Originally Posted by Viking
There are also a lot of inter-state projects that will aim to further unify the GCC as an economic force.Originally Posted by IMF
All a sham the damage was already done and Libya was shattered. All the weapons are in Islamist hands since NATO got involved. Turkey had a lot to do with it and the weapons fell into Islamist hands anyway with or without foreign training of these militias.Originally Posted by Viking
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/wo...ands.html?_r=0
They were Islamists right from the get-go and have been infesting eastern Libya for years with pent-up aggression for the regime. LIFG and AQIM affiliates/admirers saw the spring as an opportunity to hijack everything mid-revolution rather than Egypt’s post-revolution hijacking. These are armed Islamists that were trained by Turkey and funded by pretty much everyone including ksa and qatar. Everyone turned against Ghaddafi in support of Islamist militias that were entrusted with regime change.
This is not Syria, Qaddafi kept those rats in check. They couldn’t utter so much as a word back then until they got the sympathy of foreign countries who hated him. Total failure on all accounts it doesn’t matter what Libyans themselves did after the revolution, violent holes festering for decades were armed and ready. Ghaddafi could have cracked down on these movements if not for nato advocating total regime change, as if anything can possibly be guaranteed in a movement filled with affiliates of known transnational jihadi movements.Yet Libyans under Gaddafi rose up. If NATO hadn't gotten rid of Gaddafi, we could have had another Syria and another country where IS was really strong. That would have been inconvenient - imagine two big fronts against IS rather than one.
Actually, ISIS is already in multiple fronts including yemen, sinai, tunisia, algeria, and libya.
It's like in Iraq, where people thought replacing a secular nationwide vibe in support of sectarianism was a good idea.
Bookmarks