

More Hard Work


Yes, that is a purposeful title, “Waging Peace”.   How do we sort out the competing ideas, claims, needs with regard to Libya and the international community?

I have been occupied with several family and business commitments leaving little time to study varying analyses of how this country could help Libya.   And I make no claims to having much knowledge of military strategy to begin with.   For example I do not know why planes and such cannot be shot down in a no fly zone.  I don’t know why we  need to bomb the ground  bases.  No doubt I have seen and read took many romanticized stories of planes being shot  from the sky since World War I.

I did just hear President Obama discuss a UN resolution that will demand certain conditionsof  Gadhafi.   I am thinking of all the problems…the history of our involvement in the area for our own ends who is really supporting any efforts to intervene, on what basis would we intervene, and what are the risks of seen or unforeseen consequences.

I have said on these pages that I am not a complete “pacifist”.  I have said violence may be necessary and legitimate for selfo-defense.  I have said I might support use of US military force if called to aid a people under attack or severe oppression.

Apparently some factions of the people fighting in Libya for a better government and better leadership have asked the United States and the international community to enforce a no fly zone over Libya as a means for the rebels to drive Gadhafy from power. 

Others in the rebel movement have said the US must stay away.  Otherwise sympathies in the Arab world might turn against the rebels and the present regime might gain support by blaming “foreign intervention” for its troubles.

And who is supporting the effort at the multi-national level?   I have heard the Arab League is in support of an enforced no fly zone.   Right now, I don’t know who the Arab  League is.  With so many governments in the region being opposed by their own people, who does speak for the people of each nation that makes up the Arab League?

I gather that the plan from the UN is that there would be an enforceable cease fire and  Ghadafi forces would be asked to halt their attacks because civilians would be in danger.  This may be a good direction to move because it could support the idea of negotiations between the currently warring sides.  However, if the international community has its bluff called and it must begin to enforce the demands by some kind of military action, where will that lead?

Since the United States has made matters worse for its potential role as hpeace maker  by supporting Middle Eastern dictators and  arming and training the region’s military forces (more likely to be used against each nation’s own people than in any other kind of conflict) and by past interferences only when we didn’t like the specific regime  or one of the factions that might have become the next regime there, the US is on dub ious grounds in rushing to aid rebels of such a country as  Libya (where we have long had big issues with its leader).   Even now there is language coming out of the State Department that can be interpreted as the US looking for an excuse for “regime change”.

We did not  go in to support the people of Rwanda.  Is this the time to change that policy?   Do we support any people that is fighting an oppressor?   Any people that ask us for help?   Do we support only those groups that seem ready to form a legitimate government?   I guess we have have been taught to appreciate the French for helping us during our own Revolution…but I seem to remember that they helped only after we had won some significant battles.   And …  if we make a case for helping the Libyan rebels may it even now be “too late”?   They have lost their momentum now and may have little chance of governing anything but a small section of Libya.

All this and more to think about.  We do not want the world to stand by and watch a massacre.  Can we  enforce a cease fire, a hold the line for now policy, a real prevention of significant numbers of civilian deaths?   I am sorry at this point that it looks a little too much like the US  is about to get into another quagmire.   I am horrified at the thought there might be civilian massacres with the international community at odds over what to do..or too slow to do anything.   I am far from having sorted all this out in my mind except to hope for minimal loss of life…and in the region as a whole true movement toward people   being in charge of their governments.

Linda Muralidharan

104 Responses

  1. edgar says:

    Are any demonstrations against the war in Libya planned for our area yet?

  2. Mitch Rapp says:

    The Queen of White House journalists thinks she knows the reason for all of the turmoil… The Jews. For so long, the left lapped at her feet, celebrating her “tough” questioning of Rep Presidents… celebrating her integrity…

    Just another example of modern journalism and how it is to actual news gathering and reporting, as, you guessed, it Westboro Baptist is to religion.

  3. Mickie Lynn says:

    Linda, in answer to your question about just what a “no-fly zone” would entail. It’s necessary to have many airplanes to first bomb radar sites so that Gaddafi’s anti-aircraft weapons can’t lock on to the aircraft protecting the no fly zone. No-fly zone for Libya would require attack:

    To further this discussion it’s important to have a bit more information about just what the UN resolution actually authorizes:

    The UN Security Council Has Not Authorized Regime Change in Libya
    It’s a good thing that the Obama Administration has resisted calls for unilateral U.S. military action in Libya, and instead is working through the United Nations Security Council, as it is required to do by the United Nations Charter. Now, the Administration needs to follow through on this commitment to international law by ensuring that foreign military intervention remains within the four corners of what the UN Security Council has approved: protection of civilians, not regime change.


    So it sounds as if France, the UK and some of the Arab league nations will be taking the lead on creating such a zone.
    “Obama said France, Britain and the Arab nations would take the lead. That is the clear desire of the Pentagon, which has strongly resisted another American war in the Middle East, the NYT says. Obama said flatly that US ground forces would not enter Libya…”

  4. edgar says:

    “The people of Libya must be protected.” Obama

    Is this about oil?

