Egypt and Arab States circle toilet bowl

[Kaliayev]

Originally Posted by ZenGum

There is some talk that the troubles in Tunisia were warmed up a bit by a wikileaks revelation of a state department document detailing just how corrupt the buggers there were. Not the main factor, but fanned the flames a bit.

Yeah, I would say it fanned the flames. People were already discontent for quite a while, with the brutality and increasing poverty (the underlying factor) and the massive rise in food prices over the past couple of months, on top of stagnant and/or declining wages seems to have been the trigger.

Which I believe is being caused by financial speculation more than traditional supply/demand issues, but finding evidence either way has been difficult. Commodity speculation on food is technically illegal, unless you get a note from the Fed excusing you. The last time food and oil prices rose this high was in 2008, and that was definitely driven by speculation.

In other news, Gaddafi's mercenaries are apparently pulling down a cool $2000 per day on the job (400 times the average Libyan wage). It was $500/day up until about a week ago, which suggests he is under ever increasing pressure. It also suggests a massive declining curve in the supply of state violence. Which is pretty much a fancy way of saying "revolution".

By contrast, Mubarak was paying around $70 a day for his thugs. Given a year before, according to Reuters (when they were covering the sham 2010 Egyptian election) an entry level thug could pull down $140 a day for his work, this is quite unusual. The demand for violence was much higher, and the thugs are not so stupid as to accept offers of future side-deals in lieu of cash payment, not when the regime is up against the wall. So something very interesting happened there, but I'm not sure what.

And, just to add, it certainly was interesting timing that Libya decided to get violent when it did, since a lot of eyes were looking at the state of Bahrain. Bahrain, of course, has been nearly as violent, but as the world's fastest growing financial centre and with its strategic location in the middle of the Persian Gulf, is much more important to certain key interests in European and American capitols. Gaddafi was, of course, in recent years, also a clien-uh, firm ally in the War on Some Terror, but nowhere of near the importance of Bahrain, home of the Fifth Fleet, who would be the principal strike force against Iran in any war.

Tony Blair was giving advice to Gadaffi, incidentally. Given Blair's spirited defence of the autocratic Egyptian regime, one can only wonder what kind of "good advice" he was giving Libya's leader. Especially when the spiritual guru of New Labour, also had a rather cozy relationship with the man.

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by Kaliayev

Tony Blair was giving advice to Gadaffi, incidentally. Given Blair's spirited defence of the autocratic Egyptian regime, one can only wonder what kind of "good advice" he was giving Libya's leader. Especially when the spiritual guru of New Labour, also had a rather cozy relationship with the man.

I'll be in the corner sobbing, if anybody needs me...

[Kaliayev]

Originally Posted by DanaC

I'll be in the corner sobbing, if anybody needs me...

The "Decent Liberals" who idolize Blair are very confused about everything going on in the Middle East and North Africa right now. It's very amusing. Their reliance on Neocon-funded, pro-dictatorship "think tanks" means they are now essentially parroting lines about the villainous Muslim Brotherhood and their insidious global jihadist network/Iranian proxies taking over in countries where there is rioting right now...which just so happens to be the regime line on many of these protests. Amazing, that.

Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton describe themselves as personal friends of Mubarak, and Blair of course famously holidayed in Sharm-el-Sheikh (where Mubarak is allegedly in a well timed coma right now). Blair and Third Wayists were taking money from the Gaddafi regime. Tunisia's dicator was hailed as a "progressive leader" in western capitals. It's all very cosy, isn't it?

They seemed to have regained some measure of self-respect by demanding the bombing of Libya, but that is really just a reflexive Decent pose when threatened by uncertainty: up with the war planes! Never mind that such planes would be flying from Italy, whose relationship with the Libyan dictator could best be described as "cosy" (or "wingman" if you are feeling ungenerous, as I am this morning). Or that they have a bad track record for predicting when foreign states will greet heavily armed liberators with cheering crowds and so on.

Anyway, I'm off to teach children maths, so no doubt something highly exciting and interesting will happen in the next few hours, which I will miss.

