Now don’t get me wrong, Colonel Gaddafi is a bad ‘un who needs to go. In my opinion he needs to be taken out. I am already a little bemused as to why we (the “coalition”) haven’t sent in special forces, Mossad agents, or, a Jason Bourne, and assassinated him. It would have been easy enough to make it look like an inside job, or like the Rebels had done it. It’s not as if we haven’t done it before….the CIA or Mossad at least.
But no, instead we adhere to the ridiculous charade of a no fly zone and intervening only to protect civilians.
Well, what protection for those standing against the mad man should, Heaven forbid, he endure and actually survive to rule on?
And, given his existing superiority in heavy weaponry, and propensity towards sneaky tactics, and a willingness to endorse atrocities, that is not an unlikely outcome. Especially as NATO seems to be unwilling or unable to sanction proactive support of the Rebels, even to the extent of arming them, or, to put our own boots on the ground.
If a job is worth doing, then it is worth doing well.
Have we not learnt from recent mistakes in Iraq and Afghanistan? These would seem to me to be classic examples of a half-hearted intervention early on leading to a protracted involvement and unnecessary loss of life on both sides.
Which brings me to the increasingly obvious hypocrisy of the US, Britain and the UN. What was it, I wonder, that prompted our interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya? What was it that prevented direct military action in Rwanda, the Congo, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Chad, and now the Ivory Coast, etc. when similar atrocities were/are being carried out by similar despots and madmen on the very same continent?
I would hope it was not because they are all in the “darker” end of Africa!
Surely it was not because we feared their military might. Although their victims will testify to the terror of a drug induced beserker wielding a machete.
No, I suspect it is more to do with something they lack……
Shame on us…….