  5. wheninthecourse says:

    the 2009 nobel peace prize winner bypasses congress and declares war on libya. UNCONSTITUTIONALLY. IMPEACH OBAMA NOW

  6. Mickie Lynn says:

    Dear WITC,
    I think that you’re getting a bit ahead of the situation at this point. The US hasn’t “delcared war” on Libya but is an active part of a UN mandated resolution to stop the killing of Libyian civilians by Col. Gadaffi and his military. But there are a few important aspects to your post that call for further involvement of the US citizens and of their Congressional representatives in making some decisions about just how far the US becomes involved in what could certainly turn into a war at some point.

    Jon Rainwater of Peace Action West has summed up the need for a congressional debate about the questions raised by the US involvement in attacking the Libyian air defenses and in the use of missiles against the Gadaffi military as described in yesterday’s events. Here’s some of what he said in an email asking for Congressional involvement:

    …We still don’t know what the US role will be in the initial miltary actions. Here are just a few of the tough questions Congress needs to start asking, starting NOW:

    1) What are the chances that this could backfire and cause harm to Libyan people, as happened in Kosovo?
    2) What is the potential for escalation into a wider bombing war or even the use of ground troops?
    3) How much would this cost in U.S. lives and money, and civilian “collateral damage”?

    There is a reason why the Constitution places war powers in Congress’s hands. When the US goes to war, whatever the motive, the people have the right to weigh in.

    I know many people have very strong, and sometimes very mixed emotions about what the US should do in Libya. Wherever you stand on the imposition of a no-fly zone, please … tell Congress that they can’t sit on the sidelines, and they must have a full debate…

  7. edgar says:

    The US may not have “declared war” on Libya, but in bombing Libya, Obama is WAGING war on Libya, we can all agree there, no?

  8. wheninthecourse says:

    how is bombing a nation not an act of war, Mickie Lynn. obama bypassed congress and the US sovereignty by going to the UN. if Bush had done this, you libs would have had him in GITMO by today


  9. Mickie Lynn says:

    To recapitulate, the creation of a no-fly zone in Libya is basically the act of taking sides in what has become a civil war. With superior military force on the side of the ruler (dictator) of Libya,, and inferior military force and weapons on the side of the people’s uprising for more democratic rule. Since even if a cease fire does eventually hold the country will then be partitioned and this will lead to instability and to the constant threat of re-eruption into battle. To further question the actions this is not an incident of “ethnic cleansing” as happened in Rwanda and Yugoslavia and even there it was controversial and the results were not good.

    Having outside forces support one side in a civil war is tricky and (as happened in Bosnia) it doesn’t always prevent or decrease civilian deaths. I agree that it’s an act of war to bomb another country even in the creation of the no-fly zone and even in a UN sanctioned action. Many in the Obama administration counseled against it. On the other hand the loudest voices for intervening came from the right wing.

    It’s getting even trickier now since one of the candidates for President in Egypt has now said that the military action in Libya has “gone too far”, even though Egypt was one of the members of the Arab League that called for the no-fly zone in the first place.

    So no clear cut or simple answers. Some of the questions do need to be publicly discussed so that we have a clear idea of what our ultimate goals are in this situation and just what our exit strategy will be.

  10. Linda Muralidharan says:

    I appreciate the many comments adding to the issues I raised in the original blog. I understand that some sites on the ground have to be disabled so the enforcing planes of the US and allies are not sitting ducks, so to speak. And that does lead to more of the worries about how contained, how surgical, can such an effort be. There are already some claims of loss of civilian life, but I am not sure what has been verified, what the cost/benefit ratio, might be, or who and what can limit potential escalation of the conflict once the “dogs” of war have been unleashed.

    Of course the constitutional issue is the same no matter which party is in power. At the very least, Congress needs to get involved now with a debate about current strategies, time limits, goals and goal limits.

    Is this about oil? Certainly a good question although the US itself is not dependent on Libyan oil. I have been suspicious all along about former colonial powers such as France and the UK being so gung ho to start military action…even one appearing to be a limited, defensive one.

    And what might Obama’s motivations be: strictly humanitarian, vulnerability to right wing hawk pressure, bias against Ghadafi?

    (I guess if he were all that humanitarian he would see to it that the US client state of Israel makes a fair settlement for the sharing of the land of Palestine/Israel.)

    Another area of great concern is tht the conflict will too easily fall into one of intertribal civil war. It concerns me greatly that neither I nor the majority reporting in the news media seem to know much about internal Libyan affairs. I have heard brief remarks that point to the possibility of a prolonged tribal conflict, but I don’t know that this is true. I don’t know the best way to protect the maximum number of civilian lives.

  11. Mickie Lynn says:

    Linda, You’ve raised some other important questions in your article and I’d like to add some more questions about the behavior of the UN (and remember it was a large number of nations that voted for this well circumscribed but still military) intervention.

