how would you feel if another country sent you some "democracy."?

[eridani]

[Lodestar]

1. Indeed. And simultaneously stripped this country of its natural resources. n/t

[TexasProgresive]

2. I would receive it with open arms

Maybe Canada, Western Europe has some to spare-real democracy.

[Wounded Bear]

19. They sure as hell could teach us a few things about...

holding fair elections. We kind of suck at it.

[Hydra]

3. Ya, no

I've always wondered why people buy that framing, and the assertion that the native population should at the very least passively accept it.

If China successfully invaded at least half the US, are they saying we should welcome our new deliverers of pure capitalism with open arms?

[oberliner]

4. In 2011, Gaddafi killed hundreds of civilians in Misrata for daring to resist his rule

Libyan rebels pay a heavy price for resisting Gaddafi in Misrata

The graves outside the shrine are packed tightly together, thick stripes of cement with small concrete blocks poking out of the earth at either end. Some of the graves are about six feet apart, like those marking the remains of Khalid Abushahma, the first protester to be shot dead by Muammar Gaddafi's forces in this Libyan port city on 20 February, and of Ali al-Hadi, who died just two days ago.

Other graves barely span two feet. Ibrahim Omran, a baby buried on 7 April. Amina Abdullah, a small girl, two weeks before. Sanad Aduraat, a toddler killed by a bullet on 6 March. Carved into the cement next to Aduraat's name, next to all the names, is the word al-shaheed, meaning martyr.

"Gaddafi is the reason for all this," said Abdullah Almohandis, an old man in a brown hooded cloak who oversees the cemetery.

Heavy explosions boomed in the distance, as they do here for many hours of each day and night. Almohandis held his open hands to the sky, shaking with rage.

The war in Misrata is now two months old. The graveyards are filling up and the hospitals are overflowing. In their attempt to end the uprising, Gaddafi's forces have killed at least 1,000 people. Around 90% are civilians who have died because of indiscriminate shelling or shooting, doctors here say.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/21/libyan-rebels-heavy-price-misrata

Misrata was destroyed pretty early on in the Libyan people's attempt to free itself from Gaddafi's rule.

From the same article:

Fighting has been so heavy that parts of the city centre are now almost completely destroyed. Buildings, homes and mosques are pockmarked with bullet holes. Walls have been completely blown away, or are blackened by fire. Entire suburbs near the front lines are empty of families, who have crammed into other parts of the city, closer to the sea. Communications have been completely cut. Burnt-out cars and tanks litter the streets, alongside effigies of the dictator who has ruled Libya for 42 years.

The resistance from the rebels – from all the people in Misrata – seems remarkable given their limited armoury and experience. That they have managed to keep Gaddafi's forces to one side of the city seems a miracle, or at least a masterclass in guerrilla warfare. But this is a siege, and while the rebels can defend their lines, they do not have the means to fight their way out, or to send their families to safety. And despite significant losses, Gaddafi remains determined to fight his way in.

The cost is huge. Besides the dead, more than 3,000 people in this city have been injured since the conflict began. Many have been hit by shrapnel from indiscriminate shelling by Gaddafi's forces. Others have been picked off by snipers, including Mohamed Hassan, 10, who was hit in the head when he opened his front door last Saturday. He now lies in Misrata's hospital, screaming for his father and uncle or jabbering incomprehensibly. His mother, Zeinab, touches his forehead. Her tears have run dry. She tries to speak but then shakes her head and looks down.

This was what happened when the Libyan people had the audacity to challenge the Dear Leader and demand democracy, risking their lives in doing so.

[eridani]

5. And the death toll since then has been what? Far more than if we had left the place alone

ISIS has a strong foothold, and two competing governments are fighting with each other.

[oberliner]

6. The Libyan Revolution started without us

When the initial protests began, Gaddafi's forces fired on those who dared to protest his rule.

