Libya

With Muammar Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi in charge, I guess the Libyan boil was always going to burst. It was just a question of time.

Western forces claim that their actions are all about protecting the Libyan people. Well if that is really the case, how come they have collaterally murdered an unknown number of Libyan citizens with their adventurous attacks from the air? Where is the protection in that when mothers,sons and grandfathers have been blown to smithereens or else maimed for life? The mantra "No pain no gain" is insulting to innocent Libyan families who have been bereaved by their self-proclaimed saviours. How many more must die?

Al-Jazeera reports that:

"Only one in three Britons agree with the decision to take military action in Libya, according to a poll published on Monday. The ComRes/ITN survey found that 43 per cent disagreed with the action and 22 per cent were unsure. But in parliament, British legislators voted 557 to 13 in favour of military involvement."

Why is my country, the so-called "UK", always next in line behind the USA to flex military muscles around the globe? Iraq, Afghanistan and now Libya. With all three countries there is surely a linking theme and that's what the Clampetts used to call "black gold" - oil. It's key to the hidden agenda. Mobilisation of military forces because of internal governmental terrorism in Indonesia, Congo or Burma seemed out of the question. Reason - no oil. But Libya? Straight in there with the best airborne hardware available.

Anticipating political change in Libya, the west should have composed wiser, longer term diplomatic strategies instead of jollying Gaddafi along because he held the keys to the oil cupboard. As in all hastily devised military interventions, it is the innocent, ordinary folk who will suffer the most. There will be many more tears before the new Libya emerges.