    Here are some of my questions: Why did we choose Libya to intervene in while the unelected but still clinging to power ex-President of the Ivory Coast is killing scores to hundreds of the people who support his successor?

    Why is our government (all sides of it) silent on the increasing crackdown against the popular uprising in Bahrain? Where Saudi and United Arab Emirate troops have entered the country to act as police and military forces and there is now a state of emergency declared, and the king’s forces are shooting, beating and killing unarmed civilians.

    Bahrain Brings Back the Sectarianism,
    Marc Lynch, Foreign Policy, Wednesday, March 16, 2011

    While the American and international debate over Libya continues, the situation in Bahrain has just taken a sharp turn for the worse. A brutal crackdown on the protestors followed the controversial entry of security forces from Saudi Arabia and three other GCC states. Media access has been curtailed, with journalists finding it difficult to gain entry to the Kingdom… The road to political compromise and meaningful reform – which appeared to have been within reach only a few days ago – now appears to be blocked, which places the long-term viability of the Bahraini regime in serious question…

    The United States may see the preservation of the Bahraini regime as essential to its strategic position, given its concerns about the Fifth Fleet and about losing a key part of its decades-long strategy of containing Iranian power. But what the Bahraini regime is doing to maintain power may badly hurt America’s position as well. The harsh repression, immediately and publicly following the visit of Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, suggests either American complicity or impotence. The refusal of serious reform probably makes the survival of the regime less rather than more likely. And finally, the sectarian framing of Bahrain has the potential to rebound upon other Arab states with significant Shi’a populations, including Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. It may also drive Iraq’s leaders into a more assertively Shi’a and pro-Iranian stance, as Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and his rivals seek to win popularity with Iraqi Shi’a who identify with their Bahraini counterparts. If the Obama administration hopes to define a new vision for the region, it needs to leave behind such outdated concepts and lines of division. Bahrain, sadly, with the help of its regional allies, has brought them back into fashion…

    Why aren’t we interfering in Yemen where the government is also killing unarmed people who are asking for more democratic government and better economic conditions?

    Dozens of Protesters Are Killed in Yemen
    Laura Kasinof and Robert F. Worth, New York Times, March 18, 2011

    Government supporters opened fire on demonstrators in Yemen, killing at least 45 people and wounding more than 200, the New York Times reports. “It seems like people saw what happened in Bahrain and thought you could do the same here,” said one high-ranking Yemeni official, who said he did not know who was responsible for the outbreak. “But in Yemen it is going to be very bad – a disaster,” he added. “This will change everything, because the people killed have tribes.”

    President Obama condemned violence in a written statement that called on President Saleh “to adhere to his public pledge to allow demonstrations to take place peacefully.” He added: “Those responsible for today’s violence must be held accountable.”

  12. Joan says:

    Well, to understand Libya, maybe a timeline will help.

    Note that our first action in Libya goes all the way back to 1795.

    APRIL 2002

    Libya Time Line

    7th-5th Cent. B.C.
    Greeks settle in Cyrene and four other cities in Cyrenaica.
    Before 5th Cent. B.C.
    Phoenicians establish commercial settlements in Tripolitania.

    c. 1000 B.C.
    Garamentes tribe gains control of Fezzan.

    525 B.C.- A.D. 642
    Tripolitania and Cyrenaica ruled by various rulers: Persians, Alexander the Great, Ptolemies, Romans, Vandals, and Byzantines.

    A.D. 395
    Roman Empire partitioned: Tripolitania attached to west; Cyrenaica to east.nRomans had controlled the two regions for approximately 500 years.

    5th Cent.
    Vandals dominate North Africa.

    Byzantine General Belasarius recaptures Tripolitania.

    Death of Muhammad.

    Amr ibn al-As conquers Cyrenaica.

    Amr ibn al-As conquers Tripolitania.

    Uqba ibn Nafi conquers Fezzan.

    10th-16th Cent.
    Tripolitania and Cyrenaica suffer from constant internal strife and are controlled by various Muslim and Christian rulers: Fatamids, Berber Zirids, Normans, Almohads, Mamluks, Hapsburg Spain, and Knights of St. John Malta. Pirating becomes popular.

    16th Cent.
    Ottomans gain control of all North Africa except Morocco; sultan is represented by a pasha in Tripoli.

    17th Cent.
    Tripoli lapses into military anarchy.

    Ahmad Karamanli, a Turkish-Arab cavalry officer (khouloughlie–“sons of servants”), establishes a semi-independent dynasty in Tripoli; later gains control of Cyrenaica.

    The United States makes one-time tribute payment to the pasha.

    Pres. Jefferson rejects Pasha Yusuf ibn-Ali Karamanli’s demand for annual tribute; the pasha declares war on the United States.

    The Tripolitan War.

