Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Albright: Gadhafi's Death A 'Watershed Moment'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
jakeXT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-11 11:52 PM
Original message
Albright: Gadhafi's Death A 'Watershed Moment'
NEAL CONAN, host: Libya's Moammar Gadhafi died outside of his hometown of Sirte, earlier today, but the decisive moment in Libya's civil war came this past spring, when NATO launched an air campaign to protect civilians and provide protection for rebel fighters. Back in 1999, Madeleine Albright served as secretary of state when NATO intervened in the civil war in the Balkans and launched weeks of air strikes there. She's now chairman of the National Democratic Institute and joins us by phone from Atlanta. Secretary Albright, nice to have you back on TALK OF THE NATION.

...

CONAN: The United States, its NATO partners and some Arab allies, including, most prominently, Qatar, joined in the air attacks against the Gadhafi forces. There were no boots on the ground, no American casualties. And the whole thing, according to Vice President Biden, cost about $2 billion, a sharp contrast to other American interventions.

ALBRIGHT: Well - exactly. I think it's very, very important. It shows so many different things. I mean, there have always been discussions about whether you can win through an air war. That was one of the issues that happened when we were dealing with the Balkans. I think when - it doesn't mean that NATO has to be on the ground. Obviously, the rebels there were fighting, practically hand to hand. But it does mean that international intervention can be done in this particular way through an alliance structure in - and a way that is through the air and with no loss.

And I think that it really is - I mean, no loss of American lives. And so I think it's very important. I do think that this shows the leadership of the Obama administration on this. They took a lot of flak, frankly, but I think that they knew what they were doing, and that this was a very important step forward for how America gets involved these days.

...

http://www.npr.org/2011/10/20/141562153/albright-gadhafis-death-a-watershed-moment
Refresh | +2 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Lithos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-11 11:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. The war was not won purely via air war
All that happened was the air war denied Ghadaffi of crucial strategic capabilities and allowed time for the NTC to train and put boots on the ground. The NTC did the heavy lifting here. All the air war did was give them time.

L-
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-11 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Exactly, Sir
Aerial operations functioned first as an equalizer, and then as reliable artillery for a militia force.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DCBob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-11 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. I dont think Albright meant it that way..
She is speaking from NATO's POV.. their only involvement was via air and that was enough to help the insurgents/rebels on the ground win the war with no NATO soldiers. That is the "watershed moment" and could prove to be the blueprint for future NATO actions in other similar conflicts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-11 12:23 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. "blueprint for future NATO actions in other similar conflicts"
Oh my gosh. Is that what NATO is now? It protects rebels of gov'ts we're cool with overthrowing so they can track down their leaders and shoot them in the head when they're yelling, "Don't shoot!" Really?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
irislake Donating Member (967 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-27-11 08:05 AM
Response to Reply #5
14. I am ashamed to belong to a NATO country
I thought the MSM celebrations of Gadhafi's death were obscene and disgusting. From what I understand there was another side to the story. I think Libyans will suffer a great fall in their standard of living. Maybe down to US level. No free health care, no free university etc.

However, we got their oil and that's what matters. On to Syria now. And Iran and Pakistan and so on and so on. Your government lied you into Iraq and other wars but you will continue to believe their propaganda whenever they pick a new arch-villain. Frankly I have considered Albright to be a psychopathic monster ever since she said the death of 500,000 Iraqi children was "worth it". Worth what?

Hillary Clinton laughing about the death of Gadhafi put her in the same class as Albright.

As for Bill Maher and Rachel Maddow I have lost all respect for them. I gave up John Stewart and Stephen Colbert when they celebrated the fake death of long dead Bin Laden for three nights running.

Well the chickens will soon come home to roost for us all --- and we deserve it!

As Harry Belephonte said, American's have not reached their moral maturity.

Well Gadhafi is dead and George Bush and Dick Cheney are still on the loose plugging their disgusting books.

Adieu
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-04-11 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. You're badly misinformed about a huge number of matters.
For starters, the Libyans under Ghaddafi did not have a "superior to US" standard of living. The "free healthcare" was third-rate quality, and anyone who could leave the country to get treatment DID. One Libyan who lived in the UK for awhile, who gave a comprehensive debunking of the propaganda myths spread about the Ghaddafi regime, pointed out that Libyans would pretty much universally trade the British NHS system for the "free" Libyan system in a heartbeat. The same is true of the universities: "Our Education system is no better. It is outdated, teachers are underpaid and under-trained and libraries are largely non-existent.... The absence of a comprehensive selection process and a corrupt entry protocol means that universities in Libya are grossly over populated and over subscribed, despite limited facilities. This results in an over inflated number of graduates, but not necessarily an adequate level of employability. There are thousands of students studying foundation year medicine in Tripoli alone."

