Why is Libya in the Crosshairs of the West? Good article from Foreign Policy Journal

[PurityOfEssence]

Tripoli was a reluctant ally, not a firm ally, in America’s war on terror. A 2007 West Point study based on Al Qaeda files retrieved from Sinjar in Iraq confirmed that Libyan fighters crossing the Syrian border into Iraq under the banner of ‘Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia’ consisted of a far larger percentage on a per capita basis than any other nationality in the 2006-07 timeframe. Turning his back on jihadis fleeing Libya was Qaddafi’s way to purge his country of potential troublemakers. ‘Operation Odyssey Dawn’ was launched to impede Tripoli from exploiting the power vacuum during the transition in Cairo and Tunis. The assault came even before the UN special envoy to Libya had tabled his report. Regime change in Tripoli costs the US relatively little. Qaddafi did not have an ‘oil for protection’ arrangement with the US like the Saudis. Nor was he pivotal to the US like the Bahrainis who host the US’ Fifth Fleet and have an FTA with the Americans. Bahrain is strategic because it is separated from Saudi Arabia by a narrow seaway through which 18% of the world’s oil passes.

Qaddafi was wedded to the idea of floating a ‘gold dinar’ in conducting international oil trade. He urged the OPEC members to re-price their oil in the gold dinar, instead of dollars. His view resonated well with the African petro-economies. Such a bold move could have had ‘ground-shifting’ implications for the world economic order. A country’s economic strength would depend on the gold reserves and not on its dollar assets. In 2000, Saddam Hussein announced that Iraqi oil would be traded in euros, not dollars. Some say that the sanctions and the invasion followed because the US was desperate to deter other OPEC members from toeing a similar line.

Foreign Policy Journal

There's much, much more going on here than just this, but it's a very good and concise article.

It's a war of opportunism for oil and money; it has little to do with protecting civilians except as a pretext, and the sheer cynicism of such a claim is breathtaking. Those who swallow this are either naive beyond belief or so besotten with hero-worship of our President that nothing that he does could ever be interpreted as less than genius or lawful beyond reproach. That's just sad.

This is a truly shameful episode for our country.

[Distant Observer]

1. Pls don't disturb the war propagandist.. The humanitarian pretense is so satisfying

[PurityOfEssence]

16. Yes, and it's so much fun to gush self-love of being sympathetic to the innocent victims-to-be

It's rapturous self-aggrandizement to uphold the banner of sweetness and light and insultingly hound any dissent that would characterize our President as anything short of honest and sincere.

Some truly swallow this bullshit, but some are just fighting back to try to contain ANY questioning of the President. The latter cleaves into two groups: those who truly feel that he is a transcendent being who deserves protection at all costs, and those with fragile egos who quiver and rage at any thought that they may have made a grave error of character judgment which would then show them to be less than perfect themselves.

The corporate media has done a masterful job, and the Republicans have played a fairly deft game here of getting their enemy to do their dirty work for them while exposing himself legally and politically in the process.

This is a truly shameful episode in world history for all parties concerned, and the very idea of hiding behind a cloak of moral sweetness and beauty is the big lie writ large.

Meanwhile, people die, dreams are dashed and the very wobbly world is further destabilized.

[tabatha]

30. Please see

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1325284&mesg_id=1325609

[PurityOfEssence]

42. So what? AFTER that, he threatened nationalization.

Do you think other people don't understand context? This is laughable. Yes, Qaddafi even hired Richard Perle to help him get in good with the US Government, but you'll also note that after Chevron and Occidental went into Libya, they found that the deal just wasn't good enough for them, and withdrew their interests after a not-so-lucrative--to say the least--foray.

The fragmented bits and pieces of "evidence" you offer are sheer piffle. Hey, Ronald Reagan was a New Deal Democrat once upon a time; he must've been a great guy, right?

[BeFree]

2. US dollar

The threat to the US dollar posed by this new oil exchange mechanism is exactly what has led us to bomb the crap out of Libya.

And hoarders of the dollar are rejoicing.

[Distant Observer]

35. Most don't understand that Gaddafi's rhetoric on pan-African finance systems was destabalizing

to the Euro-African pact and opened the door wide for an Afro-Asian pact that destroyed the long-held
assumption that North Africa would become the resource basket for Southern Europe.

[EFerrari]

3. It is a good article.

I saw it too late last night to read well or post. Thanks.

[joshcryer]

4. Oh, it's certainly about oil, you don't get outside help if you don't have a resource.

See: Rawanda. That does not mean that Gaddafi would have "easily sewn it up at little loss of life" however, and such an idea is patently ridiculous in light of the overwhelming evidence that he had no desire to crack down on the rebellion with patient caring.

[tabatha]

5. This is the best of the comments to that heap of BS

Cactus
June 13, 2011 - 8:53 am

This article show how you can take any set of facts, turn them sideways into half-truths and create a skewed world view to fit your belief system.

I see this all to well as I lived in Libya for 5+ years prior to the start of the war. Libyans, most all sane Libyans, were desperate for the Qadhafi Kleptrocracy to just go away and that they be given the chance to build a real country.