    10 June 1805
    The war ends when the two sides conclude a treaty of “peace and friendship.”

    The Ottomans reassert direct control over the country, creating a single province (vilayet) under an Ottoman governor-general (wali). (In 1879, Cyrenaica becomes a separate vilayet.)

    Muhammad ibn Ali as-Sanusi, a marabout and scholar from Algeria, founds the first of many Sanusi lodges in Cyrenaica. He becomes known as the Grand Sanusi. The Sanusis combined Sufism with orthodox Islam.

    The Ottomans refuse an Italian ultimatum that it allow Italy to occupy the country to protect its growing interests. Rome declares war.

    The Italo-Turkish War; Enver Pasha and Mustapha Kemal organize local resistance.

    The Treaty of Lausanne grants independence to Tripolitania and Cyrenaica; Italy promptly annexes the two provinces.

    Italy enters World War I on the side of the Allies; the Sanusi leader Ahmad ash-Sharif as-Sanusi sides with the Central Powers.

    First Italo-Sanusi War.

    Ash-Sharif leads a disastrous invasion of Egypt; turns leadership over to the pro-British Muhammad Idris as-Sanusi.

    Truce between Idris and Allies.

    Italo-Sanusi War. Italians under Mussolini conduct brutal pacification campaign over entire country.

    Italians complete pacification of Libya with defeat of Shaykh Umar al Mukhtar at al-Kufrah Oasis.

    Mussolini formally establishes colony of Libya.

    June 1940
    Italy enters World War II on the side of the Axis. Idris declares his support for the Allies.

    Qaddafi born in Sirte.

    February 1943
    Libya liberated from Axis. British and French set up military governments in Libya.

    November 1949
    U.N. passes resolution calling for a sovereign independent Libya by January 1952.

    October 1951
    Constitution is adopted; federal system with constitutional monarch is established.

    24 December 1951
    King Idris I announces the independence of the United Kingdom of Libya.

    Base agreements negotiated with Britain and the United States.

    October 1956
    Suez Crisis.

    June 1959
    Esso discovers a major oil field in Cyrenaica.

    June 1967
    Six-Day War.

    1 September 1969
    The Free Officers Movement overthrows the monarchy. The Revolutionary Command Council under the de facto leadership of Capt. Muammar al-Qaddafi declares the Libyan Arab Republic and assumes supreme governing authority. The RCC quickly transforms Libya from a conservative monarchy to a radical republic.

    U.S. and Britain evacuate Libyan bases; Qaddafi negotiates first arms deal with Soviet Union.

    Qaddafi formulates his revolutionary ideology.

    Qaddafi demands and receives huge increase in the amount foreign oil Qaddafi announces the merger of Egypt, Syria, and Libya: The Federation of Arab Republics. This is the first of several Libyan-led merger attempts.

    Qaddafi announces the start of the Libyan Cultural Revolution; ideology is promulgated in a series of publications called The Green Book.

    October 1973
    The Yom Kippur War; Qaddafi declares that the Gulf of Sidra is sovereign Libyan territory.

    Libya gains controlling interest in all foreign oil companies.

    11 February 1974
    U.S. repudiates Qaddafi’s claim over the Gulf of Sidra.

    2 March 1977
    The General People’s Congress approves the Declaration of the Establishment of the People’s Authority and proclaimed the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriyah.

    July 1977
    Egyptian-Libyan border war.

    March 1979
    The GPC announces that the masses are fully vested with power. Qaddafi abdicates all official positions and becomes the “Leader of the Revolution.”

    Sadat’s peace initiative infuriates Qaddafi who becomes a leader of the Steadfastness and Confrontation Front, an organization of radical Arab states opposed to any accommodation with Israel.

    2 December 1979
    U.S. Embassy in Tripoli is attacked and burned by Libyan mob.

    May 1980
    Carter Administration closes U.S. mission in Libya and expels four Libyan diplomats from U.S.

    Qaddafi’s first intervention in Chad.

    January 1981
    Reagan becomes president; he orders Pentagon to plan major naval exercises for the Gulf of Sidra.

    May 1981
    U.S. closes Libyan People’s Bureau (embassy) in Washington.

    19 August 1981
    The Gulf of Sidra incident. Two Navy F-14 Tomcats shoot down two Libyan Su-22 Fitter Js after one of them fired a missile at the American planes. Qaddafi vows retaliation.

    November 1981
    Reports reach the Reagan Administration that Qaddafi has dispatched “hit squads” to assassinate Reagan and other high ranking Administration officials.

    Reagan Administration initiates a number of military, diplomatic, and economic measures to deal with the Libyan threat.

    December 1981
    U.S. citizens ordered out of Libya.

    March 1982
    U.S. places an embargo on the importation of Libyan oil and export of high technology to Libya.

    February 1983
    The U.S., Egypt, and Sudan foil a Libyan plot to overthrow the Sudanese government.

    Qaddafi’s second intervention in Chad.

