Seriously... Why is USA getting involved with the whole Libya ordeal?
I am American and I love USA! But seriously why is the USA getting into this crap with Libya. Why does it matter, I feel like USA is always getting into other countrie's business. I am ignorant on this whole ordeal so please don't criticize, I just want an answer. I think they should let Libya solve its own problems, not spend BILLIONS to solve a problem in a country that I don't care wtf happens to it. Thanks!
- fireflyLv 610 years agoFavorite Answer
United Nations Security Council of which we are a member) authorized the use of force to protect civilians. The council’s resolution, was approved yesterday 10-0 with five abstentions, allows the U.S., the U.K., France and Arab nations to “take all necessary measures” to protect civilians. It excludes “a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory.” France said military action may start within hours and U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron called an emergency Cabinet meeting.
Despite weeks of anti-government protests in the Arab world, this was the first time the UN Security Council took up the issue. Russia and China signed on despite previous reluctance to intervene in what they have argued were the internal affairs of sovereign countries. But diplomats said the scale of the violence in Libya is really what prompted action. European nations are also alarmed at the prospect of refugees spilling over their border. And Libya is the first Opec country to be hit by major protests, prompting oil prices to surge.Source(s): http://wdsi.wordpress.com/2011/03/19/un-security-c... http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-18/un-securi...
- 10 years ago
The one thing all the rebelling Arab countries have in common is implementation of policies forced on them by the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. These policies have nothing to do with helping these countries but rather opening them up for exploitation by global, usually Western, corporations.
These policies always have the same effect - an acute rise in unemployment, a hike in food prices,
vast amounts of wealth leaving the country or ending up in the pockets of the elite and, last but not least, an increase in internal repression. So it is no coincidence that the rioters are complaining of NO JOBS and FOOD PRICES.
Which brings us back to the question - why is the US interested in Libya? For two reasons. Firstly it wants to secure the "progress" it has already made in Libya, i.e. implementation of the IMF and WB policies. It is no coincidence that these bodies have their headquarters facing each other on the same US street, populated by economists who all preach the same philosophy, i.e. extreme laissez faire economics.
They preach that this economic philosophy is synonymus with "freedom" and thus muddy the democratic debate - now, so the argument goes, unregulated capitalism is the same as democracy. You cannot have one without the other. Thus anytime a country throws off the shackles of dictatorship and takes on the debt burdens created by the previous corrupt regime, the IMF and WB economists fly in and insist on extreme privatisation and deregulated markets. In practice this means sacking all the public workers, removing restrictions on food prices and selling off all the country's resources to outside corporations.
So the IMF and WB economists and technocrats are really US and Western economic servants. They do not give a damn about helping the newly liberated countries, only opening them up for the US and the West. It is not even true capitalism as preached by Adam Smith. Just an insane global monopoly.
So the US wants to protect a Libya that was already implementing the WB and IMF policies. Why lose all those markets to rebellious Libyans who might want to redistribute their own country's wealth. Far better to take control of the situation and safe guard these interests. Which brings us to the second reason.
Once the US and the west (i.e. Europe, Canada etc) have secured Libya, IMF-WB economists will fly in to "advise" the newly liberated Libyans. These economists will insist that the only way to ensure freedom is to implement, to an even far greater degree, the same bloody policies that caused the revolt in the first place. And the Libyans are unlikely to refuse because they need the huge loans from these two bodies.
Btw all this information is gleaned from a modern classic, "The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein. You will see the world anew and understand what really motivates Western intervention and causes unrest around the globe. A sobering read and it doesn't offer any ideological answers, which is a blessing.
PS I hope Qaddafi falls. I hope the Libyans are allowed to setup their own full, independent democracy. What I fear will happen is that the IMF-WB vultures will fly in and hand over the country to the Corporations. And then we will see unemployment rise even further; more food riots; and the revolts will start all over again. I am just trying to persuade you to look beyond the humanitarian crisis and think about the END GAME. This is what the Western governments and Corporations are doing.
- The First DragonLv 710 years ago
You and I would do well to care what happens to Libya. The rebellions in North Africa and the Middle East are going to have a profound effect on developments in the world to come. Events are building toward a major global conflict [WW3, if you will] in the next couple of decades. Who wins in these rebellions is going to have a big effect on who our allies are, and how that war ends.
Unfortunately, even now we can't be sure what kinds of governments will emerge in these countries. But I suspect that in Libya, it couldn't be worse than Qaddafi.
Now the US is not supposed to fight on Libyan soil, just restrain Qaddafi's troops from overwhelming the civilians and rebels. Remember, the US didn't initiate this conflict; the Libyan rebels did. We don't have to help set up a government for them like we had to in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Still, I expect plenty of trouble in Libya even if they manage to defeat Qaddafi's regime.
