Middle East Thread of Despair: More Broken Than Syria

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Middle East Thread of Despair: More Broken Than Syria

«‹›3125 »

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

He makes a lot of good points, but I think of the following point he misreads the reaction of the media:

quote:

In my opinion, the big disaster was Libya, because it raised the threshold dramatically and it gave to Western media an excuse not to look at what was going on in places like Bahrain and elsewhere.

In a situation like this the Western media generally will report whatever story is the most exciting and involves western interested, and currently a NATO bombing campaign and a bunch of plucky rebels fighting and winning against a former Western bogeyman is going to be a lot higher priority than protests turning nasty in other countries. To say the Western media needed an excuse to not report on those countries seems to demonstrate a lack of understanding about how it operates, it reports on Libya because it's a lot sexier.

I'm sure if Libya hadn't have happened there would be a lot more focus on other countries, and it's very useful for those governments who don't want attention on Bahrain, Yemen and Syria to support military action in Libya, but saying the Western media were looking for an excuse not to report on it suggests they are playing an active role in some sort of conspiracy with those governments, while really they just report whatever will get the most people watching their bulletins and reading their newspapers.

The point he makes afterwards is valid though:

quote:

Before, death counted. Now that it turned into an armed struggle, life has become much more cheap, and that made non-violent struggle more difficult.

Even if Libya was resolved today I doubt the situation in other Middle Eastern countries would seem as appealing to Western media outlets, as it was 3 months ago.

My criticism of that specific opinion isn't to say the way the media reacts in situations like this is good or right, just that I don't believe they are motivated in quite the same way as he implies.

# ? May 17, 2011 09:33

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Nov 10, 2025 22:52

eSports Chaebol: Feb 22, 2005; Yeah, actually, gamers in the house forever,

Mr. Sunshine posted:

But by that reasoning people fighting for human rights in Belarus, Iran, North Korea, China etc etc are pro-american imperialists.

Well, in many cases, some (though of course not all) of them are. And while those sorts of people might not be terribly popular in their own countries, they are the sorts of people whom we in America are most likely to hear about and are most likely to see held up as examples of legitimate alternatives to oppressive regimes. Nobody denies for example that Robert Mugabe is terrible dictator, but at least he doesn't support international sanctions on an already beleaguered Zimbabwe unlike the Democracy-Certified opposition leader, Morgan Tsvangirai.

# ? May 17, 2011 09:34

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Tunisia has confirmed Shukri Ghanem, the Libyan Oil Minister, has fled to Tunisia.

# ? May 17, 2011 10:45

Mr. Sunshine: May 15, 2008; This is a scrunt that has been in space too long and become a Lunt (Long Scrunt); Fun Shoe

eSports Chaebol posted:

Well, in many cases, some (though of course not all) of them are. And while those sorts of people might not be terribly popular in their own countries, they are the sorts of people whom we in America are most likely to hear about and are most likely to see held up as examples of legitimate alternatives to oppressive regimes. Nobody denies for example that Robert Mugabe is terrible dictator, but at least he doesn't support international sanctions on an already beleaguered Zimbabwe unlike the Democracy-Certified opposition leader, Morgan Tsvangirai.

That seems a bit disingenuous, seeing as how the sanctions are in place to force Mugabe to allow free elections, respect for human rights and the rule of law. Furthermore, the sanctions are mainly aimed at institutions and persons tied to Mugabe, so of course he would be opposed while Tsvangirai would be in favor - they are political rivals, after all. I very much doubt Tsvangirai would be in favour of sanctions if they targeted him.

But this is a complete derail, so maybe we should take it to another thread?
It is also a specific case in a larger point I was trying to make - is a regime's anti-imperialist stance enough to discredit its opponents?

# ? May 17, 2011 11:05

eSports Chaebol: Feb 22, 2005; Yeah, actually, gamers in the house forever,

Mr. Sunshine posted:

That seems a bit disingenuous, seeing as how the sanctions are in place to force Mugabe to allow free elections, respect for human rights and the rule of law. Furthermore, the sanctions are mainly aimed at institutions and persons tied to Mugabe, so of course he would be opposed while Tsvangirai would be in favor - they are political rivals, after all. I very much doubt Tsvangirai would be in favour of sanctions if they targeted him.

But this is a complete derail, so maybe we should take it to another thread?
It is also a specific case in a larger point I was trying to make - is a regime's anti-imperialist stance enough to discredit its opponents?

Perhaps a better and less extreme example would be Yuschenko in Ukraine, whose narrow victory in 2005 was hailed as a victory for democracy even though Yanukovych was elected again in 2010?! The general point I am making is that, just as bad leaders point to the fact that they oppose to America as a reason why they are good, so too dubious opposition groups point to their opposition to bad leaders as a reason why they are good. But their reasoning isn't much better than kneejerk alliance against America! And a part of their positive portrayal in American media is doubtless a kneejerk alliance against leaders America dislikes.