    Wave of Middle Eastern terrorism directed at the U.S.: bombing of U.S. embassy in Beirut; bombing of Marine Barracks in Beirut; bombing of U.S. embassy in Kuwait; bombing of U.S. embassy annex in Beirut; highjacking of Kuwaiti airliner to Iran; highjacking of TWA 847; Achille Lauro; highjacking of EgyptAir 648; and Rome and Vienna airport attacks.

    Libyan plane bombs Khartoum; British police officer shot and killed outside Libyan People’s Bureau in London; Libyan mining of Gulf of Suez; Soviets gain greater access to Libyan bases.

    7 January 1986
    Reagan announces strict economic sanctions against Libya: all travel and commercial transactions between the two countries are banned. Reagan orders naval demonstrations for the Gulf of Sidra and contingency strike planning.

    26-30 January 1986
    Operation Attain Document I (Operations in Vicinity of Libya I)

    12-15 February 1986
    Operation Attain Document II (OVL II)

    24-27 March 1986
    Operation Attain Document III (OVL III)

    24-25 March 1986
    Operation Prairie Fire: Libya fires at least six SAMs at U.S. naval task force; U.S. responds by putting missile battery out of action, sinking two Libya naval vessels, and badly damaging a third vessel. Qaddafi orders terrorist attacks against the U.S.

    5 April 1986
    Libyan agents detonate bomb in La Belle Disco in West Berlin; kills two U.S. soldiers and Turkish woman. U.S. and British intelligence intercept Libyan cables discussing this operation.

    7 April 1986
    Reagan orders air strike against Libya “in principle.” Planning proceeds at furious pace.

    14-15 April 1986
    Operation El Dorado Canyon: Air Force F-111F bomb targets in Tripoli and Navy A-6Es bomb targets in and around Benghazi.

    May 1986
    G-7 leaders issue Tokyo Communique’–a strong, united declaration against international terrorism.

    French-backed Chadian government forces rout Libyan-backed Chadian rebel forces.

    Reagan Administration states it has evidence Qaddafi is building a chemical weapons plant.

    Two U.S. Navy F-14s shoot down two Libyan MiG-23 Floggers near Tobruk.

    U.S. and Britain charge two Libyan government employees for their role in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. France issues arrest warrants for four Libyan officials for their role in the 1989 bombing of UTA Flight 772 over Chad.

    U.N. Security Council imposes strict sanctions on Libya for failure to hand over Pan Am suspects and failure to cooperate with UTA investigation.

    Five suspects go on trial in Berlin for 1986 La Belle bombing.

    The International Court of Justice rules that it has jurisdiction in the Pan Am 103 case. Qaddafi had offered to give up the two Pan Am 103 suspects for trial at the ICJ in The Hague.

    March 1999
    A French court convicts four Libyans in absentia of conspiring to sabotage UTA Flight 772.

    5 April 1999
    Following a deal negotiated by the U.N. Secretary General and other high-profile intermediaries, Libya hands over the two Lockerbie suspects to Scottish authorities in the Netherlands for trial in a Scottish court. The U.N. suspends sanctions against Libya.

    July 1999
    Britain and Libya resume diplomatic relations.

    September 1999
    Libya hosts African summit; Qaddafi proposes a United States of Africa.

    December 1999
    Qaddafi denounces terrorism; he had earlier expelled Abu Nidal organization and closed down terrorist training camps.

    April 2000
    Qaddafi invites Israeli official to visit Libya.

    3 May 2000
    Lockerbie trial opens; the two suspects Abd al-Basit Ali Meghrahi and Al-Amin Khalifa Fahima plead not guilty.

    Summer 2000
    Qaddafi negotiates the release of a dozen hostages held by a Muslim guerrilla group in the Philippines.

    31 January 2001
    The Scottish court in the Netherlands finds Abd al-Basit Ali Megrahi guilty and sentences him to life in prison. The court acquits Al-Amin Khalifa Fahima. The Bush administration states that it will neither support the permanent lifting of U.N. sanctions nor consider the resumption of normal relations until the Libyan government accepts full responsibility for the destruction of Pan Am 103 and pays damages to the families of the victims.

    11 September 2001
    Qaddafi condemns the terrorist attacks on the U.S. and pledges humanitarian aid to the families of the victims. Ironically, he states that the U.S. has the right to retaliate against those responsible for the attack.

    24 September 2001
    President Bush orders U.S. banks to freeze assets belonging to al-Qaida and other organizations linked to Usama bin Ladin and suspected of financing terrorist operations. One of those organizations is the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, an anti-Qaddafi Islamist organization. Recognizing that he and the U.S. have a common enemy, Qaddafi orders his intelligence service to cooperate with its American counterpart.

    March 2002
    A Scottish court of appeals upholds the conviction of Abd al-Basit Ali Meghrahi.

