As I recall the whole point of the limited NATO action was to stop Qaddafi from massacring the civilian population of Benghazi.
As noted, that seems to have been the only thing that the UN could agree upon.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/07...09756.html
Luckily for us when the Syria situation rolled around we had a man in the White House with a sense of pattern recognition and not a fucking crazy warmongering shitball like Bush. Obama learned the painful lesson that you just cannot help some people.
As noted, that seems to have been the only thing that the UN could agree upon.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/07...09756.html
Quote:In 2012, you hailed the NATO operation in Libya as a model for intervention. Do you still perceive it that way?
The intervention at the time was designed to do three things: to make sure there was an arms embargo enforced on Gaddafi, that the people who were being attacked by government forces were protected and in some ways to provide the space and time for the people of Libya to decide their own future.
If you look at those goals they were all met. The impending disaster of an attack by Gaddafi’s forces on Benghazi was halted, over time the ability of Gaddafi’s forces to attack civilians declined, the arms embargo was kept in place and the people of Libya were given the opportunity to decide matters about their future by themselves.
Unfortunately, the way Libya has evolved demonstrates that just because you give people the opportunity to decide their own future they don’t always decide in the right or best way — in the way that we would have wanted. So the situation in Libya has gone from bad to worse and is horrific in many dimensions. The future doesn’t look much brighter.
Luckily for us when the Syria situation rolled around we had a man in the White House with a sense of pattern recognition and not a fucking crazy warmongering shitball like Bush. Obama learned the painful lesson that you just cannot help some people.
