But Don't Libyans Have a Right to Freedom Too?

Tommullen.net ^ | 05/14/2011 | Tom Mullen

[Tom Mullen]

Perhaps the most compelling argument for supporting the U.S. government in using military force when no state of war exists is the “humanitarian war” argument. As much as “humanitarian war” sounds like an oxymoron, the argument is actually grounded in good intentions. It asserts that all human beings, regardless of what country they were born in, have the same right to freedom as U.S. citizens. Therefore, when the people of another nation are being oppressed, the U.S. government should step in and fight to defend them. This is the argument being used for the latest overseas war.

At first glance, the argument seems consistent with both the non-aggression principle and the theory of limited government. There are victims whose lives, liberties, or properties are being harmed. Even for those who would limit the role of government most narrowly, the government should use force against aggressors in defense of their victims. Assuming that what is reported about Qaddafi’s regime is true, the U.S. government is doing precisely that in Libya. It is fighting a brutal dictator and defending freedom.

As with so many other arguments for government intervention for humanitarian or philanthropic ends, there is a vital component missing to this analysis. Namely, it is the Forgotten Man, who is no better remembered when it comes to foreign policy than he is when making domestic policy. For those not familiar with William Graham Sumner’s classic essay, the Forgotten Man is the taxpayer, the man who pays.

[DTA]

Assuming that what is reported about Qaddafi’s regime is true.

It is not.

But what is true, is not reported. New Central Bank of Libya is true. Libyan oil concessions, water and other things worth looting.

I wonder what bleeding heart do gooders would do if they knew the truth.

United States provide military support to Al Qaeda in Libya.
The same way as providing support to Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

The blood of Christians murdered in Egypt and blood of Libyans murdered by NATO is on the hands of do gooders who see no evil hear no evil. But speak evil 24 7

[Jack Hammer]

So our government goons are going to involve us in a war every time some internatonal thug somewhere causes a citizen to stub a toe?

Better hock the family jewels; Premier Hussein is gonna need a whole lotta your money for that.

[freedomfiter2]

Freedom isn’t a right, it’s a priviledge that must be bought and maintained with blood. That’s why we’re losing it here in the US.

[wendy1946]

Perhaps the most compelling argument for supporting the U.S. government in using military force when no state of war exists is the “humanitarian war” argument. As much as “humanitarian war” sounds like an oxymoron, the argument is actually grounded in good intentions.

This is bullshit of the worst sort. This thing in Libya is about Soros wanting to control that $5T which Libya represents

George Soros and Bork Obunga are trying to perpetrate a bank robbery in broad daylight and using American military assets to do it.

As Ellen Brown noted:

Another anomaly involves the official justification for taking up arms against Libya. Supposedly it’s about human rights violations, but the evidence is contradictory. According to an article on the Fox News website on February 28:

As the United Nations works feverishly to condemn Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi for cracking down on protesters, the body’s Human Rights Council is poised to adopt a report chock-full of praise for Libya’s human rights record.

The review commends Libya for improving educational opportunities, for making human rights a “priority” and for bettering its “constitutional” framework. Several countries, including Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, and Saudi Arabia but also Canada, give Libya positive marks for the legal protections afforded to its citizens — who are now revolting against the regime and facing bloody reprisal.

Whatever might be said of Gaddafi’s personal crimes, the Libyan people seem to be thriving. A delegation of medical professionals from Russia, Ukraine and Belarus wrote in an appeal to Russian President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin that after becoming acquainted with Libyan life, it was their view that in few nations did people live in such comfort:

[Libyans] are entitled to free treatment, and their hospitals provide the best in the world of medical equipment. Education in Libya is free, capable young people have the opportunity to study abroad at government expense. When marrying, young couples receive 60,000 Libyan dinars (about 50,000 U.S. dollars) of financial assistance. Non-interest state loans, and as practice shows, undated. Due to government subsidies the price of cars is much lower than in Europe, and they are affordable for every family. Gasoline and bread cost a penny, no taxes for those who are engaged in agriculture. The Libyan people are quiet and peaceful, are not inclined to drink, and are very religious.

They maintained that the international community had been misinformed about the struggle against the regime. “Tell us,” they said, “who would not like such a regime?”

In other words, Khadaffi's government is arguably the best the slammite world has to offer and a man would pretty much have to be deranged to want to rebel against it. Khadaffi was on the edge of pulling all of Africa out from under the IMF and BIS and that apparently was too much for the NWO crowd.

The idea of those slammite-brohood fools creating a central bank prior to having a country pretty much tells the story: Soros simply told them that if they played ball with him, he'd put them in charge of Libya.