    Prepared by LCDR Joseph T. Stanik, USN (Ret.)
    [timeline from history course at navy military college - cached version]

  13. edgar says:

    ‘On Saturday, a number of liberal Democrats raised objections to the mission during a House Democratic Caucus conference call, Politico reported. The day before, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D., Ohio) issued a statement saying that Mr. Obama lacked the authority to clear the Libya operation and that “Congress should be called back into session immediately to decide whether or not to authorize the United States’ participation in a military strike.”’

    Unemployment still north of 8.0%, the “shellacking,” Gas near $4.00, Gitmo STILL open, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Democrats criticizing Obama: Imagine the mess that the next President is going to inherit!

  14. Mitch Rapp says:

    #9. Agreed, 110%.

  15. Mickie Lynn says:

    #13, It’s simplistic to say that only Democrats oppose the extensive use of air and missile attacks in Libya without Congressional approval. Here’s a link to an article that demonstrates otherwise. Several Republicans and most notably Rep. Ron Paul have also raised this point.
    Obama’s Libya Policy Makes Strange Bedfellows Of Congressional Critics
    Sam Stein and Amanda Terkel, Huffington Post, 03/21/11


    Under the War Powers Act of 1973, the president can send U.S. armed forces into conflict only with the authorization of Congress or if the United States is under attack or serious threat. Absent such authorization, however, the president does have a 48-hour window to report about military deployments overseas. While Congress is supposed to be consulted “in every possible instance,” a broadening interpretation of executive powers has greatly diminished its “sign-off” authority…

    UPDATE: Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) had been circulating a resolution “[e]xpressing the sense of Congress that the President is required to obtain in advance specific statutory authorization for the use of United States Armed Forces in response to civil unrest in Libya.” The measure was supported by Reps. Michael Honda (D-Calif.) and John Conyers (D-Mich.), among others.

    “In launching over 100 missiles on Libya this weekend, not only did the Defense Department undermine a carefully constructed consensus, which included the Arab League, but it leveled a devastating blow to our legislative-executive checks and balances,” read a statement by Honda, who is co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus’s Peace and Security Taskforce. “For the Pentagon to deliberately circumvent Congressional authority sets a new precedent for war powers authorization and sends the message to the world that American democracy is deeply dysfunctional. Secondly, for the Pentagon to pick its battles based on energy security considerations, which is particularly apparent given Libya’s 7th-ranked oil reserves, sends the message that America cares little about the human rights and freedoms of people in countries, like the Democratic Republic of Congo, Western Sudan, or Ivory Coast, without critical energy resources. Thirdly, for the Pentagon to pursue past precedent in employing a shock-and-awe-type invasion, indicates a deliberate disdain for the myriad of smaller pursuable efforts that are possible before pummeling a country with an air assault. I demand a serious conversation in Congress before new countries are incautiously invaded and before America’s legislative branch is eviscerated further.”

  16. Linda Muralidharan says:

    I am glad to hear Rep. Mike Honda speaking up. I remember when he was the well respected principal of a nearby elementary school when I lived in Ca. Also Republican Senator Richard Lugar has some very valid and cautionary things to say about our rushing into war again..especially without Congressional direction.

    I don’t want to lose sight of the plight of Libyan civilians and yet meanwhile what is overkill? what is the honest goal as honest brokers of humanitaraian governance? who are the current political factions? Some have said there is a combination of the spontaneous civilian leaders who simply want a decent and representative government with some Islamists who have joined the same cause, and wouold of course always work toward a more theocratic state even though that is not the thrust of the spontaneious uprising. What is the effect of tribal rivalries? Some say a number are opportunisitc and not necessarily ethnically bonded with Gadhafi…would pick the winnig side whoever that might appear to be. This is rumor and not based on good academic input. Or even input from a respected and reliable Libyan who is very familiar with recent politics there.

    I think it is time again for concerned citizens to contact elected officials and state we need to leave Afghanistan and we need an immediate Congressional debate about how long to stay involved in Libya and why we abandon the citizens of Bahrain.

  17. Linda Muralidharan says:

    As suggested above, we need to rethink the basics of our Middle East policies. Iran is not a threat to the US unless we want to be greedy and hog all trade and oil resources in the region. Iran has no intention of wasting its lives and treasure on any attack on Israel. Like any humane person,they would like to see justice for the Palestinians, and we won’t need to go picking and choosing (often loosing) leaders to champion. If we stop treating Iran as a pariah, we won’t need to play these hypocritical games.

    Iran and Israel are the keys. Treat them both as respected powers. And hold them accountable for acting respectfully on the international stage.

  18. Mickie Lynn says:

    It’s difficult to “respect” Israel’s violations of the human rights of the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. Is it apartheid? Is it ethnic cleansing? Can we ignore the 1,400 or more civilians who were killed in the attacks on Gaza during “Operation Cast Lead”? Why isn’t the US government speaking out against the illegal and ever increasing settlement expansion?