If Mousavi were elected president of Iran but he was running against Khatami for example instead of Ahmadinejad, nobody would be talking about what a great gain it was for human rights in Iran. He'd still be considered a Bad Man because he's the leader of Iran. And I'm not saying that that would be inaccurate, nor am I saying that Ahmadinejad is better. What I'm saying is that popular perception is highly politicized, and it doesn't even need to rely on lies, because almost anyone can be portrayed positively or negatively.

# ? May 17, 2011 12:59

The X-man cometh: Nov 1, 2009

al jazeera posted:

A security services building and the headquarters of Libya's anti-corruption agency in Tripoli have been set ablaze after being hit by apparent NATO air strikes.

Really? Libya has an anti-corruption agency? Was it supposed to ensure that all corruption was controlled by Gaddafi?

# ? May 17, 2011 13:37

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Speaking of air strikes

quote:

Nato has begun dropping leaflets over Libya urging soldiers to return home as part of a campaign of psychological warfare.

Speaking a press briefing wing commander Mike Bracken said the messages also advised pro-regime troops to "to move away from any military equipment" that could be targeted by NATO's strike aircraft.

Earlier this morning government buildings were hit in the latest air strikes against Tripoli. Britain's Ministry of Defence said a building used to train Gaddafi's famous female bodyguards was hit, according to Reuters.

quote:
Libyan intelligence agency buildings were also attacked in the overnight raids on the Libyan capital Tripoli, using Tornado aircraft and Tomahawk missiles fired from a submarine, HMS Triumph.

One of the intelligence centres hit played a "significant role in the collection of information by Colonel Gaddafi's secret police" and the other was a headquarters for Libya's External Security Organisation, the Ministry of Defence said in a statement.

Is this what General Sir David Richards meant by stepping up the campaign in Libya?

In other news:

quote:

Russia called on Libya on Tuesday to stop using force against civilians, part of a drive by Moscow to secure a truce between supporters of Muammar Gaddafi and rebels who are fighting to end his 41-year rule.

Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Russian officials told a Gaddafi representative who travelled to Moscow that Libya must comply fully with UN Security Council resolutions and withdraw armed groups from cities.

"The answer we heard cannot be called negative," Lavrov told reporters, adding the Gaddafi representatives said Libya was ready to look at peace proposals based on those suggested by the African Union and to comply with Security Council resolutions.

quote:
"The only things that our interlocutors from Tripoli noted today was the necessity of the insurgents accepting analogous steps and that NATO also stopped bombing," Lavrov said.

"The main thing at the moment is to agree with terms and timeframe of a truce," Lavrov said.

quote:

Arabsat no longer hosts any of the Libyan state TV channels.

quote:

The trial of those foreign journalist in Tripoli has been delayed indefinitely, according to the South African news agency Sapa.

It said:

quote:
The journalists were scheduled to appear in court on Tuesday. No further details have been made available as to why their trial was delayed.

Also amusing news from Egypt:

quote:

Egypt's former first lady Suzanne Mubarak is to be released on bail after agreeing to return assets to the state, judicial sources have told both Reuters and AP.

Reuters has this:

quote:
An Egyptian prosecutor will end the detention of Suzanne Mubarak once she pays bail and returns some assets to the state, a judicial source said on Tuesday.

Mubarak, who denies charges that she abused her husband's influence for unlawful personal gain, was admitted to hospital on Friday after suffering symptoms of a heart attack.

Meanwhile, her ousted husband Hosni Mubarak is to apologise and offer to return funds to the nation, according to reports.

The English-language Egyptian news site Ahram says:

quote:
According to the Shorouk newspaper, the speech is currently being prepared and will be aired on several Egyptian and Arab channels. Mubarak will apologise for his or his family's wrongdoing against the Egyptian people, which he is expected to blame on bad advice and misinformation given to him by his consultants.

There also seems to be alot of anticipation about events in Tripoli tonight, security forces are out in force, and even the TNC member who has been Tweeting says he expects something big to happen tonight.

Brown Moses fucked around with this message at 14:23 on May 17, 2011

# ? May 17, 2011 14:11

Chade Johnson: Oct 12, 2009; by Ozmaugh

Mr. Sunshine posted:

With the risk of starting a massive derail:
Given the lack of free elections, and the well-known oppressive nature of the regime - on what do you base that claim? Have there been any reliable polls on the Iranian people's attitude towards their rulers? What we do know is that the regime has very little patience with political dissent, and that it tends to crack down violently on demonstrators. If the population is forbidden, under the threat of violence, from expressing anything but support for the regime, any claim that the regime enjoys popular support is simply absurd.

