9 Comments on “Dr. Phal and the Libyan Issue”

  1. I think Dr. Phal just got outsmarted by a chicken. Which means a chicken beats out Harper, Obama, Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin, because Dr. Phal is smarter than all of them rolled together.

  2. It looks like Obama is more anxious to gear into war with Libya than he is to help Japan bring their nuclear reactors under control. Not that i’m criticizing Libya’s rebels. If they don’t like their administrating government, they have the right to overthrow it. I just feel our President’s priorities are screwed. Japan has been our ally and financial business partner, adding a stability to the dollar that otherwise might not have existed. Now it’s hurting bad and needs our help. We’re spreading ourselves a bit thin with one war in Afghanistan, an ally in crisis, and now busy-bodying in a civil conflict that could easily end up in sending more body bags home.

  3. That’s the entire problem – Libya is in civil war, yet Western leaders and their mainstream media toddies are attempting to spin it as their concern. Has Libya become the West’s Scapegoat? Today, NATO coalition forces, including Canada (in spirit at least, the several jets that King Harper has offered will not leave ground for two days) started bombing targets in Libya citing the Libyan President’s decision to not follow the resolutions passed by a predominately European and upper North American council, which in part demanded Gaddafi cede his leadership. It should also be noted that the rebels attempting the coup of the Gaddafi regime were the ones who asked for the help of the Security Council – since when does NATO support insurgents? Is not the action in Afghanistan to support the West’s puppet government over those who are trying to overthrow that said government?

    I was somewhat amused when the news rolled the sound bites from the leaders in Paris, Harper commenting that in this action “there are going to be unavoidable civilian casualties” – is this not the very crux of civilians dying that spurned these leaders to decide that launching rockets and air raids on Gaddafi’s forces was to prevent the Libyan President from doing? Harper also admitted that the leaders were looking towards a “regime change” as the end of their actions. At least it would appear that the Canadian government isn’t hiding behind the coattails of the Americans as they did in Haiti though there are documents that support the claim that it was the Canadian government that came up with the plan to rid Haiti of Aristide after he demanded that West Germany and France to repay the $40 billion dollars the two countries had siphoned out of the country for decades before. It was somewhat also funny how in Hillary Clinton’s statement on the actions of the forces that she would use it as an opportunity to warn Iran about the concern America and its “Gulf Nation” partners in Iran “spreading its agenda”. Does this mean that the West is going to target Iran next? I suppose the Israeli aggressions are justified in the eyes of these Western leaders as they are acting very much in the manner that Gaddafi and his loyalists are doing. Is not Israel violating the agreed international non-aggression declarations? It must be good to have that global guilt conscience working for ya. It would also lead to the question that if, as Harper and Clinton stated, this was to stop Libyan forces from killing its own citizens, where was the security forces for Bosnia?

    The way I see the West’s actions in Libya is one of opportunity for raising their status in their own countries where each leader respectively is struggling. Harper is in the middle of a political storm, scandals coming to light, a motion of contempt of Parliament, the discovery of his plan to create a Prime Minister’s Office controlled media centre, and no doubt a budget engineered to force the opposition parties to balk at its contents and call for a vote of non-confidence to spur on an election. Harper needs something that will make the Canadian public suspend their disgust in the lack of ethical behaviour on the part of his government. President Obama is being seen as an indecisive leader (though it does make me wonder about the American faction in Paris – Hillary Clinton representing the U.S. while Obama is in Brazil, I think it is? Could this be an indication that Obama will not be running again in the next election and is ceding the image of being a decisive leader to Clinton, who may well emerge as his replacement for the Democrats in the next American election?). Prime Minister Cameron of Britain has been under fire from all sides on his deep budgetary cuts that have most sectors of England looking for a noose. Nicolas Sarkozy, President of France, has been facing economic budgetary cuts as well as controversy over several, what have been said to be extreme, security measures – he needs to up his public image with a decisive win for his calls to action when he faces election either later this year or early in the next. In my opinion, what all this amounts to is what I’ll call the “George W Effect” – just as Bush was able to springboard the initial campaign into Iraq in 2003with American voters in order to ensure his re-election in 2004.

    It will be a glorious victory for democracy when the NATO coalition finishes its mission; after all, it will be the West that writes the history that Canadian, European and American history students will be allowed to read in the textbooks. The reality of the situation however, will be the opposite; this will cause a further fracturing of the delicate nature of Middle East and African relations with the Western powers that in the future will see more deaths to the innocent populations of these countries by men who with their national treasury paid personal security forces ensuring that those who should have the sight scopes firmly implanted on their foreheads will not. Perhaps it is time for Western populations to rise up against the insanity of their professed “leaders” and strip them of their securities. It is incredulous that Harper, in attempting to look as a global leader, has left blaring markers for his lack of empathy for the citizens of the country he is supposed to be the leader of. He let Omar Khadr take a fall for actions that he reacted to in the midst of an American shoot out – I did not see any American soldiers on trial for the dead bodies they left in the rubble in that little hamlet – to be taken prisoner and tortured by the American Forces. Is not torture against the Geneva convention? Or is this just for cultures who are not predominantly Christian and White? When the initial uprisings began in Libya, Harper did not send a plane of Canadian citizens residing in Libya to get out of that country – it sat on a runway in Europe. His explanation was that if Canadians needed to get out, the other countries would share and take them on. Even this week, Canadians seeking passage back to Canada from Japan were left to find rides from other countries – Harper explained that he didn’t see the need to send jets because there were commercial flights available (so begs the question, why did other countries send jets to retrieve their patriots then?)

  4. What i doubt is that any of the lead role players at this shameful epilogue in history is going to be extolled by the future. They will probably be used as examples of how things go wrong when global leaders make bad decisions. It will be the same sort of painful reconstruction of the poor leadership and unfortunate events that led to the Two Big Wars; and just as complex and confusing. We should take their Vicidin away so they can start facing reality.

  5. If find the recent five years as ironic in terms of the shift in the global winds. During the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s and 80’s it was the Soviets leading the charge in mainstream media as the “Communist threat”. Today we are seeing similar actions being taken by the Western controlled UN security council, yet there is no call of the “Democratic threat” – it makes me wonder if the old handlers of TASS have moved on to more lucrative positions in Western countries.

  6. I am finding it hard to believe that Canadians, the U.S. And the French collectively are listening to the same coke addled advisors from the 80’s that would make both MacGrueber and the A- team cringe with their advice. There are plenty of other “causes” to get involved with that would both raise ratings and not kill people, like say…feeding Japan. Or smuggling Charlie Sheen into an ex-rendering facility that’s now being used for rehab. – Hey wait! I call that one for my next sitcom attempt “celebrity rendition”.

  7. It really amazes me too that there isn’t a single commentator out there pointing out that there seems to be a regression into the Thatcher/Reagan era within the context to Libya as it was back to Afghanistan then

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.