The two sides of our betrayal of Kaddafi
Diana West quotes my blog entry about the death of Kaddafi, and adds this:
Qaddafi was not killed in retaliation for his attacks on American servicemen in Berlin in 1986, or the downing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie in 1988. He was not killed for his central role in the USSR’s terror networks going back to the 1960s and 1970s. He was killed after coming over to our side in George Bush’s “war on terror,” in the final phase of a civil war in Libya in which his regime fought al Qaeda affiliates.Diana has brought out the second side of the betrayal I spoke of: that what we did to Kaddafi was not just a selfish or ideologically driven betrayal, but a betrayal that helped our sworn enemies. But, as she shows, it’s even worse than that. We turned against Kaddafi at the very moment that he began fighting on OUR side against al Qaeda. All that the al Qaeda people needed to do was align themselves with some people who called themselves democrats, and we were at their beck and call.
As I’ve been saying all these months, I have not seen one mainstream politician or commentator denounce our immoral, criminal, and pro-Qaeda Libya policy, not one. As I wrote in “An uncertain trumpet against a criminal war,” some conservatives, like Sean Hannity and Bruce Thornton, questioned it or said that they “didn’t understand it.” But they never actually said the policy was wrong. They just whined.
Our country has lost its honor.
The Bush administration’s insistence that they were spreading democracy and freedom in the Middle East seems to have rendered Republicans/”conservatives” incapable of criticizing any intervention on the side of putative democrats, no matter the damage to American interests. Remember the bitter denunciations from those quarters after Jimmy Carter’s betrayal of the Shah of Iran in favor of the “democratic” Iranian university students and mullahs? What a difference!An Indian living in the West writes:
There is a lesson for any tyrants out there from all this. It is that if you have nuclear weapons, Uncle Sam won’t dare mess with you. The North Koreans took that lesson to heart as have the Pakistanis. The Iranians have understood this lesson and are working feverishly on acquiring nuclear weapons. It is the same message American sent to the world after Iraq War II: get those bombs before we come after you.LA replies:
And the worst part of it is, the absence of any real challenge to it anywhere in our mainstream politics. If someone has seen a real challenge to it (and I mean real opposition, not just impotent quibbles), let me know.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 21, 2011 09:42 AM | Send