On a semi-related note: I understand taking an anti-american stance, I really do. I even sympathize with it. But it seems to me that some people take it as the sole defining trait of a regime - you're either for or against america, and if a regime is anti-american then its opponents must by definition be pro-american imperialists. Why is that?

Hundreds of thousands of lower class Iranians turned out in support of the current regime, dwarfing the so called "Green Movement."

# ? May 17, 2011 17:01

farraday: Jan 10, 2007; Lower those eyebrows, young man. And the other one.

Chade Johnson posted:

Hundreds of thousands of lower class Iranians turned out in support of the current regime, dwarfing the so called "Green Movement."

Government sponsored rally on national anniversary draws hundreds of thousands, a sure and true sign of unwavering public support according to every dictator ever.

# ? May 17, 2011 17:12

big fat retard: Nov 11, 2003; I AM AN IDIOT WITH A COMPULSIVE NEED TO TROLL EVERY THREAD I SEE!!!! PAY NO ATTENTION TO WHAT I HAVE TO SAY!!!

In fairness, even some members of the Green movement admit that Ahmadinejad would have won the original election (although he would have won by a much smaller margin). The election was obviously rotten, and it was the Green movement's anger at such a blatant display of assholery that led people to rise up in anger. The regime's brutal crackdown (instead of investigating) is what finally pushed things over the edge.

It's similar to the election of Hamid Karzai. It was obviously a rigged election, but Karzai would have won even if it were free and fair (once again, by a much smaller margin). In countries like Afghanistan and Iran (and the United States during most of the 19th century), it's drat near impossible to hold accurate and fair elections, even if the government ISN'T an autocratic monstrosity.

Authoritarian regimes will sometimes rig elections even if they have majority support (and often local entrenched corruption will be tolerated or even encouraged). That's what you saw with the victory of Ahmadinejad over Mousavi.

Now I think it's fair to say that the regime is mostly unpopular.

# ? May 17, 2011 17:25

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

This just popped up on Reuters, very serious if true:

quote:

Libya said on Tuesday its forces hit a NATO warship while it was shelling areas in the western parts of the rebel-held city of Misrata.

Libyan state television said "our forces fired (at warships) and hit one directly and severely." It gave no further details. It was not immediately possible to verify the report.

Or it could just be State TV getting desperate.

# ? May 17, 2011 20:31

Killer robot: Sep 6, 2010; I was having the most wonderful dream. I think you were in it!; Pillbug

Mr. Sunshine posted:

But by that reasoning people fighting for human rights in Belarus, Iran, North Korea, China etc etc are pro-american imperialists. That's the problem - if the only defining property of a state is its attitude to America, then the crimes of that state are irrelevant and anyone pointing out those crimes is simply a shill for the opposing side. Such a worldview means that it's allright for a state to opress the poo poo out of its population as long as the state itself opposes the western imperialists.

The extra irony is that often the people taking such stances name support of brutal authoritarian regimes for sake of realpolitik strategy as one of the great evils of the US, then happily speak up for brutal authoritarian regimes just because they oppose the US.

# ? May 17, 2011 20:46

rum sodomy the lash: Nov 24, 2007; by Fistgrrl

This is only sort of relevant, but right now in Spain there are large leftwing protests throughout the country (which has 20% unemployment) and the central square in Madrid is being declared a "tahrir square" with large camps being set up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ar2nmOQZEjw

Slogans include '�Por qu� manda el mercado, si no lo hemos votado?' or 'Why does that "market" govern, when we didn't vote for it?'

# ? May 17, 2011 23:56

King Dopplepopolos: Aug 3, 2007; Give us a raise, loser!

Killer robot posted:

The extra irony is that often the people taking such stances name support of brutal authoritarian regimes for sake of realpolitik strategy as one of the great evils of the US, then happily speak up for brutal authoritarian regimes just because they oppose the US.

Mugabe may be a bastard, but damnit he's their bastard, so that makes it okay!

It's like Bizarro realpolitik. Not that I'm a fan of the regular kind.

# ? May 18, 2011 00:10

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Live blogs May 18th
Feb17.info
AJE
LibyaFeb17.com

quote:

NATO has denied allegations of Libyan state TV that Libyan forces hit a NATO warship which state TV said was shelling Misrata. �It�s a totally fabricated allegation,� a NATO official said. �We have checked with our operational headquarters in Naples who have verified that there are no NATO ships close enough to the coast that could be hit by shots fired by pro-Gaddafi forces,� he said.

quote:

Tunisia has warned Libya that it would refer Tripoli to the UN Security Council if Libya continues to commit �enemy acts� in Tunisia. The warning was made in relation to rockets landing on Tunisian soil. A Tunisian source at the foreign ministry said that the shellings violate Tunisian sovereignty and puts citizens at risk.

quote:

Canada, which is participating in NATO�s air operations in Libya, has expelled five diplomats from Libya�s embassy in Ottawa for �inappropriate� activities, the government said on Tuesday.