    UN investigator: Israel engaged in ethnic cleansing with settlement expansion

    Reuters, 21.03.11

    Israel’s expansion of settlements in East Jerusalem and eviction of Palestinians from their homes there is a form of ethnic cleansing, a United Nations investigator said on Monday. United States academic Richard Falk was speaking to the UN Human Rights Council as it prepared to pass resolutions condemning settlement building in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

    The “continued pattern of settlement expansion in East Jerusalem combined with the forcible eviction of long-residing Palestinians are creating an intolerable situation” in the part of the city previously controlled by Jordan, he said. This situation “can only be described in its cumulative impact as a form of ethnic cleansing,” Falk declared.

  19. Mitch Rapp says:

    #17. Really? “Like any humane person” = IRAN & IRANIANS… The same place where public stonings still take place, where Sharia Law is the law of the land…REALLY? TO put IRAN and ISRAEL on the same level in the realm of HUMANITY is a farce and perhaps the most incendiary nonsense I have read on this board. There is nothing, nothing RESPECTABLE about IRAN… and nothing respectable about claiming so.

  20. edgar says:

    “Why isn’t” Obama “speaking out against the illegal and ever increasing settlement expansion?”

  21. Mickie Lynn says:

    #19, Where do you get your information about Iranians? Have you visited Iran? Have you spoken with any Iranians, in exile or in Iran? When you judge an entire nation by the actions of the current government and say that there is “nothing respectable about Iran” you ignore centuries of history and culture and the courage of the past and continuing Green Revolution.

    If other nations cited our extreme torture and solitary confinement of a 23 year old possible, but not yet charged whistleblower or the treatment of prisoners in Chicago, or in the Federal CMU’s then they might say the same of the US. But of course we’re a diverse, rich and over all group of good people. So why stereotype an entire nation based on some of the actions of the government. I don’t.

  22. Phana24JG says:

    It is an incredible stretch to consider Iran to be on a higher moral plane than Israel. If the residents of the West Bank or Gaza would like to stop Israeli military strikes upon their land, it might be a good idea to stop lobbing rockets into Israel.

  23. Mickie Lynn says:

    Phana, You’ve missed the point if you think that this is some kind of moral comparison of Israel and Iran. Both of those nations are doing heinous things to their people on different scales and in different ways. It’s up to the people and to the international community to call them on those actions and to help bring about changes in behavior.

    As we’re finding out, it’s not a matter of military intervention or a quick fix but a long struggle for the best impulses of each nation to prevail. And we do need to raise the questions about why we seem to notice and have media attention to some bad behavior while other equally bad or even worse behavior is ignored or even excused.

  24. edgar says:

    Are the Women Against War against Obama’s Libyan war, too?

  25. Mickie Lynn says:

    “The U.S. government need not drop a single bomb in the Middle East to help liberate oppressed people. All it need do is stop selling bombs to their oppressors.” ~Medea Benjamin

    When all you have is bombs, everything starts to look like a target. And so after years of providing Libya’s dictator with the weapons he’s been using against the people, all the international community — France, Britain and the United States — has to offer the people of Libya is more bombs, this time dropped from the sky rather than delivered in a box to Muammar Gaddafi’s palace.

    If the bitter lesson of Iraq and Afghanistan has taught us anything, though, it’s that wars of liberation exact a deadly toll on those they purportedly liberate — and that democracy doesn’t come on the back of a Tomahawk missile…

  26. Mitch Rapp says:

    I for one, could care less what Susan Benjamin thinks… I find her quite hollow… and for the life of my, why change ones name to Medea, considering what the mythical princess/sorceress she took the name from did to kids out of spite…

    Further, I am quite perplexed about how Egypt is “transforming”…
    When an innocuous entity like an airline removes references from Israel from the maps on their website… one can only wonder…,7340,L-4046460,00.html

    And while I am sure many won’t believe a Jewish website, you can take them time to check for yourselves, as it is true.

    Further, the supposed peace and freedom seeking folks in Libya are being rooted on by the like of, Abu Yahya al-Libi… a Libyan born Al Qaidi leader… one has to wonder what is truly driving the “rebels” in Libya and throughout the region….

    I would sell my Israel related stocks… it is going to be a long summer for our friends… or, is it wrong to say they are our friends in these circles…? If so, I retract the “our” and replace it with “my”… afterall, persons and nations are known by the friends they keep.

  27. J. Nash says:

    Oh, ‘comon, Mickie. Do you support the war in Libya? Yes? Or no?

    I do not. I think our military resources are over-extended, and no-one can afford it right now. France, for example, is even more in debt than we are.

    So, does Women Waging Peace only wage peace against Republican wars? Or all wars?

  28. Mickie Lynn says:

    Jack (and your various alter egos) I do not support the war on Libya, as anyone who has read my numerous comments on the subject could surmise. But remember that the opinions expressed by me are mine and not those of all Women Against War members although we share the basis of understanding that war is not the answer to conflict.

    Data has just been updated to reveal that the numbers of internally and externally displaced people in the world are 27.5 million souls and bodies suffering from wars and other natural and unnatural disasters. What are we doing to help them?

    “The US is not only militarily overextended but also financially overextended.

