Intentions and Outcomes

The FUKUS (France, UK, US) intervention was not humanitarian in intent, conduct or outcome. The motivation was clear. When the intervention started and instantly exceeded the remit set by the UN I asked why there was no attempt at negotiation. No proposals not even ultimatums just bombs. Cameron was criminal, the Labour opposition collaborated as did the media. Some like John Pilger saw through this clearly; if others were blind it was wilful blindness or criminal negligence. I’m not against intervention but if there have to be wars they should be humanitarian and just in intent, conduct and consequence; the Libya intervention fails on all counts.

Patrick Cockburn in the Independent writes:

The winning anti-Gaddafi militia are not proving merciful. Often they have had relatives killed in the fighting or imprisoned by the old regime who they want to avenge. Sometimes they come from tribes and towns traditionally hostile to neighbouring tribes and towns. Gaddafi supporters are being hunted down. According to one person in Gaddafi’s home town of Sirte, they are facing a “continuing reign of terror”.

Full Article.

The Rebels came to power on the back of NATO terror, to maintain power they need to maintain terror. NATO, the FUKUS (France, UK, US) countries, intervened in a civil war and turned a crisis into a catastrophy; they unleashed chaos and now wait, like a wake of vultures, to pick the bones of Libya clean.