Note that it is the Libyans who are fighting for their freedom. The regime is fighting with mercenaries to maintain their ability to continue their thieving ways.

and another:

Ussef
June 13, 2011 - 1:26 pm

No matter how you twist and colour facts to fit into your narrative, there is the one single fact of the blood of thousands of Libyans Qaddafi murdered over the years and the thousands he is murdering now. How could any decent human being sing the apology of such a monster? How can you face yourself in the morning?
Shame on you.

and this one is so wrong:

This journalist speaks the truth. This is no popular uprising, otherwise it would have been over almost immediately. Gaddafi has the power to shut off the water supply to Benghazi, but refuses to do so because of the innocent women and children who would suffer. Gaddafi is a good man. I can forgive the ignorance and idiocy of Osborne, Cactus and Ussef. But I don’t think that God will.

Yeah right, Gaddafi has cut the water off to lots of towns and cities, and poisoned water wells with gasoline.

[EFerrari]

6. And who can argue with name calling and anonymous claims.

lol

[joshcryer]

7. Good point. Anyone here want to post non-anonymously?

;)

[tabatha]

8. Sometimes I feel as though I am somewhere in Wonderland.

Just look at Gaddafi's wiki entry and the crap and terrorism he has supported in his 41 years, and people are supporting him?

Up is down, black is white. Gaddafi is good.

[EFerrari]

10. You must be in Wonderland if you are hearing Gaddafi is good

because no one here is saying that.

[tabatha]

13. Distant Observer does.

[EFerrari]

17. No, he doesn't. Please. If you want to be taken seriously

address the issues.

[tabatha]

25. He is always defending Gaddafi.

And he constantly shouts in capital letters - and does not respond when I counter with factual information.

[EFerrari]

32. Maybe you are reading some other Distant Observer. n/t

[BeFree]

18. Obama thought Gaddaffi was good.

There is a pic floating around of Obama warmly greeting Gaddaffi.

Until Gaddaffi started talking about putting the US dollar down a few notches, all was swell.
The OP is dead on. Just try to refute it, I dare ya.

[joshcryer]

20. It was a G8 event, they even sat at the same table.

Proof that Obama and Gaddafi are friends.

Maybe that's why he was reluctant to jump on board.

:sarcasm:

[BeFree]

41. Obama was reluctant because it is a crime to attack?

Especially attacking a warmly welcomed friend like Gaddaffi.

It is about the oil and the idea that instead of selling oil for US dollars, there was a conspiracy to begin exchanging oil for something besides US dollars. Please don't ignore those facts.

[Brianboru]

9. I'm SHOCKED! 0bama went to war over oil?!?!

And playing golf with Boner.

0bama lied. Libyans died.

[tabatha]

12. It is NOT the same.

Thousands of Libyans have not died because of Obama.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/03/opinion/03kristof.html?_r=2&ref=nicholasdkristof

And BTW, Obama was RELUCTANT to get involved, and got the hell out as fast as he could.

Do you really think that if someone was interested in oil they would do that?

[Brianboru]

37. Look at just a few the tragic human situations in the world –

- Iraq – oil, US intervention
- Rwanda – no oil, no US intervention
- Ethiopia - no oil, no US intervention
- Libya – oil, US intervention
- Sudan - no oil, no US intervention
- Syria - no oil, no US intervention
- Kashmir - no oil, no US intervention
- Afghanistan – could disrupt oil producing countries, US intervention
- Yemen - borders Saudi Arabia and the Straights of Hormuz – US intervention

Without oil the US economy would collapse, so it is our interest to keep the oil flowing until something better comes along.

Just don’t kid yourself that 0bama went to Libya for a more noble purpose than oil. He can say that, you can say that, but why aren’t we helping in Rwanda?

Follow the oil.

[Exilednight]

38. We haven't cut our ties from the Libyan war. NPR announced yesterday that US Apache

helicopters were flying missions into Libya.

Edit: Sorry, it wasn't yesterday on NPR, it was Friday. I think it was the Diane Rehm show on which I heard it.

[Distant Observer]

40. US is 40% of NATO military budget. If NATO bombs, the US is bombing

[Distant Observer]

14. Obama just goes along with the imutable Euro-impulse to justify ruthless domination

[tabatha]

29. Oh quit the phony nonsense.

I don't think you are convincing anyone.

[Distant Observer]

36. The victims of colonial and neo-colonial control all over the globe disagree

[EFerrari]

11. I keep forgetting about water in this situation.

It's easy to remember big oil and the banksters but water may play just as important a part.

[tabatha]

15. Evidence, facts? rigorous analysis?

[EFerrari]

19. Water Emerges as a Hidden Weapon

Water Emerges as a Hidden Weapon
By Simba Russeau

CAIRO, May 27, 2011 (IPS) - Libya’s enormous aquatic reserves could potentially become a new weapon of choice if government forces opt to starve coastal cities that heavily rely on free flowing freshwater.

