Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
I think you misread Boo a little bit.  He wasn't advocating for getting rid of Gaddafi or letting him stay.  If anything, he seems to be on the side of not getting involved.  He simply meant that it was dangerous to make a policy of regime change with reliance on the rebel forces -- who aren't trained in the strategy and equipment the way soldiers from Britain, France and the US are -- to get the job done instead of simply doing it ourselves.

He's worried that we're committing to something without really committing to it fully, and that the consequence could be to make it needlessly bloody or even a failure.

I think it's a little pessimistic, but his concerns aren't lost on me.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Fri Mar 18th, 2011 at 01:32:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Boo and I have had a few arguments of late - largely because I feel he accepts the militaristic framing of political problems so beloved of the neocons even if he doesn't share their intentions.  He has also taken to bemoaning the responsibilities of being the world's sole superpower whilst not being shy of reaping the benefits.  

On Libya, he basically wanted Europe to do the invading and the regime change.  He argued that basically that was what the UN was sanctioning.  My point is that under international law, the UN can sanction no such thing.  Protect civilians, yes. Prevent human rights abuses, yes.  Ultimately attack Gaddafi forces if they violate the ceasefire, yes.  Overt invasion for the purposes of regime change crosses the line.

Europe isn't here to follow neocon framing and act as the USA has done in Afghanistan or Iraq.  Boo is now arguing that gross human right's violations are not the USA'a problem.  He's wrong on that score as well.  It is the responsibility for all UN members, and particularly Security Council members, to act.  But the solution isn't the invade first and ask questions afterwards.

It used to be US conservatives who were the isolationists.  Now it is US progressives - disillusioned by Iraq and Afghanistan - who take that stance. What we actually need is a more sophisticated model of graduated intervention, not the all or nothing approach Boo seems to be advocating.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Fri Mar 18th, 2011 at 02:11:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series