Log in

View Full Version : US recognizes Libyan rebels as Libyan government



KurtFF8
15th July 2011, 15:33
Source (http://news.yahoo.com/us-recognizes-libyan-rebels-libyan-government-124658625.html;_ylt=Ah4lflmzVIsjirzH00f1d.6s0NUE;_ ylu=X3oDMTM4OTRqMTkyBHBrZwNmZjdjMDYyMy01MWYwLTM5Nj QtODU3Ni0xZWQ2Y2E2MzBiMDQEcG9zAzMEc2VjA0p1bWJvdHJv biBGUAR2ZXIDOTE1YTMzYjAtYWVlMC0xMWUwLWJmZDYtOTA3Yz hhNjQxOWZk;_ylg=X3oDMTFpNzk0NjhtBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZw Nlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANob21lBHB0A3NlY3Rpb25z ;_ylv=3)


ISTANBUL (AP) — U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton says the Obama administration has decided to formally recognize Libya's main opposition group as the country's legitimate government. The move gives foes of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi a major financial and credibility boost.
Clinton announced Friday that Washington accepts the Transitional National Council as the legitimate governing authority of the Libyan people. Diplomatic recognition of the council means that the U.S. will be able to fund the opposition with some of the more than $30 billion in Gahdafi-regime assets that are frozen in American banks.
Clinton made the announcement at an international conference on Libya in Istanbul.


Therefore the Rebels are the legitimate government now.

LevDavidovichBronstein
15th July 2011, 15:37
$30 billion eh? That's a small investment compared to the profits they will receive from Libyan oil ;)

Principia Ethica
15th July 2011, 15:37
Wow. Does the US really even know who the rebels are and what they stand for? What their plans are? Or does the US just not care as long as it is not Gahdafi?

I hope the US doesn't act all shocked and appalled when these "friendly rebels" decide they don't like us any more.

crazyirish93
15th July 2011, 15:39
They are the legitimate according to imperialists yes also im sure this will allow a lot more funding to tnc for peaceful uses like FN fals and ammo from Qatar.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3Sg2lNk-n8&NR=1

KurtFF8
15th July 2011, 15:48
$30 billion eh? That's a small investment compared to the profits they will receive from Libyan oil ;)

I think that's a bit simplistic of an assessment. The US government/governments of Europe don't make money off of oil in these countries that they're bombing. Part of the project of Neoliberalism is to use state power to protect private investment. Hence how in Iraq we just saw Shell buy a lot of oil fields in Iraq. The cost to the US and UK governments was quite high, but for the private oil companies, profits are to be expected indeed.

Then there are factors of "security" and power that come into play as well.

There are many conservative arguments that surfaced during the Iraq war about "well look how much it's costing us to be there, how could it be about making oil profit when the military cost outweighs that profit!" We need to be clear about these things I would argue.

KurtFF8
15th July 2011, 15:48
Wow. Does the US really even know who the rebels are and what they stand for? What their plans are? Or does the US just not care as long as it is not Gahdafi?

I hope the US doesn't act all shocked and appalled when these "friendly rebels" decide they don't like us any more.

I would imagine they have an idea by now.

jake williams
15th July 2011, 17:49
$30 billion eh? That's a small investment compared to the profits they will receive from Libyan oil ;)
It's the same sort of investments they make in Egypt and Saudi Arabia - they all end up buying American guns anyway.

Reznov
15th July 2011, 18:27
Wow. Does the US really even know who the rebels are and what they stand for? What their plans are? Or does the US just not care as long as it is not Gahdafi?

I hope the US doesn't act all shocked and appalled when these "friendly rebels" decide they don't like us any more.

That isn't really important, what matters is these rebels will be inclined to offer their oil at a cheaper rate!

Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk
15th July 2011, 18:55
I wonder if the Libyan people accept the rebels as their government? Not that this matters, because after all, its America's country now.

RadioRaheem84
15th July 2011, 19:50
So basically, the people be damned if they do not view, (and probably do not) the rebels as the legitimate authority?

The French government was the first to declare the TNC the only legitimate authority, it was a matter of time before the rest of the Western world did, along with the Arab States.

Qatar was already involved in deals with the rebels in rebel controlled territories.

The rebel movement is officially an imperial lapdog. Now things will get ugly as funds will proceed to the rebel base for more weapons, which means this will escalate into a full blown civil war.

pierrotlefou
16th July 2011, 02:35
The French government was the first to declare the TNC the only legitimate authority, it was a matter of time before the rest of the Western world did, along with the Arab States.
.
Makes sense that they would after hearing about that report on them dropping large cashes of weapons to the rebels.

agnixie
16th July 2011, 14:25
You know, we get accused of being for the TNC for less than this annoying flailing about the would-be king of Africa being deposed. Also I'll note that they recognize the TNC as a temporary structure until an interim government can be established, which leads to more questions. Of course, with regime pawns being among the defectors, it wouldn't be too surprising if one of them was put in power (of course the irony of a former Qaddafi crony being put in power would hurt given how many on here are still wailing about how a billionaire fascist arab supremacist would be a leftist somehow - national bourgeoisie my ass) - on the other hand, this isn't what the US did in Iraq, preferring a somewhat more "subtle" way to establish economic imperialism without really imposing a puppet dictator.