Canada said it has not severed diplomatic relations between the countries, but that operations at its embassy in Tripoli have been suspended.

quote:

C.J. Chivers in Misrata writes about a cemetery where hundreds of Gaddafi�s soldiers are buried with dignity and respect. While the citizens of Misrata have seen them as invaders and aggressors, they also realize many have been forced or misled to fight. Above that, they hold fast to Islam, which tells them they must do onto others as they would have done onto themselves, and to provide a proper burial not just for themselves, but for their enemies as well. Read the article here

Brown Moses fucked around with this message at 08:57 on May 18, 2011

# ? May 18, 2011 08:12

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

And here's a map of the situation in Misrata. There's been various reports last night that they've managed to restore much of the elecricity in Misrata, and they are working to restore water supplies. They're are working very hard to ensure the port is clear and fully operational, and I've read reports that more supplies are arriving in the port, along with boats from Benghazi possibly carrying reinforcements.

The following is a bit armchair general, but I think it's the mostly likely way it will go now. Looking at the map, and from read various reports, it seems like the main focus is moving south, probably to capture the two main roads that go to Sirte. There's heavy fighting in Tawergha, but it's not a very big, so I don't expect that'll last very long. The main thing is they are cut off from reinforcements, so hopefully the rebels are co-ordinating with NATO. I also expect they've been joined by rebel soldiers from Benghazi who are communicating directly with NATO.

After that there's a major airport 20-25km to the south that would probably be used by Gaddafi's forces, so that would have to be captured, then it's another 20-25km to Al Qaddahiyah, which is a small town on the first major road to Sirte, and I believe the local tribe has expressed strong support for the rebels, so hopefully that won't stop them for long.

30km to the south of Al Qaddahiyah two major roads meet, and there's a number of minor roads in the area as well, and if the rebels control those then they'll have cut off Sirte from the West, and there would only be one road linking Sirte to the south. The whole area is pretty much free of any settlements, so any fighting would occur out in the open, and backed with NATO bombing I don't expect they'd have too much trouble making progress.

Once they've secured that area cutting of Sirte will be simple. There's two main roads that go east to Sirte, one to the North from Al Qaddahiyah, and one to the south that links directly with Sirte's remaining link to the south. As far as I can see both of those roads are pretty much free of any built up areas, so again any fighting would be taking place in the desert, where Gaddafi vehicles would be an easy target for NATO aircraft.

At this point Sirte will be surrounded from the west and south, and Gaddafi's troops in Brega will be pretty much totally cut off. If the Benghazi rebels start their push towards Sirte at the right time it would end up totally surrounded, with the rebels linking up on the outskirts of the city.

In conclusion, once the rebels secure Al Qaddahiyah they shouldn't have to do anymore urban fighting, and assuming NATO gives them enough airsupport they should easily be able to surround Sirte, and hopefully capture it.

Only registered members can see post attachments!

# ? May 18, 2011 08:56

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

Cable Guy posted:

Also Xandu, where the hell did you get your avatar..? I swear I've seen that before.

Somewhere on this site.

# ? May 18, 2011 14:03

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

The Polish foreign minister wrote a good opinion piece about his visit to Benghazi, his meeting with the TNC, and the transition from Gaddafi's form of government to a functioning democracy. Worth a read if you are wondering how things will be handled after Gaddafi is gone, and pretty reassuring that Europe is guiding and encouraging the TNC towards a liberal democracy.

quote:

This week, I flew to Benghazi to meet Libya's Transitional National Council (TNC), a visit coordinated with European Union High Representative Catherine Ashton and NATO allies.

I was the first Western foreign minister to travel to Libya since the crisis began. What I saw reminded me of my country 20 years ago, just after Poland's first free elections, which, together with the fall of the Berlin Wall barely six months later, came to symbolise the Cold War's end.

Peoples in transition from authoritarian rule - peaceful in Poland in 1989, bloody in Libya today - grapple with decisions that determine their fate for decades. How should the former regime's worst wrongdoers and security police, with their insidious archives, be treated? Should the former ruling party be banned? How can civilian, democratic control of the army and police be secured? What role should religion play in public affairs? Should the constitution establish a presidential or parliamentary system?

The former communist world made those choices 20 years ago. But very different choices - for better and for worse - were made in Poland, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia, in the Baltic states, across the former Soviet Union, in Central Asia, and in East Germany.

The results form a crucial database of experience. Today's Arab reformers thus can draw on our successes - and avoid our mistakes.