- deeperpoliticsLv 510 years ago
Under Gadaffi a 25 billion dollar man-made river system has been completed. This is a prize that the British/American oligarchy would also love to get their hands on...besides the oil fields.
Or here is a present day look at US Middle Eastern foreign policy...through the eyes of Noam Chomsky:
Chossudovsky on Battle For Libyan Oil Fields:
Libya, Hypocrisy and Betrayal by the United Nations
"What is brewing in Libya is not a "protest" or "demonstration" that has spread across the country, but an attempt to overthrow the government, militarily. We hear already about "rebel soldiers" and see images of men shaking their powerful guns, waving flags from the pre-Gadafi period, which appear out of nowhere, en masse. The question is who is behind this force and what is its aim? This question is not being addressed in any way in our media and by our political representatives, and any real information and analysis has been replaced by sentimentalizing about "people power."
"We are facing soon another illegal war, an invasion to dismantle yet another country in "western" i.e. ''Corporate'' interests. Libya is the target nation this time, and already has "military advisers" from U.S., Britain and France, and perhaps also from Israel, on its soil. Although
genuine internal opposition to the regime exists, the Libyan "protesters" we see supported by a Western media frenzy are by and large a military force, now being trained and equipped by foreign powers who are intent on getting hold of Libyan oil to have it "privatized, i.e. to become foreign owned instead as it was nationalized by Gadaffi 40 years ago. The eastern part of Libya is where the oil fields by and large are."
For those who disbelieve then listen to a few short minutes of John Perkins author of: "Confessions of an Economic Hit-Man"
This entire revolution has been instigated by covert intelligence to retake control of Libya....The oligarchy would have us believe it is about 're-establishing Democracy and Freedom'
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- WrenchedLv 710 years ago
UN Commission on Global Governance (1995) and the Earth Charter are the motivations behind the action in Libya.
Muammar Muhammad al-Gaddafi is no threat to the United States, or the world, he is a pawn in the way of global governance. This is a serious answer, about a serious matter. Do your own Research here are some places to start to learn about Global Governance and the Earth Charter.
The only threat Gaddafi represents is that he stands in the way of Global Governance as he will not bow to the desires of those that want install a one world government, so he must go. He is not their lap dog and proponents of the Earth Charter and the UN Committee on Global Governance has room for only one dictator, theirs. For this reason they are removing from power the dictators in the Middle East. One by one they MUST fall. Continue to watch as they, the governments of the Middle East, all fall in line with "new governments" that kneel to the UN Commission on Global Governance and the Earth Charter.
Read: Our Global Neighborhood; Report of the Commission on Global Governance; (ISBN 0-19-827998-1; Published by Oxford University Press, 1995.
Here is A Summary Analysis by Henry Lamb (First published in eco-logic, January/February, 1996): http://sovereignty.net/p/gov/gganalysis.htm
Here are some of the people, countries and organizations that are behind the Global Governance Movement.
It is a shortened List:
Paul Warburg, Federal Reserve Bank, Strobe Talbot, Council on Foreign Relations, NAFTA, Susan Rice, United Nations, UN Commission on Global Governance, Some of the world’s most influential people constitute the Commission on Global Governance: Ingvar Carlsson, Sweden, Shirdath Ramphal, Guyana, Ali Alatas, Indonesia, Abdlatif Al-Hamad, Kuwait, Oscar Arias, Costa Rica, Anna Balletbo i Puig, Spain, Kurt Biedenkopf, Germany, Allan Boesak, South Africa, Manuel Camacho Solis, Mexico, Bernard Chidzero, Zimbabwe, Barber Conable, United States, Jacques Delors, France, Jiri Dienstbier, Czech Republic, Enrique Iglesias, Uruguay, Frank Judd, United Kingdom, Hongkoo Lee, Republic of Korea, Wangari Maathai, Kenya, Sadako Ogata, Japan, Olara Otunnu, Uganda, I.G. Patel, India, Celina Vargas do Amaral Peixoto, Brazil, Jan Pronk, Netherlands, Qian Jiadong, China, Marie-Angelique Savane, Senegal, Adele Simmons, United States, Maurice Strong, Canada, Brian Urquhart, United Kingdom, Yuli Vorontsov, Russia, Mikhail Gorbachev, Brooking Institute, Barack Hussein Obama, Environmentalists / Green Cross, William Jefferson "Bill" Clinton (born: William Jefferson Blythe III), Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton, World Trade Organization, Richard Gardner, George Herbert Walker Bush, International Criminal Court (World Court), Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Bilderberg Group, Kevin Rudd, Trilateral Commission, David Rockefeller, Zbigniew Brzezinski, John Podesta, Rahm Emanuel, MacArthur Foundation, Ford Foundation, Carnegie Corporation
- Anonymous10 years ago
Why does the US get involved in the business of any country ?? OIL
- 10 years ago
Because they are trying to play good guys role and gain every ones respectSource(s): Myself