Libya protests: More than 100 killed as army fires on unarmed demonstrators

More than 100 people have died over four days of anti-government protests in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi as Colonel Muammar Gaddafi confronts the most serious challenge to his 42-year rule as leader.

The Libyan army is reported to have fired into unarmed crowds of protesters, killing about 20 people on Saturday while 35 people were believed to have been killed on Friday. Human Rights Watch said estimates of the death toll were conservative. About 15 of the deaths were reported to have been after government forces opened fire during a funeral.

A doctor in Benghazi, Libya's second city, said victims had come to hospital with wounds caused by high-velocity rifles used by security forces.

Foreign journalists have been banned from entering the country since the start of the protests. Gaddafi has so far made no comment on the escalating violence despite growing condemnation from western leaders.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/feb/20/libya-protests-benghazi-muammar-gaddafi

This was in February, before the US/NATO intervention a month later.

Time Magazine did a piece about what was going on in Libya in February:

Excerpt:

The simple act of protesting peacefully, under those circumstances, is to risk one's life — and the fact that thousands of Libyans have been willing to take that risk over the past week underscores the depth of feeling against Gaddafi. Large crowds demonstrated on Tuesday in the Mediterranean port city of Benghazi, which has long been a stronghold of anti-government sentiment. Those crowds joined a far smaller demonstration already underway, called by some of the families of 1,200 inmates killed in a 1996 massacre in the Abu Salim prison. The resulting clashes sparked more protests in the cities of Baida and Zentan, as well as pro-Gaddafi demonstrations in Benghazi, Tripoli and elsewhere. Thursday's call for a nationwide strike and mass demonstrations could signal whether the protests can maintain their momentum in the face of the regime's willingness to unleash violence. "How serious a challenge this is to Gaddafi will depend on how many people will take the risk of going out on the street," says Heba Morayef, researcher for Human Rights Watch in Cairo. She points out that the 1996 prison massacre, in which police gunned down about 1,200 inmates, was in response to the last serious attempt to overthrow Gaddafi, which also originated in Benghazi. "That response remains very live in people's memory," Morayef says.

http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2049945,00.html

[eridani]

8. We left Tunisia alone and they are fine. Foreign intervention makes things worse--

--every single time. Hat the protesters won by themselves, there would probably not be two competing governments.

[oberliner]

9. The protestors would not have won by themselves

Without outside support, Gaddafi would have been able to crush the rebellion.

Bear in mind that the Arab League requested a No-Fly Zone to protect the civilian population, and a resolution to that effect passed the UN Security Council unanimously. France, Britain, and The Arab League were actually the strongest voices calling for a no-fly zone.

[eridani]

10. And they haven't won now. The country is a chaotic mess with two governments

And ISIS thrown into the mix as well.

[oberliner]

13. Yes, it is an awful situation

I think, however, that the initial intervention itself did not necessarily need to result in the situation that we see today. It is unfortunate that the disparate groups within Libya who wanted to oust Gaddafi were not able to unite to form a stable democratic government. It is sad to think (which sometimes seems to be the implication) that some parts of the world "aren't ready" for democracy and/or are best left to some kind of autocratic but relatively stable rule.

[eridani]

20. those parts of the world are never 'ready" to be overthrown by foreign intervention

--which almost always makes things worse.

[oberliner]

22. It's hard for ordinary people to overthrow an autocratic regime that controls the military

Without some kind of foreign intervention, attempts to do so almost invariably fail and those who are brave enough to make the attempt generally end up dead.

That's why so many dictators around the world are able to hold on to power and deny democratic rights for the people indefinitely.

Look at Al-Bashir or Mugabe.

[eridani]

23. So? Foreign intervention makes it worse 100% of the time

I suppose you think that destroying Iraq was peachy keen because it got rid of Saddam?

[oberliner]

25. Destroying Iraq was not "peachy keen"

I am trying to have a reasonable discussion, it is not fair to make ridiculous claims like that. If you would like to talk about Iraq, I am happy to do so, but this conversation is about Libya.