We central Europeans knew the misery of communism. Yet we knew what we wanted to replace it with - a system based on modern European democratic market values. Building democratic structures requires time, discipline, pain, and patience. But it pays off. In July, Poland will assume the EU presidency for the first time; we have earned this responsibility to lead European affairs over the next six months.

Poland learned the hard way that demanding change and defying oppression are much less difficult than formulating and delivering a clear, reasonable programme for a better future. Not all popular demands for freedom succeed: in the confusion, reactionary forces can make their move.

The fall of the shah in Iran had ruinous consequences for that country. Belarus won independence in 1991, but, since 1994, president Alexander Lukashenko has shamelessly embraced communist symbols - and methods - to cling to power. Europe has unfinished business here.

Today, across North Africa, millions of people are demanding a voice in their own destiny. Each country is looking to change and move forward.

In Morocco, the king has announced constitutional reforms, including guarantees for public participation in national decision-making, an independent judiciary, and new regional authorities. This measured, inclusive reform can be a model for others.

And reformers in the Arab world have had tremendous support from Qatar, which has provided an example of strong leadership, particularly in Libya, but also through the news channel Al Jazeera - a real force for change in the region.

Libya is experiencing a deadly struggle between people insisting on change, and a desperate, greedy regime determined to cling to power after 40 years of crass misrule. The UN Security Council, supported by the Arab League, has authorised the use of all necessary means to protect Libyans from the cruelty of their own leaders. Our NATO allies launched proportionate military operations aimed at denying Colonel Muammar Gaddafi's regime the means to attack civilian targets. Governments worldwide have frozen illicit assets stashed abroad by the regime - money that should be used to help the opposition to build a new society.

I went to Benghazi to assess the intentions and credibility of the Transitional National Council and Libyan opposition. We brought medical supplies for the Benghazi Medical Centre, where injured people from Misurata and elsewhere are being treated.

Around the table sat improbable allies: some had been prominent officials in Gaddafi's regime; others had spent many years in prison under sentence of death. They were united in recognising that their country deserved a new start. I was reminded of Poland's "roundtable" in 1989, when Solidarity sat with the ruling communists to negotiate the end of the regime.

I talked frankly with TNC Chairman Mustafa Abdul Jalil, Deputy Chairman Abdul Hafez Ghoga, and TNC Defence Minister Jalal Dheili, himself a former political prisoner. They were grateful for the international community's involvement, but described in moving terms the huge loss of life that Gaddafi had inflicted on his own people.
I told them that we considered the TNC to be our new legitimate political interlocutors in Libya and were ready to support them, but that in return we expected the TNC to work towards the best standards of transparent democratic government. They had to realise that they need a plan - revolutionary moments are moments to be seized. Poland would help by offering training for TNC officials.

Following this visit, my message to European leaders is twofold. First, Libya's TNC is the best bet we can make now for Libya's future. Its leaders are cooperating in an effort to bring about real reform in a way that was unthinkable a few months ago. They deserve the world's energetic support.

Second, while Europe has much to offer its North African neighbours in terms of financial support, advice, and training, the region needs to find its own path to freedom and success. Let us approach this task in the best spirit of European solidarity, but also with a certain humility. Europe's former communist countries can make a special contribution to the process of transition across North Africa. Above all, we understand that sustained reform requires assuming responsibility by mobilising the energy of one's own people, not relying on well-intentioned but often ill-focused outside help.

Poland is ready to lead the way, on its own and as EU president. For example, former president Lech Walesa recently visited Tunisia to offer advice as part of a Polish programme to help Tunisia devise robust constitutional reforms and election laws.

North Africa's people know what they don't want - and won't accept. But they are struggling to identify what they do want, and how to build it. As I saw in Benghazi, there is a fair chance that Libya's emerging leaders will be good, realistic partners for good realistic policies.

Radek Sikorski is foreign minister of Poland.

From the sounds of things the day has been a pretty average day, NATO blew up some stuff, the rebels kept fighting in the Mountains and around Misrata, Gaddafi's forces shelled some civilians, and the rebels captured more equipment. The only real things of note are that NATO asked the Eastern rebels to withdraw so they could bomb a column of Gaddafi vehicles heading east out of Brega, and the rebels then moved into positions around Brega. There were also claims the rebels now control the Chad/Libya border crossing, but that's impossible to verify.

Hopefully at some point today there will be good news coming from south of Misrata.

# ? May 18, 2011 14:04

shotgunbadger: Nov 18, 2008; WEEK 4 - RETIRED

So apparently we're going to sanction Syria's leader directly, can someone smarter then me explain what that exactly means? Is that just our way of overtly supporting regime change?

