Wednesday, August 24, 2011

NATO, Obama and Harper need to answer a lot of questions on Libya

Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) seems to have the gonads which are sadly missing from most of the members of both the Republican and the Democrat party.... just like over here in Canada, the opposition NDP, the Libs and of course the Cons in the Conservative party have remained silent on the NATO trickery being played out in Libya.  Kucinich is one of the very few questioning Obama on how they came about to be in the present Libyan situation.

Does anyone in power in the govt of Canada have the balls to question PM Harper on same?  Harper keeps saying we are helping the people of Libya.  PLEASE ...that's not true at all. The people of Libya are not just the elite there who are hungry for Libya's oil money and more power then Gadhafi gave them, and neither are they the imported Al Qaida murderers and other thugs (who are our partners in this war, whether you want to believe it or not).

Like I have been saying several times, Harper's foreign policy when it comes to the Middle East, other then Israel,  is in the toilet.  He knows zero about the muslim mentality  and less about arabs in general.

I really don't care how bad a dictator Gadhafi is/was. Killing his people is not the way to go. The man and his sons used to travel all over the world... if it was really a matter of getting rid of the family so the Libyans could benefit from it, then why didn't NATO make a decision to kill them and leave Libya and it's people unscratched?  The death, destruction, chaos and general misery that NATO has wrought on the ordinary Libyans is truly unbelievable. 
Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), who has led the fight in the House challenging the Obama Administration’s actions in Libya, today released the following statement:

“Libyan rebels have entered Tripoli. As gun battles break out across the city, it is timely to enter into a discussion as to how the rebels arrived there. It is time to review the curious role of NATO and the future of U.S. interventionism.

A negotiated settlement in Libya was deliberately avoided for months while NATO, in violation of UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolutions 1970 and 1973, illegally pursued regime change. NATO chose sides, intervened in a civil war and morphed into the air force for the rebels, who could not have succeeded but for NATO’s attacks.

NATO acted with impunity. The NATO command recklessly bombed civilians in the name of saving civilians. Usurping the United Nation's traditional role, NATO looked the other way as the arms embargo was openly violated by U.N. member nations.

NATO's top commanders may have acted under color of international law but they are not exempt from international law. If members of the Gaddafi Regime are to be held accountable, NATO's top commanders must also be held accountable through the International Criminal Court for all civilian deaths resulting from bombing. Otherwise we will have witnessed the triumph of a new international gangsterism.

The reasons for the U.S./NATO intervention in Libya keep changing. First it was about the potential for a massacre in Benghazi. When the massacre did not materialize and once the war against Libya was underway, the reasons for intervention changed....

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.