The Forkes Report

Tim's Favorite Blogs

The Weather
Ruffle Your Shuffle
Eschew Obfuscation
IM Earthling
Kaki West
Silk Road
The Huffington Post
Talking Points Memo
American Progress
Citizens For Ethics
Crooks And Liars
Common Cause

Media Matters

Blog Directories

Friday, August 26. 2011

Brokedown Palace

How many different ways have you seen “Moammar Gadhafi'” spelled? There have been three; of course FOX News has their own spelling for Arabic words and names. They even call themselves “fair and balanced.” But that’s beside the point.

Hell, the spelling of his name isn’t even the point.
 “WHAT’S THE POINT!”
 “The point is we are willing to grow along spiritual lines.”
 Okay, only the Friends of Bill will get the joke.

Well, above it’s spelled as we find it on CNN and other sites, but the New York Times spells the dictator’s name this: Muammar el-Gaddafi. Which is easier to spell? Here’s the deciding criterion: which does MS Word recognize? Ah! The New York Times, the newspaper of record, wins!

As most people know, Gaddafi has been removed from power and is on the run. The rebels, once a rag-tag gang that couldn’t shoot straight, is searching every door and every rat hole in Libya for the former dictator and his family. Judging from how Gaddafi’s supporters are being treated, I’d say the Gaddafi family will be brutally murdered and put on display as trophies: every man, woman and child that has any connection to Gaddafi.

If Gaddafi and the men of his family have any sense, or compassion and mercy, they will have put their families on a boat to … on a boat to … hmmm … hard to think of any country that would harbor the family of Muammar el-Gaddafi. Venezuela, he could send them to Venezuela! Hugo Chavez likes Gaddafi.

The old dictator has enough money to buy freedom and life for his family, despite the sanctions and restrictions and Hugo Chavez would do it just to piss off the U.S. government. And all those right wing extremists who look for anything to blame on President Obama.

Here’s the fascinating thing about Gaddafi: he had a huge stash of porn — gay porn! But he appeared to be heterosexual. He had those women bodyguards and a thing for Condoleezza Rice! The rebels found Gaddafi’s homage to our former Secretary of State, a photo album. Who knows what else they found that our media might be too embarrassed to report. Or maybe, they want to save Rice any further embarrassment.

Seven years ago the Bush Administration began normalizing relations with Gaddafi and five years ago Rice met with the brutal dictator in Tripoli; everyone shaking hands and smiling. There was a Congressional delegation as well that included several Republican members of Congress and then Senator Barack Obama.

Those crazed right-wingers like to circulate that photo when talking about the fall of Gaddafi — but they conveniently forget to mention how and why Obama was in Tripoli. As usual, it was all about the oil. Europe and China had their hooks into the Libyan government for oil and our government leaders wanted our slice of the big gooey pie.

Which reminds me: remember back in 2002-03 when the neo-cons pulling Bush’s strings said with absolute certainty all of Iraq’s oil would pay for the war we started in that country? Of course they also said we would be in and out of Iraq in five months. Here it is eight and a half years later and we’re still pulling troops out of Iraq.

Had President Obama did what Bush did, what crazy fools like Senator McCain advocated, sending ground troops into Libya, we would be looking at years of involvement and who knows how many American troops killed or wounded. Again.

Thankfully, President Obama only committed air power to a no-fly zone slash let’s help the rebels intervention. We lost one drone. It was a really expensive drone, all tricked out with all the latest electronics, but no Americans injured or killed.

But of course Republicans aren’t giving President Obama any credit; they say Obama didn’t commit enough U.S. force to the effort and it dragged on longer than it should have.

What Republicans don’t want to admit is that President Obama is far more successful “war” president than Bush. He’s ending the two wars Bush started, he got Usama bin Laden, no thanks to the Bush Administration, and now he’s successfully navigated the hairy road of rebellion in Libya without getting any U.S. troops involved on the ground — although I’m willing to bet there are some special operators in Libya, sort of helping things along, teaching the gang that couldn’t shoot straight how to shoot straight.

Republicans don’t want to give President Obama any credit for anything because, as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has stated many times, their number one goal is to make Barack Obama a one-term president.

Not the economy — no. Not jobs — no. Definitely not the environment or health care — no. Ousting President Obama is their top priority. But that’s a rant for another day.

What we have to wonder about is what will Libya look like in the coming years, three, four and five years from now. Some non-partisan foreign policy analysts said that the transitional government (loosely defined) in Libya is looking to be pro-Western, but that is not settled by any means. All one has to do is look at what’s happening in Egypt to see how things can change.

One of the first things Egypt did when the government of Hosni Mubarek was toppled was forbid women from having any meaningful involvement in governing. Then of course there is the spectacle of Mubarek being put on trial. The guy is in court on a gurney.

Here’s the thing about these rebels in Northern Africa and the Arabian Peninsula. They think like they’re still in the 12th Century. They get into a battle with Gaddafi and his forces in Tripoli, Libya’s capital if you weren’t aware. And what do they do once they drive the dictator out? They start trashing the place, stealing weapons and ammunition along with everything else that can be pried off the walls, leaving the compound unlivable.

From the description of Gaddafi’s last stronghold, it was a well-built place and could have served any new regime well. Yeah, there was definitely opulence beyond opulence and that could have been sold with the proceeds going to pay costs or help those in need — and Libya has a lot of people in need — but instead, they destroy it.

Granted, a lot of the damage is from NATO bombing, but the endless celebratory firing of weapons, shooting at buildings for no other reason than impromptu target practice and the wanton brutality of people deemed to be supporters of Gaddafi — it just doesn’t give me a lot of hope for Libya’s future.

Vengeance is the name of the game in many parts of the world, not just the Middle East and we certainly engage in it here — the death penalty. There’s no other reason for it, except to exact vengeance.

 “Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.” — Romans 12:19
 Most of the people, if not all of the people, who favor the death penalty claim to be Christians. I guess their religious beliefs stop at Death Row.

But I could be too cynical and harsh. The people are exuberant about the dictator being gone. Many Libyans have never lived without Gaddafi as their supreme leader. Changing 42 years of one of the ugliest dictatorships won’t be easy and isn’t going to come over night. It will no doubt be developing for decades to come. Our democracy is still developing 235 years later.

So, maybe it’s time to let go of the yoke of cynicism and have a little faith and good cheer, at least for a little while. In just a few hours the worst hurricane to hit in decades will be drenching friends on the East Coast. Our response to Irene will be the true measure of our national character. We’ll see the national character of Libya in the months and years to come.

Posted by Tim Forkes in NEWS and POLITICS at 12:01 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0)

(Page 1 of 3, totaling 3 entries) » next page