And the only point I am making about Libya is that some of the people there attempted to overthrow the Gaddafi regime and that much of the international community implored for us to help implement a no-fly zone. Agreeing to do so and declining to do so are each choices that would have had consequences. Probably negative ones in both cases.

Foreign intervention has certainly helped to create the chaos (and worse) going on in Libya right now. Powerful autocratic rulers successfully crushing attempts to revolt is not generally something to be celebrated either.

I wish there was a way for the people living under the many brutal dictatorships around the world to achieve their freedom without violence or foreign interference. Very rarely does that happen.

[eridani]

44. I can think of no instance where foreign intervention has helped protesters against dictators n/t

[Lancero]

51. Hitler was a dictator.

Don't know what history book you've been reading from, but from the one I read it seems that foreign intervention put a stop to his genocide, and by all accounts quicker foreign intervention would have ensured that it never started.

I'm willing to bet that that the Jewish people were protesting his actions and trying to get the US to intervene. But if you wish to say otherwise, then go right ahead.

[polly7]

30. You might want to look in a mirror, actually. nt.

[awoke_in_2003]

7. Why do we always have to get involved...

with getting rid of asshole dictators? Let the people do it themselves. When we get involved it costs us money, and the people end up hating us anyway.

[oberliner]

11. That is a fair question

I just think it is important to keep in mind that the there was a genuine movement by ordinary Libyan people who risked their lives (and in some cases gave their lives) in an attempt to free themselves from Gaddafi's rule.

There was also unanimous agreement in the United Nations Security Council to impose a no-fly zone. This was something that was fervently pushed by countries other than the United States, which was a relatively reluctant participant at the beginning.

[awoke_in_2003]

12. Fair point...

have a good weekend.

[polly7]

17. What crap. nt.

[BlueMTexpat]

14. Thanks for trying to add some reality.

It won't be appreciated by some who were not paying attention at the time and who now buy the whole revisionist version without question.

I was paying attention.

[polly7]

16. You mean the western trained and funded 'rebels', right? Those ones who'd

torched police stations, government buildings and who had killed dozens of police already?

Your numbers are also lies, just as was everything else about the planned ruin of a secular Libya and its Jamahiriri Peoples Congress, its quest to be completely free of the predatory IMF and provide funding for all of Africa to become the same, to keep AFRICOM and its bases out, to use the gold dinar for trade .... to continue to use Libya's oil wealth to fund the highest standard of living for any people in the region - equal pay and rights for women, health-care as a human right, housing, employment, immigration policy that included letting in hundreds of thousands of Africans over the years, Qaddafi's support of Mandela against the wishes of the west, who'd branded him a terrorist and refused to sanction apartheid, and on and on and on.

PNAC's founder, Kagan was advising Clinton - who had to push Obama on this and who'd used Sidney Blumenthal's (who Obama distrusted and who was representing those who had economic ambitions in a failed Libya) 'advice' in private emails with no scrutiny from anyone.

Your propaganda is just that ........... propaganda. Yellow-cake, incubator babies, mushroom clouds. Qaddafi commiting genocide on his own people, rape as a weapon of war! All bullshit.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1413524

From this thread: Cheese Sandwich: Hillary's policies turned Libya into a terrorist hell hole

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511413353

[oberliner]

18. The irony of your post is that you are spouting the pro-Gaddafi propaganda

You must at least be able to realize that you are doing this.

It's funny how you talk about how much better the standard of living was in Gaddafi's Libya compared to others in the region as that is exactly what the leaders of Apartheid South Africa used to say.

You are just spitting out the dozen or so pro-Gaddafi propaganda points that one finds repeated on certain types of websites that try to create a sanitized version of the reality of life in Libya under Gaddafi for a variety of reasons.

Can you talk a bit about what life like for ethnic minorities under Gaddafi's rule? In particular, the Amazigh (Berbers)?

Would you say they were able to practice their cultural traditions freely? Did they face any government-sanctioned oppression?