Second, the "we got their oil" talking point is silly and wrong. The NTC is honoring all the pre-existing oil contracts from the Ghaddafi regime. The same companies and countries that were receiving shipments before are receiving them now. "We got their oil" is just a way to try and shut down debate and a stale talking point way of saying that neither NATO nor the United States can ever be involved in anything positive. The same people who were screaming bloody murder when the west started reaching out to Ghaddafi are now screaming bloody murder that NATO responded to him as the brutal dictator he was.

Lastly, your belief in the conspiracy theory that the death of Bin Laden was somehow faked shows how much you're mentally invested simply in finding anti-western things to believe, even when they're obviously wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Lithos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-11 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. What blueprint?
Gen. Doolittle was full of crap - airpower alone does not win wars.

There are significant reasons why this was not a repeat of Vietnam where the French and later the US held an overwhelming majority of airpower. Airpower alone does not win, it's the commitment of the boots on the ground. We did not have it in Vietnam. Nato had it (via the NTC) in Libya. Nato will not be able to repeat this except in situations where they can work with a viable, cohesive force supported by the population and possessing sufficient resolve to do what it takes to win.

Even more blunt, the NTC won this war because they were more willing to die for their cause than the mercenaries Ghadaffi paid. They had the committment of the people and were able to field the troops who were able to take and hold the positions and do so with overwhelming popular support. The only places they did not have this - Bani Walid and Sirte, were they stymied and frustrated and only because these were main places where they lacked popular support.

L-
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DCBob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-11 12:52 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. you said it yourself...
The blueprint: "in situations where they (NATO) can work with a viable, cohesive force supported by the population and possessing sufficient resolve to do what it takes to win."

Of course that will not happen in every conflict but it can happen and it might happen more often if a rebel force knows NATO is willing to support them with dominant air power.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Lithos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-11 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. That implies of course
Nato is supporting an extremely popular element, ie the will of the populace.

L-
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-11 12:00 AM
Response to Original message
2. Wow. That does not look like a recipe for cutting the MIC budget.
Air power galore...Isn't that where we spend all our defense funds?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-11 12:25 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. I'm sure all this celebrating makes the MIC very very happy.
It is a wet dream. More war! More war!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jpbollma Donating Member (68 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-11 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. I am neutral on this whole affair
and I definitely think I could be wrong for it...obviously Ghaddafi was evil...but who replaces him? That is my concern..
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Danse Donating Member (92 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-11 01:30 AM
Response to Reply #6
11. Albright
Edited on Fri Oct-21-11 01:33 AM by Danse
Isn't that the same humanitarian who quipped about the genocide of 500,000 Iraqi children( killed via sanctions and the deliberate targeting of essential infrastructure, such as sewage treatment facilities) that it was "worth it"?

She's right about this being a bit of a watershed moment, however. It shows conclusively that a great many people who call themselves "liberals" and "Democrats" will become enthusiastic supporters of imperialist aggression if performed in the name of "humanitarianism". Plausible propaganda isn't even necessary. Just arm dissident factions in the enemy nation, have them violently attack government institutions, watch for a crackdown, then let the real slaughter begin via predator drones and other humanitarian instruments. Install the new puppet dictators and begin wealth extraction in earnest.

It also helps to compare this process with actual, organic, non-violent uprisings such as occurred in Egypt.

Albright's statements may indicate that "humanitarian intervention", though hardly a new justification for mass murder, will become the new normal. The enthusiastic, almost orgasmic response by so many liberals virtually assures it, and constitutes a huge shot in the arm for the military industrial complex. That's ok though. Because it shows that Obama "kicks ass!", and after all, partisan loyalty is far more important than principles or peace. That's what separates progressives from the neocon zombie hoards; we don't simply follow the leader...er, right?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-27-11 05:48 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-27-11 06:02 AM
Response to Original message
13. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Doctor_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-27-11 06:47 PM
Response to Original message
15. I wish the PTB would not use every dead bad guy as a prop in their
never-ending MIC Fundraising drive. This particular intervention was by the book and handled as neatly as possible, I guess, but all of these victory laps while our domestic unemployment and poverty continue to swell is aggravating.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
craticdemo Donating Member (50 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-11 01:44 PM
Response to Original message
16. UGH.
Yes, and we're the majority of NATO. We need to stop these wars...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-04-11 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-09-11 02:15 PM
Response to Original message
19. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 06:14 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC