Introducing the Official Libyan Government

When President "Never Been Vetted" Obama says the Libyan Rebels have been 'thoroughly vetted' you know it's time to worry.

I think Libya is actually a cover for NATO to maintain a military readiness posture in the eastern Med in full knowledge that a much larger crisis could develop there at any time. This would be any rational person's analysis of the situation that involves Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Israel and Iran. It was probably decided at some point around the threat to Benghazi that the optics were tolerable to get involved and a real cynic might even go as far as to suggest that Gadhafi is playing along, since the military situation in Libya amounts to a prolonged war game with occasional photo ops. I mean this -- if NATO really wanted to get rid of Gadhafi then how difficult would that be as a purely military question? They subdued Iraq, a much larger country with a more formidable military, within a few days (after which of course they messed up the occupation badly). NATO are clearly there to stabilize a cease-fire zone in Libya and unless the de facto position of it begins to worry our fearless leaders, then the details are left almost to random chance. So long as the rebels control the eastern half of the country, the actual position of the two sides has no real relevance, and it is actually better for NATO if the situation remains fluid, because then they will continue to have cover to maintain this military readiness just a few minutes flight time from Cairo or Damascus.

It could now be a matter of days or weeks until Syria destabilizes to the extent that Iran feels threatened by its potential collapse, with the added complication that Lebanon will become very unstable, and Iranian assets such as Hezbollah may try to assert more rather than less influence. How Israel responds to this will be key to what happens next, but there is probably about a 50-50 chance now of war between Israel and some of its Arab neighbours later this year.

It's just a warm up for deploying NATO to the streets of Greece this summer.

You know they will be rioting and tearing the place apart, once the reality of having to pay their own way through austerity sinks in.

I think Libya is actually a cover for NATO to maintain a military readiness posture in the eastern Med in full knowledge that a much larger crisis could develop there at any time.

I disagree.
Don't forget Iraq is in the Middle East, and don't forget NATO is only attacking K-Daffy's forces because France prematurely recognized the "Rebels" as the new defacto government(thereby souring their relationship with K-Daffy) when the "Rebels" didn't even have control of the country.
The "Rebels" then lied about K-Daffy targeting civilians to give the UN and NATO a figleaf to cover France's foreign policy blunder and to attack K-Daffy and engineer an overthrow on behalf of these Islamist Rebels and France's Libyan oil supply.

This truely is a War for Oil and NATO doesn't care that al-Qaeda Islamists are going to be in charge of Libya's oil supply and the funding which it brings.

The Bank of England is very pleased.

PS:

Thankyou Mr. Baird

Who have we elected???

Related:

From: updates@taxpayer.com

Dear Petition Signer:

Thought you might get a kick out of this little video we just put together (watch the video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNBXi00Myro).

We took the National Debt Clock to the Conservative Party Convention this past Thursday as a friendly reminder to the Prime Minister, MPs and party delegates that their government is still overspending by $1,024 per second (Read: time to roll up the sleeves and control spending in order to meet the 2014 balanced budget commitment).

However, many delegates didn't see it that way reporting the vehicle as "suspicious" resulting in the Ottawa police detaining both the clock and CTF staff. Incredibly, the CTF's clock and vehicle were subjected to inspection by a bomb squad -- but found the only thing exploding was the federal debt!

Perhaps it should come as no surprise that when it came to nutty protesters the Ottawa Police were all too willing to accommodate including blocking off an entire city street so they could cart around signs inviting people to "beat back the Tory attack" -- far less "suspicious" than the National Debt Clock.

--Troy, Derek, Courtenay, Shannon and the rest of the CTF team

This is totally ridiculous. There is absolutely no Canadian interest in dropping bombs on Libya. If it is humanitarian, then there is much more reason to be in Syria.

And this new govt there, how many members belong to al-Qaida or other jihadist groups? Answer: no one knows, but we recognized them anyway.

The whole Libyan mission is fishy. No fly doesn't mean drop a bunch of bombs, but rather restrict aircraft. If Libya is humanitarian, is Syria chopped liver? Hard to believe NATO couldn't mop up in a few days, but to what end? If it's just for the oil, then what the heck, install our bastard and don't hide behind the 'rebels', whoever they are. I don't buy the readiness for other parts of the Middle East argument, as NATO is already pretty darn close to the hot zones. Seems like an exercise in futility with no real objectives that is costing money we cannot afford.

Meanwhile, on the home front, something is shaking here too.

Drugs raids target Que. Mohawk communities

Should be interesting to see what falls out of this.

chip
You got all the salient points. It baffles me why whee even their unles under some kind of social duress. Syria I could see. There we would only be after the same folks who say thier going to kill us all anyway. So far thier using Nationals as fire practice.

I have been railing on about this foolishness from the very beginning, and I know almost no one who supports this action in Libya.

But Harper just goes on.... what's going on in his head? Canada does not need anything from Libya. We are simply carrying water for France and England. Why? Why?