[eridani]

21. All black Africans have fled or been murdered since the overthrow n/t

[oberliner]

27. Yes, the current situation is horrific

I am just challenging the narrative that things were hunky dory when Qaddafi was in charge.

Have you ever read The Socialist Worker?

Here is an interesting article from that website describing the racism that existed against Black Africans while Qaddafi was still in power:

The facts about racism in Libya

http://socialistworker.org/2011/03/14/facts-about-racism-in-libya

[polly7]

33. Mustafa Abdul Jalil, Head of False Libyan Revolution, Admits Ghadafi did not Kill Protesters

Published on May 31, 2014

Mustafa Abdul Jalil, Head of the National Transitional Council in Benghazi in 2011, admits:

Gaddafi did not order the shooting that started the false revolution in Libya. Now after the destruction of Libya, Jalil admits to the world on Libyan Channel One that the protestors that were killed in Benghazi that caused the UN and NATO to attack Libya were killed by a group of spies and mercenaries who were not Libyan. He admits that he knew the truth at the time but it was done to take down the Libyan government and break the state. He admits that he was briefed in advance that this was going to happen and that the people of Libya did not recognize the dead protestors because they wore civilian clothes and there was no one who came to their funerals as they had no relatives or friends in Libya.

As we have been saying since February 2011, the so called revolution in Libya was a false flag. The Libyan people by large majority were happy and «safe». Islamic extremist groups were illegal in Libya. Now Libya is controlled by Islamic extremists groups (Al Qaeda, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), The Muslim Brotherhood, Ansar Al Sharia and others). The country is broken, there is no security, thousands have been imprisoned illegally and hundreds tortured to death. There is no government, there are no oil sales, 2 million are still in exile, psychopaths have taken the country and it is now considered a «grey state» — no borders and no government.

So, thank you Obama, CIA, Hillary Clinton, NATO and the UN for NOT protecting the innocent civilians in Libya.

[oberliner]

35. Exactly the sort of propaganda site that I referenced above

Libyan Free Press is exactly what I was talking about.

They even have that list of all the wonderful things about Gaddafi's Libya.

Maybe consider looking at this propaganda a little more critically.

Can you answer my question above about the Berbers?

[polly7]

38. Maybe consider not trying so hard to justify illegal and immoral invasions and

destruction of sovereign nations.

[oberliner]

41. There is no such justification

There were steps that could have and should have been taken that would not have involved an invasion by outside forces.

That does not change the fact that there was a revolution being attempted in Libya by people who no longer wanted to live under Qaddafi's decades-long autocratic rule.

One should be able to at least acknowledge and respect that while also decrying the outside intervention.

[polly7]

43. Sure there was .......... lies, but still - justifications. nt.

[eridani]

45. Things were better under Qaddafi than now, particularly for racial minorities

Just as things were better under Saddam in Iraq. This does NOT mean that things were good--only that intervention is guaranteed to fuck things up even worse.

[polly7]

29. ..........

I'm not 'spitting out' anything. I'm stating fact - don't like it, don't read it (and obviously, you don't).

It's funny you mention Apartheid - Qaddafi was demonized for fully supporting Mandela, branded a terrorist by the west. That's not another talking point ,either.

Can every culture practice their traditions freely in every country? Not in mine .... which is unfortunate in some cases, but really no need for foreign military intervention because of it. Qaddafi had much hatred against him by tribal leaders who wanted a more fundamentalist Libya - some of those, in FACT, were used and aided to 'rebel' and get away with murdering police, threatening and using violence against all those Qaddafi loyalists who protested (not that any of it was shown by western media) in support of their gov't and people, before the west could get those lying numbers to the UN.

“We’re going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran” Libya - 'tick'.

Oh, and check this out: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1632882

[oberliner]

36. Facts can still be propaganda

If you repeat only the facts that are positive and leave out the ones that are negative than you are engaging in propaganda.

