I have been quite concerned about the revolution/civil war that is going on in Libya. I am on the side of freedom and human rights for the people of that country who have been oppressed for forty years by their leader. I am, however, not happy with the military intervention by the coalition that includes the United States. I believe along with the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. that peaceful means bring peaceful ends. I do not believe that war is the way to peace. I believe along with the Quakers that War Is Not the Answer.
I have seen some articles by others that seem to feel this way.
CODEPINK’s Medea Benjamin and journalist, Charles Davis have a piece entitled, Instead of Bombing Dictators, Stop Selling Them Bombs. They write, “If the bitter lesson of Iraq and Afghanistan has taught us anything, though, it’s that wars of liberation exact a deadly toll on those they purportedly liberate – and that democracy doesn’t come on the back of a Tomahawk missile.” They tell us, the American taxpayers: “Instead of forking over $150 million a day to the weapons industry to attack Libya or selling $67 billion in weapons to the Saudis so they can repress not just their own people, but those of Bahrain, we – the ones being asked to forgo Social Security to help pay for empire – should demand those who purport to represent us in Washington stop arming dictators in our name.”
Richard Dawahare of Lexington wrote ‘Reality demands restraint’ for a blog on courier-journal.com. He concluded, “America should instead attend to the fallout of the continuing disaster in Japan, using our resources to help rebuild life, rather than reducing it in the sands of North Africa.” He also wrote a post on his own blog, The Peace Cow Field Journal, entitled, Attack on Libya seems right, is terribly wrong. “This smells like another neocon end-run using the veneer of humanitarianism as a smokescreen to hoodwink--ONCE AGAIN—an unwitting public,” he said there.
Alan J. Kuperman had a commentary, 5 things the U.S. should consider in Libya , in USA Today. Writing that intervening actually magnifies the threat to civilians in Libya and beyond, he wrote, “That is because armed uprisings, such as Libya's, typically provoke massive state retaliation that harms innocents.” He listed five principles to guide humanitarian intervention, all of which apply to Libya.
I have seen some articles by others that seem to feel this way.
CODEPINK’s Medea Benjamin and journalist, Charles Davis have a piece entitled, Instead of Bombing Dictators, Stop Selling Them Bombs. They write, “If the bitter lesson of Iraq and Afghanistan has taught us anything, though, it’s that wars of liberation exact a deadly toll on those they purportedly liberate – and that democracy doesn’t come on the back of a Tomahawk missile.” They tell us, the American taxpayers: “Instead of forking over $150 million a day to the weapons industry to attack Libya or selling $67 billion in weapons to the Saudis so they can repress not just their own people, but those of Bahrain, we – the ones being asked to forgo Social Security to help pay for empire – should demand those who purport to represent us in Washington stop arming dictators in our name.”
Richard Dawahare of Lexington wrote ‘Reality demands restraint’ for a blog on courier-journal.com. He concluded, “America should instead attend to the fallout of the continuing disaster in Japan, using our resources to help rebuild life, rather than reducing it in the sands of North Africa.” He also wrote a post on his own blog, The Peace Cow Field Journal, entitled, Attack on Libya seems right, is terribly wrong. “This smells like another neocon end-run using the veneer of humanitarianism as a smokescreen to hoodwink--ONCE AGAIN—an unwitting public,” he said there.
Alan J. Kuperman had a commentary, 5 things the U.S. should consider in Libya , in USA Today. Writing that intervening actually magnifies the threat to civilians in Libya and beyond, he wrote, “That is because armed uprisings, such as Libya's, typically provoke massive state retaliation that harms innocents.” He listed five principles to guide humanitarian intervention, all of which apply to Libya.
I agree that restraint and caution should be used. If it's not, it will be yet another situation where the US inserts itself in another country, drags it out, and at the consequences of losing unnecessary lives, expense, and respect of our country.
ReplyDelete