The “next front against Islamic State,” as a headline in The Economist puts it, appears to be Libya. The chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joseph Dunford, had talks last month with his French counterpart with an eye toward taking “decisive military action” against ISIS.
I agree with the author that knocking off gaddaffi was a spectacularly bad idea. One should look at the power waiting behind the throne whenever one wants to knock off a dictator. In this case..religious fanatics.
It quite clear why Europe and the USA and NATO countries intervened.
It had nothing to do with human rights nor had it anything to do with terrorists.
The leaked Clinton emails make this clear.
France wanted to re-establish its influence in North Africa
The multi-national oil companies wanted a greater share of oil revenues as they felt too much going to pay for social programs
The gold backed Dinar as proposed by Qaddafi to use as a currency in Africa thus replacing other currencies was to be prevented from happening.
Follow the money and not the terrorist.
This is a brilliant insight on the part of Mr. Pillar, and it seems to characterize any "theater of war." I recall a discussion on C-span years ago focused on the "War on Drugs" and the inane strategy of just setting Monsanto-type chemical "bombs" loose over foliage in an attempt to control the growth of Cocaine plants.
The only FEMALE on the panel pointed out that a supply of cocaine substantial enough to fill global demand could be satisfied on about 30 acres of land. She contested the idea that ruining specific terrain would stop the problem.
So I am pleased to see the same fundamental flaw in strategy laid out by Mr. Pillar as per the "War on Terror" and its logistical operations:
"This conception embodies the fallacy that control of a patch of distant real estate is to be equated with threats of terrorist attacks against the West and especially the United States. Even if the connection between distant real estate and proximate terrorism were greater than it really is, there is the further common but also fallacious corollary that whatever particular patch has most recently caught our attention is somehow more significant than other patches..."
The "real estate" approach is useful in moving INVENTORY as costly items of war must be shipped, sent, or parked somewhere. By designating regions--in a manner similar to that of routes ascribed to traveling salesmen--uninterrupted SUPPLY chains can deliver "the goods" and thereby fulfill the covert objectives of the MIC and its weapons' developers and distributors.
Carlyle and its investors are also made happy.
This is another uncommon insight. It's uncommon because this type of wisdom is NEVER heard among beltway pundits or MSM faces:
"Inadequate governance has multiple bad effects, including the sort of chaos that violent extremists exploit. Libya does not have a governance problem because ISIS is there; ISIS is there because Libya has a severe governance problem."
An important analogy can be made to the field of medicine. Conventional medicine looks for foreign "bodies" to attack. Holistic medicine recognizes that when the body's own functions break down, that's when outside dangers enter.
Cause and effect relationships can be inverted. THAT is quintessential to U.S. foreign policy under the direction of Martial Forces. Skilled in the practices of organized terror, they insist that terror be assigned to the targets of their own barbaric actions.
Those who argued that they "had to destroy the village to save it" are still "at the wheel."
One may be a thug but until you step on the toes of the economic elite like Saddam and Qaddafi did you are not labeled a " TERRORIST"!
That scenario has been the modus operandi of the economic, elite for a long time and the only difference is that terrorists has replaced reds,anarchists and communists. If they couldn't label Castro as a communist, he would have been labeled a terrorist.
There were WMD's in Iraq and Libya but they were not nukes in Iraq or the MSM canard about Libya. Saddams real WMD's were that he was wanting to sell his oil in currencies other than the petro-dollar and the WMD in Libya was the threat of the gold Dinar.
HRC as Secretary of State has the blood of regime change and the assassination of Gaddafi in Libya, on her hands.
Paul Pillar states that Libya was a relatively prosperous state before the ordered regime change. HRC was complicit and culpable in that bloody regime change and should be indicted for war crimes.
What you were never told by your MSM was that the the majority of the Libyan people were happy with Qaddafi because Libya had the highest standard of living in Africa and most of the world.
Before the regime change in Libya if you were a Libyan citizen you could expect this:
1. $500.00 a year oil dividend.
2. $50,000.00 gift to newlyweds.
3. Free education.
4. Equal rights for women and minorities.
5. 0% loans.
6. Free housing and free electricity.
7. Free universal health care.
8. Gasoline 14 cents a gallon.
9. Libyan government would pay up to 50% of the cost of a new car.
Too bad it was not the other way around because if any country in the world that needs regime change it is the # 1 terrorist country in the world!