    US military operation in Libya costs hundreds of millions and price tag could rise
    Associated Press, Wednesday, March 23, 3:38 PM

    Washington – Stretched thin by two wars, the U.S. military is spending upward of $1 billion in an international assault to destroy Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi’s air defenses and save rebels from likely defeat, according to analysts and a rough calculation of the military operation so far.



    As of Tuesday, the coalition had fired at least 162 sea-launched Tomahawk missiles priced at $1 million to $1.5 million apiece and dispatched B-2 stealth bombers – round-trip from Missouri – to drop 2,000-pound bombs on Libyan sites.


    Yet those numbers only provide part of the costs. The B-2 bombers require expensive fuel – and rely on air tankers to refuel in flight – and probably needed parts replaced upon their return to Whiteman Air Force Base. The pilots most certainly will get combat pay.

    A contingent of U.S. warplanes; 11 ships steaming in the Mediterranean, including three submarines, two destroyers and two amphibious ships; and one F-15 fighter jet that crashed, costing $75 million or more – it all adds up to numbers that unnerve budget-conscious lawmakers.

    “Every six hours we have another billion-dollar deficit,” said Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., a member of the House Armed Services Committee. “This could cost us a billion dollars there, which means simply another billion-dollar debt that our kids, our grandkids and our great-grandkids are going to have to pay back.”

    Cooper said missiles and bombs represent the significant first-time cost. As the campaign progresses, fuel will be a major expense. “The real question looking ahead is what the length of the operation is going to be and who is going to bear the burden of maintaining the no-fly zone,” he said…

    And all of the Republican budget cutting on the social and life sustaining side of the budget is being wiped out by these new war expenses thus causing increased suffering at home while not accomplishing anything positive abroad.

    Cost of military campaign in Libya could wipe out GOP’s spending cuts
    Russell Berman and John T. Bennett, The Hill, 03/21/11



  29. J. Nash says:


    “Jack (and your various alter egos)…”

    Pbbttt. ;-)


    Thanks for saying it directly, though.


    Were they so subtle about Iraq and Afganistan?

    @Mitch, #26:

    I don’t know exactly how to react to the map of Jordan all the way to the sea. I do know you see that sort of thing in Europe all the time, as well as half-”jokes” (“In this part of Denmark…” “Um, we’re in Sweden…” “Skaane is really part of Denmark…” “Ooo-kaaay…”)

    Some of it is really joking (“It is true that Sweden is cleaner than Denmark. Sweden has no rats, while Denmark is over-run with Swedes…”) Some? I don’t know. It’s part of Old World culture, that’s pretty foreign to an American mindset. So your article on the Jordan map might go better under “local culture” than overt threat.

    Do you mean “Al Qaidi” or “Al Qaeda”? Because Al Qaidi seems like a pretty common last name, while Al Qaeda is Arabic for “The Base.” The only place they look interchangable is The Washington Times.


    Mitch, they’re allies, not friends. Nations don’t have friends. I put Sofia on the “Muslim Women” blog through the same ringer (“The US is not a dad, not an international father figure. It’s a nation.”) It’s my opinion that everyone needs to grow up to get realistic about international politics.


  30. Mickie Lynn says:

    Jack, The clear opposition to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan was based on unilateral, illegal and basically unsupported (coerced) actions by our country where at least hundreds of thousands of people died and are still dying. The intervention in the Libyan civil war is more nuanced, but still wrong since other alternatives including serious and continued negotiations weren’t exhausted before military action was taken. It also appears that the very civilians that we have been trying to protect are dying in the crossfire in some cases.
    Now the government of Syria is killing and imprisoning protesters and the same is happening in Yemen and continuing in Bahrain. Are we going to take part in military actions in those countries as well?

    More of today’s headlines about Syria and Yemen where government crackdowns are killing protesters.
    Death Toll Rises in Syrian Crackdown
    The death toll from a Syrian government crackdown on opposition protesters continues to rise. At least 15 people were killed Wednesday when forces raided a mosque housing protesters in the early morning hours. But there have been reports the death toll may be significantly higher. Amnesty International is reporting the Syrian government has swept up dissident students, intellectuals, journalists and activists over the past several weeks.
    [Because of the extreme secrecy of the government of Syria there is currently no way to know how many people have been killed, detained or imprisoned at the moment. There’s an excellent interview with an 80 year old Syrian human rights activist who has been imprisoned many times and who documents the killings of thousands of pro-democracy Syrians in the recent past]

    Saleh Adopts Sweeping Emergency Powers to Quell Protests
    Embattled U.S.-backed Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh has enacted sweeping emergency powers amidst a growing uprising against his 30-year rule. On Wednesday, Yemen’s parliament approved the implementation of emergency laws suspending the constitution, barring protests, allowing far-reaching media censorship and handing more authority to state forces. Just over half of Yemen’s 301 parliament members were present for the vote. Thousands of people remain in the streets of Yemen in defiance of the new laws.