In fact, some say that propaganda thrives on presenting different kinds of truths, half-truths, incomplete truths, limited truths, out of context truths, etc.

This is exactly what you are doing with respect to Qaddafi's Libya.

One can be vehemently opposed to US intervention while also acknowledging the oppression that Qaddafi was responsible for.

You are presenting instead a pro-Qaddafi propaganda narrative, creating the illusion that Libya was a wonderful place and that Qaddafi himself was some sort of fountain of generosity and benevolence. And that no one living in Libya could have possibly wanted to revolt against his leadership.

This is just BS propaganda, and I would encourage you to recognize it as such.

If you are going to go the route of claiming that all the rebels were fundamentalists or criminals or worse then you must realize that you are doing the same kind of propaganda that you appear to be decrying from the other side.

There are many first-hand accounts from Berbers, for example, that you could read that paint a very clear picture of the oppression that they had been suffering under for the many decades of Qaddafi rule.

[polly7]

37. I would encourage you to stop making excuses for illegal and immoral invasions and

destruction of sovereign nations.

[oberliner]

39. As long as you agree to stop making excuses for autocratic rulers who outlaw dissent and

refuse to grant basic political freedoms and human rights to all citizens.

[polly7]

40. Read up. nt.

[Scuba]

15. Well sure we made things worse but we also made lots of money!

Well, at least the MIC made money, and big oil stands to make money as soon as the MIC makes some more money by making it possible for big oil to take their cut of the loot.








See? It's win-win!

[pampango]

24. And the US has supported/engineered plenty of dictators over the decades. Liberals

should not support neither dictators who promote our 'national interests' (military bases, oil exports, anti-terrorism, etc.) at the expense of their own people nor 'democracy' enforced by invasion - also designed to promote our 'national interests' rather than those of the country being invaded.

In principle liberals should support human rights and democracy everywhere, but the world is a complicated place and we should also support not making things worse in places where things may already be pretty bad.

[malaise]

26. Rise, repeat and then blame those we attack

Call them terrorists, Barbarians, whatever the latest buzz word. Remember we're all angels in the West.
Imperialism is a bitch.

[oberliner]

28. "We are the same as people in other countries, and are looking for the same things.."

We want a democratic government, a fair constitution, and we don’t want to be isolated from the world anymore.”

- Mustafa Abdul Jalil

He was one of the earliest leaders in Libya who dared to go against the Qaddafi regime.

[polly7]

32. Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya

Libya

The remaking of Libyan society that Qadhafi envisioned and to which he devoted his energies after the early 1970s formally began in 1973 with a so-called cultural or popular revolution. The revolution was designed to combat bureaucratic inefficiency, lack of public interest and participation in the subnational governmental system, and problems of national political coordination. In an attempt to instill revolutionary fervor into his compatriots and to involve large numbers of them in political affairs, Qadhafi urged them to challenge traditional authority and to take over and run government organs themselves. The instrument for doing this was the "people's committee." Within a few months, such committees were found all across Libya. They were functionally and geographically based and eventually became responsible for local and regional administration.

People's committees were established in such widely divergent organizations as universities, private business firms, government bureaucracies, and the broadcast media. Geographically based committees were formed at the governorate, municipal, and zone (lowest) levels. Seats on the people's committees at the zone level were filled by direct popular election; members so elected could then be selected for service at higher levels. By mid-1973 estimates of the number of people's committees ranged above 2,000.

In the scope of their administrative and regulatory tasks and the method of their members' selection, the people's committees embodied the concept of direct democracy that Qadhafi propounded in the first volume of The Green Book, which appeared in 1976. The same concept lay behind proposals to create a new political structure composed of "people's congresses." The centerpiece of the new system was the General People's Congress (GPC), a national representative body intended to replace the RCC.