Dr Mindbender
16th July 2011, 15:17
I would imagine they have an idea by now.

They thought that about Fidel Castro right up until the point that he started implementing socialist policies.

RadioRaheem84
16th July 2011, 16:44
They thought that about Fidel Castro right up until the point that he started implementing socialist policies.


Rebel movement /= July 26 Movement

Kiev Communard
16th July 2011, 18:14
Considering the fact that the majority of the so-called "Transitional Council" leadership are former Gaddafite officials, I am not too surprised that after the two decades of co-operation with West European imperialist powers they turned to serving the U.S. interests. There is no difference between serving the interests of transnational corporations under Gaddafi's clout and doing the same after having turned against him.

RadioRaheem84
16th July 2011, 19:35
There is no difference between serving the interests of transnational corporations under Gaddafi's clout and doing the same after having turned against him.

The leaders of the TNC who were once Gaddafi officials were the leaders in convincing the Gaddafi regime to neo-liberalize sectors of the economy during the late 80s, early 90s, which in turn is causing all the calamity amongst the population, not to mention the obvious tilt toward authoritarianism that comes with neo-liberalization.

The problem is that Gaddafi did not want to totally sell out all of Libya to foreign interests and the TNC leaders eventually turned on Gaddafi and are now full agents of the West.

I am sure that if we know this much, then the Libyan people surely do and therefore see less legitimacy in the TNC and the rebel movement.

People are decrying, (especially the new generation) the ravages of the neo-liberal reforms Gadaffi conceded to, not to mention the extravagent lifestyle of the family, the crumbling public sector, and autocratic control that comes with the territory.

The rebel movement is largely led by the growing class of pre-professionals, businessmen, former Gaddafi officials and petit-bougies. The ones doing the fighting are frustrated pre-professional college students angry at the remaining beuracracy that keeps them from making bank right off the bat, disgruntled workers that fell through the cracks due to neo-liberalization and religious zealots in the East who also compromise a huge portion of the former.

Jose Gracchus
16th July 2011, 20:51
The rebel fighters are mostly college students who want to go work for investment banks, and are determined to throw off the 'oppression' against them? You really have drank the Kool-Ade.

Why do you assume Gaddhafi "conceded" to the reforms, rather than supported them, and simply was more cautious than some of his other hirelings, being afraid of initiating too rapidly dramatic reforms that might undermine his power? This smacks of "Great Man" history, where you believe a single man's 'will' has any substantial driving force in historical happening, or makes you an overt supporter of Bonapartism.

RadioRaheem84
16th July 2011, 21:11
The rebel fighters are mostly college students who want to go work for investment banks, and are determined to throw off the 'oppression' against them? You really have drank the Kool-Ade.


A small component are pre-professional college students, yes. Democracy Now! for one did some expose of the youth in the rebel movement and a lot were pre-professional college students. One medical students admitted to the rebel movement in his area that he joined as being largely composed of young people. The major protests he took a part of were at universities.


MUHANNAD BENSADIK: Most of them are young, you know? Even they are about 16 years old to 30 years old, you know?

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/3/23/fate_of_libyan_american_student_and

But at the same time, I am not saying that there is anything wrong with that. I am just pointing out what is happening over there. What is your gripe with me making note of this? Are you assuming that I am thinking that it's a bad thing and I am making all pre-professional college students out to be rebel whackos?



Why do you assume Gaddhafi "conceded" to the reforms, rather than supported them, and simply was more cautious than some of his other hirelings, being afraid of initiating too rapidly dramatic reforms that might undermine his power?


You make the case for what happened better than I did. Thank you. I am sure he didn't mind the reforms. Perhaps conceded wasn't a good enough word to denote how much of a damn fascist blood drinker he is, eh?

agnixie
16th July 2011, 21:45
A small component are pre-professional college students, yes. Democracy Now! for one did some expose of the youth in the rebel movement and a lot were pre-professional college students. One medical students admitted to the rebel movement in his area that he joined as being largely composed of young people. The major protests he took a part of were at universities.
Unless Libyans are particularly precocious, 16 years old is not a college student.

RadioRaheem84
16th July 2011, 21:48
Unless Libyans are particularly precocious, 16 years old is not a college student.

So the guy says that he saw a 16 year old and therefore you had to chime in with this quip as a counter-argument? Cheap, bro. Cheap.

The denial of college students being a big component is akin to denying that college students were also a part of the other uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia.

Again, this isn't saying that I think of them as traitor scum. They're young and living through the neo-liberal reform's ravages and therefore think freedom from that is probably Western-style democracy, IDK, that is just my opinion of what is going on with them, I could be totally wrong though.