# ? May 18, 2011 16:29

Paradox Personified: Mar 15, 2010; SoroScrew

Jeez, if all of this is true and not hyperbole..

all from LibyanYouthMovement, https://twitter.com/ShababLibya posted:

-----------------------------------
#Nafusa mntn #Yefren #AlQala: msg from Nafusa mntn: if aid doesn't reach immediately humanitarian catastrophe will occur #libya #feb17
2 hours ago
-----------------------------------
#Nafusa mntn #Yefren #AlQala 05/18/11: In the absence of media & the world, people are dying there silently. Only way to send aid is via air
2 hours ago
-----------------------------------
#Nafusa mntn #Yefren #AlQala: People in this region are dying, eating plants normally fed to sheep, drinking polluted water, need help now
2 hours ago
-----------------------------------
#Nafusa mntn #Yefran #AlQala 05/18/11- Region under siege since April 3 (from the south, north, east and west) #libya #feb17 #gaddaficrimes
-----------------------------------
2 hours ago

# ? May 18, 2011 17:43

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

They been saying that everyday for weeks, fortuantly since the rebels captured the border a lot of the civilians have been able to flee across the border to escape Gaddafi's troops.

# ? May 18, 2011 18:25

Paradox Personified: Mar 15, 2010; SoroScrew

Ah, thank you for the clarification- was hoping on your input, I've been away from Twitter for a few days.

# ? May 18, 2011 18:31

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

shotgunbadger posted:

So apparently we're going to sanction Syria's leader directly, can someone smarter then me explain what that exactly means? Is that just our way of overtly supporting regime change?

There's very little the US can do to sanction Syria, since there's very little Syrian money in the US or vice versa. Europe can do a bit more, but there's still a lack of real options. It is a way of supporting regime change and warning Syrian officials not to support violence against civilians, but it has little practical impact.

# ? May 18, 2011 18:53

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

quote:

RT @fieldproducer: RT @SkyNewsBreak: Reuters: Colonel Gaddafi's wife and daughter cross border from #Libya into Tunisia

I'm not even sure what to think of this report if it's true. Reported by Reuters though.

# ? May 18, 2011 19:28

Pedrophile: Feb 25, 2011; by angerbot

It was pretty funny seeing their unmarked plane circle around without anywhere to land last time so I'm curious what will come of that if it is true, especially considering Gadaffi's troops actively attacking the neighboring country.

# ? May 18, 2011 19:30

J33uk: Oct 23, 2005

Xandu posted:

I'm not even sure what to think of this report if it's true. Reported by Reuters though.

If true that is drat interesting. Time to throw AJE on the tv.

Edit: And I turn on to see the Queen giving a live speech about the Northern Ireland peace process. I know that the trip is a historic moment but it was a bit of shock.

J33uk fucked around with this message at 19:34 on May 18, 2011

# ? May 18, 2011 19:30

Pedrophile: Feb 25, 2011; by angerbot

J33uk posted:

If true that is drat interesting. Time to throw AJE on the tv.

Edit: And I turn on to see the Queen giving a live speech about the Northern Ireland peace process. I know that the trip is a historic moment but it was a bit of shock.

It's part of Queen's "Stop all the Terrorism" UK tour.

# ? May 18, 2011 19:57

Young Freud: Nov 25, 2006

Xandu posted:

I'm not even sure what to think of this report if it's true. Reported by Reuters though.

Al Jazeera's Live Blog is also reporting the Reuters claim.

Libya Live Blog posted:

Reuters reports that Gaddafi's wife Safia and his daughter Aisha apparently crossed the border into Tunisia several days ago. A Tunisian security source told Reuters they arrived in the country with a Libyan delegation

# ? May 18, 2011 19:58

Cao Ni Ma: May 25, 2010

Either he's gonna be joining them soon or he'll regress further into the fuhrerbunker where NATOs bombs cant reach and kill him.

# ? May 18, 2011 20:09

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

A Tunisia government spokesman has denied they are in Tunisia, but at the same time it's rumoured they've already taken a flight to Poland.

# ? May 18, 2011 22:08

neamp: Jun 24, 2003

Aisha is under a travel ban so I kinda doubt the whole story.

As for Yefren, I can't imagine the situation there not being desperate. Everything east of Zintan is controlled by Gaddafi forces and they also occupy the town center of Yefren. Resistance holds out in the outer parts of Yefren, Qalaa and Taghma in the north, as I understand it, but they are surrounded and cut off from supplies.
Most of the civilians are said to have fled, but those remaining are surely facing severe food shortages by now.
NATO and rebel forces coming from Zintan are trying to break the siege though.

Edit: gunfire once again audible now in Tripoli from Rixos Hotel according to Mark Stone (Sky News).

neamp fucked around with this message at 23:27 on May 18, 2011

# ? May 18, 2011 23:24

Nenonen: Oct 22, 2009

Brown Moses posted:

A Tunisia government spokesman has denied they are in Tunisia, but at the same time it's rumoured they've already taken a flight to Poland.

