Involvement in Libya a tad sketchy
Logan Robicheau
writer
NATO’s involvement in Libya is becoming a touchy subject.
When we first heard that Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi was killing his own people for rebelling against his dictatorial regime, like many of you, my thoughts were, and still are, “this guy is a tyrant, he’s crazy, and he needs to go.”
But my thoughts have changed in to. “Wait. If we’re in Libya, why weren’t we in Egypt? Why aren’t we helping more in Sudan? Why did we choose Libya instead of Syria?”
The decision to intervene happened so quickly, it was almost as if we had no time to debate and give opinions on this issue at all, which was probably the methodology behind it.
So once it was agreed upon by the United Nations Security Council (excluding China and Russia) to initiate a “no-fly zone” over Libya, operation “protect civilians” (not really called that) was now in motion.
So you may ask yourself what exactly a no-fly zone is?
Well, it’s military intervention. Basically you’re bombing the crap out of a countries unlucky air force and not allowing any planes to fly over this zone, so that the enemy has to rely on ground forces, seriously crippling any advantage Gadhafi may have against the rebels.
So now that we know what a no-fly zone is I think we can all assume that this isn’t just an act of moral duty that we have to help innocents, but this is an act of war. Just like Afghanistan and Iraq, we are to believe that we should go to war because of our moral duty as a good ‘liberal democracy.’
The ‘moral police’ may have had support in Afghanistan — they even had support by many in Iraq — but the third time is not the charm.
People are tired of listening to what I call “Liberal Jesus Propaganda.” We are there to help Libya free it’s people, to protect the people and to show them the light by helping them attain equality and civil rights.
What Libya doesn’t realize is that if they are going to try and emulate the ways of the West with this idea of “freedom”, they will have to do it to the West’s terms, which is to secure energy needs for the future — oil.
We are assuming that once Gadhafi is out of power a new regime will be put in place that echo’s a voice of reason, when in fact, it could be quite the opposite and a regime of thugs could be the new rulers.
Interfering in a civil war is never warranted. NATO could be making an already-unstable area even more unstable which will undermine NATO’s credibility in Arab leaders and in the civilians themselves. Are we better off without Gadhafi? Absolutely. But let’s let the Libyan people decide his fate.