With only five percent of the country getting at least 100 millimetres of rainfall per year, Libya is one of the driest countries in the world.

Historically, coastal aquifers or desalination plants located in Tripoli were of poor quality due to contamination with salt water, resulting in undrinkable water in many cities including Benghazi.

Oil exploration in the southern Libyan desert in the mid-1950s revealed vast quantities of fresh, clean groundwater - this could meet growing national demand and development goals.

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=55817

[joshcryer]

21. Indeed, Gaddafi starved Misrata of its water for almost two months. Electricity, too.

So, yeah.

However, Vision 2030 for Libya shows that they knew this was a problem and planned to fix it.

[Distant Observer]

22. How phony. As if Gaddafi is running around controling anything. Control was destroyed months ago

[joshcryer]

24. So Gaddafi loyalists were not ordered to cut off power and water to Misrata? False.

[tabatha]

26. There is nothing about any other govt except Libya

CAIRO, May 27, 2011 (IPS) - Libya’s enormous aquatic reserves could potentially become a new weapon of choice if government forces opt to starve coastal cities that heavily rely on free flowing freshwater.

[joshcryer]

27. Exactly, and that's what they did to Misrata, so the government was planning it all along.

[EFerrari]

31. "In a nutshell, whoever controls NSAS,

controls the economies, foreign policies and destinies of several countries in the region, not just north-eastern Africa," explains Saeedi.

[pampango]

23. "Qaddafi was happily shipping off Libyan oil to European ports. He was buying their weapons.

He had invested in the US’s private equity firms and big banks. He shared crucial intelligence with the West on Al Qaeda. Then why did he come in the line of fire? Was it for his ruthless crackdown on violent protesters?"

"China has extensive energy and construction investments in Libya. 30,000 Chinese were employed in these projects before the evacuation. The US wants to deny the Chinese the oil produced from their own investments. Then why did Beijing abstain rather than voting against U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973 to safeguard its interests? Simply because it is still not in a position to face off with the US/NATO." If China had vetoed the resolution there would have been no UN intervention in Libya for them to "face off with". They vetoed UN intervention in Burma and there was none to "face off with". They have threatened a veto on Syria, so there is no intervention "to face off with".

China was the first to sign a deal with the Iraq government of their oil though we have thousands of troops still there and China played no role in Bush's Iraq war. China will undoubtedly be a major player in buying Libya's oil no matter which side comes out on top. Even if Libya decides to sell their oil to some other country, China will just buy the oil that that country used to buy.

"...what held back Russia from vetoing the resolution on Libya? Moscow could not afford to derail the ‘reset’ with the US." So Russia is so afraid of derailing the 'reset' with the US that they are cooperating with everything we want now - except in Syria, of course. I hadn't noticed any overall pattern of Russian subservience to US' desires of late and the article gave no other reason for Russia's compliance.

Who knew that China and Russia were still so afraid of us (except for when it comes to Syria or perviously in Burma)?

[tabatha]

28. I guess you are also aware of the fact that it was

Gaddafi that approached the West because he wanted more oil markets. And Bush took him up on it.

So now we are bombing Gaddafi for his oil that he wanted to sell in other markets so badly that he gave up his nuclear and chemical weapons?

Yep, all of the various theories abound that are simply not true.

[Distant Observer]

33. The fact that the Western Oil interest were furious with the TERMS is well documented.

Gaddafi was not giving them the deal or the access they wanted to make their billions in profits.

They had pulled out of Libya and the Russians and the Chinese were moving in.

The profound dishonesty of the propagandists is disgusting and inexcusable, because they cannot be completely ignorant.

[Distant Observer]

34. US/EU has been determined keep N.African Energy resources under control and to keep Russia out

The false ignorance of the war propagandists is shameful. Oil is not the only reason for Western imperial impulse, but that it is a factor in the Libyan intervention is well documented.

Maclatchy Company is as mainstream a news conglomerates as they come.
http://www.mcclatchy.com/2006/06/09/354/daily.html

Yet even they have to open a little peep-hole to the obvious: The Libyan intervention finds a likely explanation in Western Energy control objectives.

That may not be the entire rationale, but there is mounting evidence that there was coordination between the Arab Oil Monarchies and Western powers to do something subversive in Libya from the very onset of the troubles in that country. Without accepting the existence of hidden agendas the rapid coalescing of support for militant action in Libya and the lack of No Move Zones above other troubled regions -- Bahrain, Yemen, borders of Syria and Israel, etc -- was inexplicable.

McClachy's "Real News" finds evidence that, as far back as 3 years ago, control of Libyan energy reserves for Europe became a focus of US policy in the region and the Colonel was not cooperating.

Find link here (others require membership):

http://warisacrime.org/content/us-acting-keep-oil-out-r...

[Distant Observer]

39. Link to McClachy report on US/EU Libya scheme to reduce Russian role

McClachy reports on Wiki-leak cables which reveal the long-running strategy

http://warisacrime.org/content/us-acting-keep-oil-out-russian-hands