Sounds doubtful. Why Poland? It is EU, why would they take the chance of possibly being arrested there? Even if they weren't held responsible for anything their belongings would likely be checked for suitcases filled with money etc.

# ? May 18, 2011 23:28

Young Freud: Nov 25, 2006

Nenonen posted:

Sounds doubtful. Why Poland? It is EU, why would they take the chance of possibly being arrested there? Even if they weren't held responsible for anything their belongings would likely be checked for suitcases filled with money etc.

In addition, Poland is part of NATO. My thought is that Qaddafi may have friends from the old Communist government, but it's been twenty years since they've had an relevance.

# ? May 18, 2011 23:32

The X-man cometh: Nov 1, 2009

Nenonen posted:

Sounds doubtful. Why Poland? It is EU, why would they take the chance of possibly being arrested there? Even if they weren't held responsible for anything their belongings would likely be checked for suitcases filled with money etc.

And Poland's foreign minister was just in Benghazi meeting with the TNC on behalf of the EU. The only thing I can think of is that he was brokering a peace deal, and the wife and daughter were somehow involved?

# ? May 18, 2011 23:37

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

Benotman has a fascinating article about how NATO's intervention is Libya is leading to contradictions in jihadist political thought. He's also the guy who broke the news about Saif al-Adel being the interim AQ head, though I'm waiting for confirmation on that.

http://afpak.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/05/18/nato_in_libya_is_a_challenge_to_bin_ladens_ideology posted:

In the summer of 1990 I was a jihadist fighting alongside other Arab mujahideen, or "holy warriors," in Afghanistan against the country's Communist government. In August 1990, we heard that the Saudi Arabia government had invited American troops into the kingdom in order to protect it from then-Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussain and to drive his forces out of neighboring Kuwait.

The effect on those around me was instant: They were angry and outraged. According to their particular understanding of Islam, anyone who allies with non-Muslims, the kuffar, to fight against Muslims was an apostate; and according to their takfiri rejectionist ideology, the Saudi rulers were quite simply no longer Muslims.

Over the next few months, I was involved in discussions among the emerging al-Qaeda leadership, including with the leaders of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad group (EIJ). From these debates emerged the ideology of al-Qaeda, which advocated that any Muslim, regardless of his intentions, who allied with the kuffar to fight against Muslims was an apostate who should be killed.

This intellectual framework provided the justification for many of al-Qaeda's subsequent actions, from the group's first attack on Saudi Arabia (the 1995 car-bombing against the Saudi National Guard in Riyadh) right up to the present day. Bin Laden himself said, in a 2002 statement, that "supporting kuffar against Muslims - even with just one word - is absolute apostasy, according to the Muslim scholars."

Last week, I met a group of Libyans jihadists and Islamists in London, including veterans of the fighting in Afghanistan, some of whom had been involved in those discussions in the early 1990s. While I myself had rejected jihadism and Islamism in the intervening years, many of them were still committed to the jihadist cause. Some had recently returned from fighting against Gaddafi in Libya.

I asked them what they thought of the ongoing fighting in Libya, our homeland, and of the rebels who had been seen on the media chanting in support of France, other Western countries and the United Nations. I was very surprised when these men unanimously said they supported the Libyan uprisings and backed the rebel forces.

"But how you can support the rebels?" I asked them. "According to your ideology they are apostates for accepting the help of NATO -- especially when NATO, as well as a mostly non-Muslim organisation under the name of ISAF [the International Security Assistance Force] is, in your own words, 'occupying' Afghanistan at present. And why were the Kuwaitis 'apostates' in 1991 for accepting Western help but the Libyan rebels today are not?''

They could not answer this question.

I then raised the issue of a mutual friend, Abu Urwa, a former shura council member of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). He had recently been killed in Libya fighting against Gaddafi's soldiers, who are Muslims, while, overhead, NATO warplanes, piloted by the "kuffar," protected him and bombed his enemies.

"Was Abu Urwa a martyr or an apostate?" I asked, "Surely, according to your thinking, if he was fighting alongside the kuffar against Muslims, he was an apostate and a traitor to Islam?"

All the jihadists present said that he was not an apostate but a martyr. However, they could not explain the contradiction in their thinking.

The reason for this confusion is that the issues at stake go to the very heart of jihadist ideology. If a jihadist accepts that it is permissible in Islam for Muslims to support the NATO intervention in Libya and to fight against Gaddafi with NATO assistance, then they are essentially accepting that the rigid ideology of jihadism is imperfect and perhaps even wrong.

By admitting this, they are also potentially accepting that the original decision of Bin Laden and others in 1991 to denounce the Saudi and Kuwaiti governments could have been mistaken -- and even that al-Qaeda might have been wrong all along on this point.