No, the British and French have messed up and figured they can win the war in Libya with air power. But NATO can't win with air power alone.

Mark my words - NATO is going to threaten to send in ground troops (just like the Kosovo War).

But Libya is not worth the bones of a single Canadian soldier. Get 'em out of there.

Nice to know our government is now supporting Al Qaeda terrorists in one part of the world and apparently fighting them in another.

http://tarpley.net/2011/04/03/al-qaeda-pawns-of-cia-insurrection-from-libya-to-yemen/

Syria has been given free reign...
Russia announced they would veto any resolutions against Syria from the U.N. Security Council...

Nato won't be going into Syria.

I agree with Ace at 3;32 - Libya is a boiling pot and it is not worth the bones of a single Canadian soldier. We went to bat for the same group in 1914 and ended up with 1939 - we sacrificed so many fine young men for the 'greed of Kings' and we didn't even get an invitation to the Victory table/parade. Bring our pilots home Mr. Prime Minister.

Canada helping to install 2nd Al Qaeda friendly government. First was Kosovo, which according to Lawrence Cannon had 'unique situation' as a justification. I guess Libya situation is even more unique, or what?

Peter O'Donnell

"I think Libya is actually a cover for NATO to maintain a military readiness posture in the eastern Med in full knowledge that a much larger crisis could develop there at any time. This would be any rational person's analysis of the situation that involves Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Israel and Iran."

You don't play RISK very well do ya? Sorta like Hitler giving Manstein advise on matters tactical.

Currently Iran has a location problem. It has signifigant US military assets on 2 fronts...Iraq and A-stan....east and west....Syria has the same problem...Iraq and Isreal.

There is no motive...humanitarian, strategic or geo-political for the Libyan adventure.

We're supposed to be fighting Al Qaida.....not giving them close air support......sheesh.....

Our troops were sent to Afghanistan to destroy Alquacka, now we're using our troops to transplant the self same murdering terrorists as the new government of Libya. Did I miss something along the way, did Harper get hit in the head with a big ole ball of freaking stupid or is he a useful idiot?

did Harper get hit in the head with a big ole ball of freaking stupid or is he a useful idiot?

I think he's taking Obama's word for it that the Libyan "Rebels" are thoroughly vetted.
Also, it should be remembered that as a 'Francophone' nation Canada kisses up to France who is actually the instigator of the whole affair.
Additionally, there may be a need in our government's view to contribute to NATO in order to maintain the solidarity of the alliance.

Canada out of the UN, out of NATO, and out of the OAS!

The irony of the unanimous vote from the Opposition in favour of extending the mission against Ghadaffi is that his regime has represented precisely the sort of ideal that the Left has always espoused for the Middle East: an officially secular socialist Marxist regime (with a tinge of Arabic Islamism). Ghadaffi was near perfection from an NDP ideological point of view! Rather humorous to see Paul Dewar and the NDP now supporting Ghadaffi's ouster when they were once one of his biggest fans, especially when Ghadaffi the supported the Marxist revolutions in Latin America during the '80's which Dewar and the NDP were behind 100%.

Well, Hugo Chavez, Ortega, the Castros and the "Bolivarians" aren't happy with this turn of events, and they have already offered Ghadaffi asylum if he succeeds in fleeing Libya and the International Court. I wonder how Dewar and the NDP/"Nouveau Quebecois Entitlement Party" will reconcile their solidarity with Comrade Hugo and his crew after kicking out Granpa Daffy?

And of course who is this "Transitional Council" entrusted with leading Libyans into something better? It comes with resounding approval from the Arab regimes (the people the rest of the Muslim world is supposedly in the process of kicking out in favour of "democracy").

What a conundrum Obama's messed up foreign policy is leading us into. I think the end result will be "the same old, same old" and worse -- more likely Iranian-style revolutions will replace these regimes. And it will certainly be compatible Iran's broader support for Chavez in Latin America for example (replacing Daffi's support), and in line with Obama's messed up compromise with some of these Latin American regimes (e.g. failure to support the Brits re: the Falklands).

It's a confusing mess right now, but I think as time goes on you'll simply see shifts from one kind of dictatorship to another as Obama "works his genious" on the world stage. Bottom line for me is there is only one way to get off of that merry-go-round, and that's with the lynch-pin --Israel: Support for any of these Mid-East revolutions must be conditional on their recognition of Israel as a fellow sovereign legitimate democractic government and as an essential ally in establishing fundamental constitutional inalienable rights and freedoms in the Middle East. And likewise support for the Arab regimes still in power must meet similar conditions.

Israel is the canary in the coal mine, and until the International community recognizes that, nothing will work. I've been watching it for some 45 years and nothing they have tried has ever worked -- why don't we try the one thing the UN has never attempted: unconditional recognition of sovereign democratic and free Israel for what it is?

Clearly we shouldn't be militarily involved but recognizing the rebels as the government is righteous. Victory to the insurrection!