FAIR editor Jim Naureckas tweeted recently, “NATO’s installation of an Al Qaeda-friendly government in Libya is one of 2011’s most underreported stories.” He’s got a point. The Washington Post today published a pretty interesting look at how the Libyan government viewed the jihadist threat, thanks to some documents recovered in Tripoli:
The documents were uncovered days after the regime fell to rebel fighters led in part by a self-proclaimed former Islamist, Abdelkarim Belhadj. He has declared himself the leader of the “Tripoli Brigade” that spearheaded the defeat of Gadhafi loyalists in the capital. Belhadj is the former commander of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, an Islamist organization that fought alongside Afghan insurgents against Russian occupation in the 1980s.
So what does the U.S. government have to say about this? Plenty–but you can’t quote them by name:
U.S. officials on Tuesday did not dispute Belhadj’s Islamist roots but played down the connections.
“Some members of LIFG in the past had connections with Al-Qaeda in Sudan, Afghanistan or Pakistan, and others dropped their relationship with Al-Qaeda entirely,” said a senior U.S. official who closely tracks Islamic terrorist organizations. “It seems from their statements and support for establishing a democracy in Libya that this faction of LIFG does not support Al-Qaeda. We’ll definitely be watching to see whether this is for real, or just for show.”
The official insisted on anonymity in discussing sensitive case files about terrorist organizations.
That seems like a pretty flimsy rationale for granting a source anonymity.
It is hard to know what to say. The US overthrows the government in Afghanistan and then fails to follow up to build support for its new government and is well on the road to bringing the Taliban back into the government. The US overthrows Iraq, condemns Iranian meddling, but installs pro-Iranian forces in the government, all the while talking about bombing Iran over non-existant nuclear weapons. Now the US is intervening in Libya to overthrow the Ghaddafi government that had become so friendly McCain and Lieberman wanted to arm him. The new anti-Gahaddafi allies the US is in favor of are the same people the US fought to expell from Afghanistan and Iraq (although they were never in Iraq until the US invaded). This is the world in the 10 years since 9/11. War is Peace. We are at war with Eurasia. We have always been at war with Eurasia.
Alliances always are shifting, when a leader falls and is replaced by the most dominant faction in the broad insugent group-it will be a crap shoot-that our CIA will try to influence, but it doesn’t always work out as planned, even if they pick or groom the winning horse.
All of our troubles in Iraq came down to making Iraq safe for the Iranians and there is very little we can do about it.
They say you can lead a horse to water……..The U.S is now -and would always-have had a tough time of bringing a western form of democracy to certain areas of the world.It is simply not in their DNA.In their historical ,cultural ,or religious experience.Iraq is doing better than Afghanistan.Iran would probably do better yet ,if it were allowed.One does get the feeling(hope thats all it is)that with libya either we are letting Europe run the show or…we don’t have a clue.And that surprises me.As dumb as Obama is,I would expect more from Hilary.Speaking of Hilary….i have never seen a secretary of state more invisible.What gives?
if anyone is interested, the u.s. was much more involved in the libyan operation that they discussed publicly according to john barry:
“The U.S. military has spent about $1 billion so far and played a far larger role in Libya than it has acknowledged, quietly implementing an emerging “covert intervention” strategy that the Obama administration hopes will let America fight small wars with a barely detectable footprint.
Officially, President Obama handed the lead role of ousting Muammar Gaddafi to the European members of NATO but behind the scenes, the U.S. military played an indispensable role in the Libya campaign, deploying far more forces than the administration chose to advertise. And at NATO headquarters outside Brussels, the U.S. was intimately involved in all decisions about how the Libyan rebels should be supported as they rolled up control of cities and oil refineries and marched toward the capital, Tripoli.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/08/30/america-s-secret-libya-war-u-s-spent-1-billion-on-covert-ops-helping-nato.html
I find myself recalling a quote from the prohet Isaiah which circulated widely during the Vietnam war, after the press ran a photo of LBJ picking his pet beagle by the ears:
“He that meddleth in strife belonging not to him is like one who taketh a dog by the ears.”
Woodward
Im not sure how to take that assessment.Barely detectable footprint?Is that like plausible deniability?Are you saying Obama is lying to America by acting as if he is not involved in this war ,while he is really running it?Or is his covert hidden actions supposed to be looked at as brilliant military strategy.Delivering bombs with their serial numbers filed off.This from a party that has espoused scathing hatred of such things.Especially having a press that is not getting the straight dope from the commander in chief.Things like this would send the left into a frenzy- if it were Bush.
So he spent 1 billion.In war terms thats about ten minutes of bombing and six cups of coffee to go.My question is simple.Who are our allies within these waring factions?Don’t take it for granted Obama is not over his head.By all appearances – he is.
The quality of life and security for the citizens has been largely restored and we are a large part of why that has happened.