Son of Muammar Gaddafi was just killed by a NATO airstrike - breaking news on CNN. Edit: It was Saif al Arab Gaddafi who was killed, not his other son as I previously thought (Saif al Islam Gaddafi).
And three of his children were killed too. Still nobody can say a word about this horrible war crime.
Say what you want about the President being a murderer, but in this case, it's actually an example of Americans caring about foreign lives. The rebels want us to be there, and I'm pretty sure Benghazi would have been another Srebrenica (which was just as preventable) given how unhinged Qaddafi is. That said, I really don't like Obama's policy towards war, but given the Libya situation, you have to say that the initial air strikes were a positive thing. Now, however, I think NATO is trying to overstep its' bounds. I don't think NATO should be there to win a war for the rebels (rebels that could just as easily defect as Osama did in the 90s). They should maintain a strict adherence to their mandate to protect civilians by bombing advancing Qaddafi units, and keep their noses out of everything else. Situation kinda reminds me of Somalia, where initially America was welcomed, then they got into a scrap with a warlord, then in their attempts to execute the warlord ended up alienating the nation by bombing the hell out of a council of elders and creating so much "collateral damage".
How were the air stikes a positive thing? Its created a perpetual civil war, 30,000 people dead. Yeah, very positive
Syria, virtually identical scenario, only more brutal suppression, and we do nothing. Incoherent foreign policy.
The air strikes did not create the civil war---Qaddafi firing on his own people and then half the damn nation seceding did that. The air-strikes were only meant to dissuade Qaddafi's forces from entering Benghazi and slaughtering people within, which the rebels asked for, and which definitely saved many lives. You convince the Arab League to condemn Syria when many of them actually like the regime as opposed to Qaddafi who alienated most of them. Then get a UN resolution passed when Russia and China were very close to vetoing on Libya, and certainly will not hesitate to do so this time around. Or, hell, let's go unilateral, and launch a ground invasion of Syria, AMIRITE. I knew one of these days America's incessant irrational vetoes on anything concerning Israel would come back to bite her, and it has. No way Obama can get anything close to the scarce multilateral support he received last time---that borderline "benefit of the doubt" China and Russia gave him is gone. Expect nothing less than a swift veto from either one if this resolution comes to pass---and hey, can't exactly fault them for following through on their conviction when the United States is busy applying the veto to pretty much everything Israel-related.
Well, for one thing, the Syrian rebels---actually don't want us there, so far as I can tell. Whereas Libya's rebels were openly decrying the West's lack of involvement. You can't just assume that all people want foreigners to invade and start bombing runs to solve their problems. While the crimes perpetrated against Syrian civilians are outrageous, American drone strikes and air-strikes are not exactly good presents to have for everyone. Also, while in an ideal world, we could save everyone, it is clear that we don't live in an ideal world. http://www.worldbulletin.net/?aType=haber&ArticleID=73199
