I don't know if it is really so easy to say
that military action is justified. Is is because
the US military needs a new target or because
another evil dictator appeared suddenly?
Gadhafi introduced Berlusconi into Bunga-Bunga
parties. They had a good relationship. Gadhafi
obviously made his own laws, but Berlusconi
bent and changed the laws of his country to
avoid his persecution, too. Is the one evil and
the other good? Both think they are somehow
above the law.
Basically what happens in Lybia is a civil war.
Should the world intervene in a civil war?
There are other countries that suffer a
civil war or a dictatorship, for example
Belarus, Chechnya, North Korea, or Burma.
In these cases the world does not intervene.
Of course Gadhafi is a special case, and apparently
he has started a war against his own people.
Therefore the military actions is maybe justified.
The question is why did the response of the
"international community" take so long? No
one cared about his weird behavior so far.
Now it looks a bit like the world cares only
if the oil supply is in danger or if the
economy is threatened. Who rules really
behind the scenes?
-J.
----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick Reilly
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2011 11:29 PM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Airstrikes in Libya. Is it necessary?
This is one of the few times that I support US military action. I have no
doubt that our government will screw-up the endgame, of course.
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
