Where’s The Outrage over Colonel Gaddafi?

The methods that Gaddafi’s military are using against what appear to be peaceful protests are overwhelming and completely out of bounds. From the BBC:

There were also widespread reports that foreign mercenaries from sub-Saharan Africa – paid by the Libyan government – had been brought in to attack protesters. Another resident told the BBC that 40 people had been killed in a short space of time.
“Just about an hour ago, more than 40 people have been shot dead in the streets of Benghazi,” he said, blaming the violence on the country’s veteran leader, Colonel Muammar Gadaffi.
“Please, please tell the world – let the world know that he’s killing the people for no reason. They’re very peaceful protesters. He’s bringing foreigners from nowhere, from nowhere, Africans, black African snipers shooting the people in the streets of Benghazi, now he’s attacking Benghazi itself with rocket missiles.”

Gaddafi has generally gotten a free pass from the usual suspects because of his (relative to Mubarak) media antics and entertainment value (such as his tent stunt in NYC) and the fact that he ritualistically “stands up” to the west.

While US ties to the Egyptian military and US pressure on Mubarak helped to make that transition occur relatively peacefully, you can see how a “real” non-aligned nation treats its citizens while they attempt to do the same thing, protest peacefully. They bring in mercenaries and utilize machine guns and rockets against their own citizens.

Where are the protests in the US? In the UN? Of course the non-aligned nations don’t give the remotest crap about human rights; they want to be able to do whatever they want to their people if that’s what it takes to control the resources that provide the money for their personal gain. And since we feel guilty about colonialism or whatever else we don’t stand up and call out this type of brutal behavior the way we ought to.

Don’t worry; if he is able to wipe out the opposition (which he may be able to do) there will be plenty of nations ready to buy his oil, from China to Italy, since human rights are way down the scale when it comes to doing business.

6 thoughts on “Where’s The Outrage over Colonel Gaddafi?”

  1. If he has to rely on foreign troops to maintain control, he’s toast. Having to use foreign troops means he can’t trust his own forces to fire on his own people. That in turn means that if the people push so hard the mercenaries can’t handle it, the military won’t back him.

  2. “Where’s The Outrage over Colonel Gaddafi?”

    He is going to have to take a number. A couple of weeks ago, folks would have noticed, but right now, Libya is no better than fourth on the mid-east list and the mid-east has sunk to second.

  3. “If he has to rely on foreign troops to maintain control, he’s toast.”

    Actually, it is a classic move among Islamic rulers.


    … al-Mamun seized the caliphate in 813 C.E.. … The constant revolutions and the deep division in Islamic society convinced al-Ma’mun that he needed a military force whose only loyalty was to him. So his brother, who would later become caliph (833-842 C.E.), assembled a military force of slaves, called Mamelukes. … Many of the Mamelukes were Turkish … also … Slavs and some Berbers. By the middle of al-Wathiq’s reign, the Mameluke army had completely displaced the Arabian and Persian army under the caliph.

  4. I also think the international community should react as quickly as possible because history teaches us that the world leaders who were slow to react to the threats posed by dictators like Gaddafi never got the situation under control.

Comments are closed.