive structures of govt in their country in line with all the other nations associated with the arab spring. Correct me if I’m wrong but occupy wall street took direct inspiration from the arab spring revolts and protests. The difference is that people in those places actually are putting their lives on the line. I did not say our policy or the true reasons underlying it were moral. I said if you were consistent you would support the end result even if you take issue with the reasons or means by which it happened. Do you think the occupy wall street movement or americans in general are more entitled to struggle for a country they want then the people of libya? I realize the us gov is not consistent with their approach but I don’t think you are either other then consistently opposing whatever they do. If the us stayed out of the way you would criticize the lack of support for the will of the people as you do inyemen and bahrain. All I said is you should be tentatively satisfied with the fact these people are getting what may be an opportunity for a representative govt. Of course the jury is out on how it ends up.
October 21, 2011 at 9:16 pm
yes jack, ows has taken direct inspiration from how Egyptians and Tunisians were able to topple their respective dictators, but neither uprisings resorted to arming citizens and waging what amounts to a civil war backed by foreign force.
it’s up to the Libyans now to determine what their future will look like, and if that future entails more extremist Islamic elements, then the US better be prepared to live with that.
October 21, 2011 at 9:28 pm
Thankfully that is not something we have to resort to because our govt is not killing people in the street. Tunisia and egypt did not have to resort to violence because it was never used extensively against them. Of course our own revolution involved armed uprising with foreign assistance back in the day. There is enough double standards on all sides here to go around. Have a good weekend thanks for the discussion.
October 21, 2011 at 9:38 pm
i sure hope it doesn’t come to that—i’m a wimp, and i don’t own any guns. thanks jack.