The new political order took shape in March 1977 when the GPC, at Qadhafi's behest, adopted the "Declaration of the Establishment of the People's Authority" and proclaimed the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. The term jamahiriya is difficult to translate, but American scholar Lisa Anderson has suggested "peopledom" or "state of the masses" as a reasonable approximation of Qadhafi's concept that the people should govern themselves free of any constraints, especially those of the modern bureaucratic state. The GPC also adopted resolutions designating Qadhafi as its general secretary and creating the General Secretariat of the GPC, comprising the remaining members of the defunct RCC. It also appointed the General People's Committee, which replaced the Council of Ministers, its members now called secretaries rather than ministers.

All legislative and executive authority was vested in the GPC. This body, however, delegated most of its important authority to its general secretary and General Secretariat and to the General People's Committee. Qadhafi, as general secretary of the GPC, remained the primary decision maker, just as he had been when chairman of the RCC. In turn, all adults had the right and duty to participate in the deliberation of their local Basic People's Congress (BPC), whose decisions were passed up to the GPC for consideration and implementation as national policy. The BPCs were in theory the repository of ultimate political authority and decision making, being the embodiment of what Qadhafi termed direct "people's power." The 1977 declaration and its accompanying resolutions amounted to a fundamental revision of the 1969 constitutional proclamation, especially with respect to the structure and organization of the government at both national and subnational levels.

http://countrystudies.us/libya/30.htm

[pampango]

34. Of course much of the damage in Misrata was done by Gaddafi's use of tanks and artillery

to retake the city before the UN ever got involved.

Anti-government demonstrators numbering a few dozen began staging protests on 17 February. Several protesters were arrested, triggering larger protests, which government forces responded to by opening fire on demonstrators. These confrontations soon escalated into general armed violence. By 23 February, the opposition had driven government forces out of Misrata, and were in full control of the city. Six to 14 protesters were killed in the clashes, and another 200 wounded.

Artillery and tank attacks
16–18 March

On 16 March, artillery pounded Misrata as a new round of fighting commenced. The rebels claimed to have destroyed 16 loyalist tanks and captured 20 government soldiers. None of the claims were independently confirmed. Eighteen opposition members were killed and 20 wounded during the clashes, while doctors in Misrata reported that 60–80 government soldiers had been killed in the day's fighting.

On the night of 17 March, government troops began an artillery and tank attack which continued well into the next day. On 18 March a cease-fire was announced by the government, following the United Nations Security council resolution on authorisation for military intervention by foreign countries; the attack on Misrata, however, continued for at least another four hours. It was not known if this was deliberate, or if orders had simply not gotten to the troops in the city yet. By the time the cease-fire was ordered, government troops had already breached rebel defenses on the outskirts of the city and were in Misrata itself, with, according to the rebels, tanks firing randomly and troops conducting house-to-house searches for opposition fighters.[61] Video from the city itself showed heavily damaged streets and at least six destroyed tanks and armored personnel carriers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Misrata

[Warpy]

52. This is what violent revolution looks like

with or without superpower intervention.

They also rarely work as advertised, with or without superpower intervention.

No one with a brain ever wants a violent revolution.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

42. How would you feel...

...if someone sent you their version of Sharia Law?

[Albertoo]

46. It can be great to have another country send you some "democracy."

[eridani]

47. WAr between states that are roughly matched militarily--

--is not the same thing as imperial bullying.

[Albertoo]

48. I answered your question, you're moving the goal posts.

[eridani]

49. Anyone who thinks that Nazi Germany is anything analogous to Iraq or Libya--

--is not living in the real world. There were countries powerful enough to stop Germany by combined effort, but no one can stop the US invading anywhere it damned well pleases.

[Albertoo]

53. Relative might of Nazi Germany vs Saddam's Iraq was not your initial claim

[Lancero]

50. At the rate the US is going, it won't be long before our nation looks like the 2nd pic.

Hell, the process is already starting in some places.

[Quantess]

54. HERE YOU GO, EUROPE!!!

It's somehow Europe's job to take in all these displaced Muslim immigrants.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

55. “What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless

“What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or in the holy of liberty or democracy?” Mohandas K. Gandhi