Indeed, in the last month, Abu Yahya al-Libi, the al-Qaeda spokesman, endorsed the Libyan rebels even though they are working in conjunction with NATO. According to bin Laden's categorical 2002 statement, this would make Abu Yahya a defender of apostates, and thus an apostate himself. Either bin Laden was wrong, or one of the terror group's major public representatives is a traitor to Islam. Al-Qaeda and its supporters can't have it both ways.

One by-product of the West's intervention in Libya is that, together with the events of the Arab Spring, it has helped create a new broader regional narrative in which the West is seen as fighting alongside Muslims in defence of their freedoms, rather than fighting against them.

A less widely anticipated outcome of the West's intervention in Libya is that it is leading even committed jihadists to cautiously question and re-think core aspects of their ideology. This includes not only their understanding of takfir as outlined above but also their attitude to nationalism and to non-jihadist Muslims. For instance, Abu Urwa, the martyred former LIFG commander, was killed while leading the Omar Mukhtar Brigade, named after a sufi Libyan nationalist, while fighting under the orders of the secularist rebel council.

How this process develops depends on the progress of the fighting in Libya. A quick victory for Libya's western-backed democrats over Gaddafi would probably lead towards more positive reassessments of jihadist ideology. A protracted and bloody civil war, however, perhaps fought against a background of declining western interest in the conflict, could lead to jihadists becoming more entrenched in their old ways. At the same time, such developments show that apparently rigid jihadist ideals and ideologies are potentially malleable, and that Western actions in the Muslim world can help undermine the very narratives that have for the past few decades provoked so much violence around the globe.

# ? May 18, 2011 23:49

Lascivious Sloth: Apr 26, 2008; by sebmojo

Great article, I can completely get behind what he's saying. It shows how ideologically hypocritical Al-Qaeda is in essence. I agree with his comments on how things play out will help shape Jihadism in the future, but I think we're past the point of losing western interest or it becoming a civil war. NATO has really stepped up in the past 2 weeks, and more time only equals less resistance from Govt forces and more training for the rebels when the rebels are allowed to attack.

On the other hand, he didn't consider that jihadism is so inherently flawed in that those jihadists can pick and choose what makes a person a martyr or a apostate regardless of statements made by Al-Qaeda or "Muslim Scholars". Extremism isn't exactly known to be based on rational thought or even remain consistant.

# ? May 19, 2011 00:55

Lascivious Sloth: Apr 26, 2008; by sebmojo

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2011/05/2011518234843534607.html

Obama to deliver a speech on 'Arab Spring'

quote:

US president Barack Obama will announce economic aid for Egypt and Tunisia during a speech on the Middle East on Thursday, but White House officials are saying little about how he will address key policy issues after months of revolution and unrest in the region.

Obama will announce a plan to cancel roughly $1 billion of Egypt's debt to the United States, a senior administration official said during a conference call on Wednesday. The US will work with the Egyptian government to funnel that money into job creation. Washington will also offer Egypt another $1 billion in new loan guarantees to support infrastructure development.

Other international institutions, like the IMF and the World Bank, are expected to offer several billion dollars in additional financing.

"We think it's important to note that some of the protests in the region are deeply rooted in a lack of individual opportunity and economic growth, as well as a suppression of political rights,"
the administration official told reporters.

This is how you win hearts and minds, promote democracy, and reduce world terrorism.

# ? May 19, 2011 01:24

Burt Sexual: Jan 26, 2006; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS; Switchblade Switcharoo

Lascivious Sloth posted:

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2011/05/2011518234843534607.html

Obama to deliver a speech on 'Arab Spring'

This is how you win hearts and minds, promote democracy, and reduce world terrorism.

Didn't we put 10b into Pakistan? I didn't see anything but money being given here.

# ? May 19, 2011 01:32

J33uk: Oct 23, 2005

Lascivious Sloth posted:

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2011/05/2011518234843534607.html

Obama to deliver a speech on 'Arab Spring'

This is how you win hearts and minds, promote democracy, and reduce world terrorism.

Last Summer the warm fuzzy feelings from his speech at Cairo University had pretty much disappeared, even with students and faculty from there. It'll be interesting to see if this speech gets the same sort of attention, because people want more than just a nice speech about mutual respect now.

# ? May 19, 2011 01:49

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Nov 10, 2025 22:52

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

J33uk posted:

Last Summer the warm fuzzy feelings from his speech at Cairo University had pretty much disappeared, even with students and faculty from there. It'll be interesting to see if this speech gets the same sort of attention, because people want more than just a nice speech about mutual respect now.

Eh, the best speech possible won't matter for the exact reasons you said, he already gave that speech and failed to deliver it. There's been no indication he's going to radically change course.

# ? May 19, 2011 01:55

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Middle East Thread of Despair: More Broken Than Syria

«‹›3125 »