[Kaliayev]

Originally Posted by Kaliayev

Anyway, I'm off to teach children maths, so no doubt something highly exciting and interesting will happen in the next few hours, which I will miss.

Or not, since it's an inset day.

Col. Gadaffi appeared on Serbian TV today, according to the BBC. Which is interesting, since I heard a rumour that some of his mercenaries may have come from "eastern europe", an especially vague term but one which could indeed include the former Yugoslavia which, as I understand it, has some notable armed fighting groups who are not very popular with Interpol.

France is flying "humanitarian aid" to the rebel held areas.

A national council has been formed in Benghazi (sounds like someone has learnt from the 1848 revolutions).

Italy has "de facto" suspended its non-aggression treaty with Libya. I guess that means no more cruising for chicks by Berlusconi and Gadaffi on their wild nights out (Putin is still free to be Silvio's wingman though).

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by Kaliayev

Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton describe themselves as personal friends of Mubarak, and Blair of course famously holidayed in Sharm-el-Sheikh (where Mubarak is allegedly in a well timed coma right now). Blair and Third Wayists were taking money from the Gaddafi regime. Tunisia's dicator was hailed as a "progressive leader" in western capitals. It's all very cosy, isn't it?

Although, to their defense, publicly mentioning that our countries are giving money to sadistic dictators doing everything in their ability to keep power because of foreign policy reasons doesn't make a real good campaign speech.

One positive aspect of wikileaks showed that the US has at least some competent people over in other countries. They will publicly state that our allies are good people but the leaks show that for the most part they knew differently.

[Kaliayev]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

Although, to their defense, publicly mentioning that our countries are giving money to sadistic dictators doing everything in their ability to keep power because of foreign policy reasons doesn't make a real good campaign speech.

One positive aspect of wikileaks showed that the US has at least some competent people over in other countries. They will publicly state that our allies are good people but the leaks show that for the most part they knew differently.

Ah, but I am not interested in letting leaders make good public speeches.

And yes, the State Department has some competent personnel, but as things stand, it is almost entirely irrelevant to the actual foreign policy making process of the USA. The Pentagon, and in particular the regional commanders, are where grand foreign policy deals and bargains are made. The State Department is left to negotiate the less glamourous and more technically difficult aspects of day to day diplomacy with foreign states. Even SecDef Gates has voiced concerns about the hegemonic status of the Pentagon in determining the foreign relations of the USA.

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by Kaliayev

They seemed to have regained some measure of self-respect by demanding the bombing of Libya, but that is really just a reflexive Decent pose when threatened by uncertainty: up with the war planes! Never mind that such planes would be flying from Italy

Only because there are no carriers in the Mediterranean right now, Sparky! Now since Gquaddafiy is sending aircraft to bomb his subjects, what would you say to establishing a no-fly zone and limiting his options without dropping a single bomb?

[Kaliayev]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Only because there are no carriers in the Mediterranean right now, Sparky! Now since Gquaddafiy is sending aircraft to bomb his subjects, what would you say to establishing a no-fly zone and limiting his options without dropping a single bomb?

I'd say "that no-fly zone definitely stopped Saddam from slaughtering his own people, eh!"

The no-fly zone would be a pretext. Something would "happen"* to an aircraft, which would then justify further intervention, which would either undermine the revolution or put troops inbetween two warring parties, neither of which are helpful or useful.


* Like this. Or this. Or as Jackson Pollack suggested with Iraq:

Assembling a [] coalition would be infinitely easier if the United States could point to a smoking gun with Iraqi fingerprints on it—some new Iraqi outrage that would serve to galvanize international opinion and create the pretext for an invasion... There are probably [] courses the United States could take that might prompt Saddam to make a foolish, aggressive move, that would then become the "smoking gun" justifying an invasion. An aggressive U.S. covert action campaign might provoke Saddam to retaliate overtly, providing a casus belli...Other means might also be devised.

The thing about reflexive interventionists is that they are classic addicts. Letting have "just one more cigarette" will invariably lead to them smoking the entire pack.

[Uday]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Only because there are no carriers in the Mediterranean right now, Sparky!

And so? There are 2 American carriers in the Red Sea, one in transit to Mediterranean Sea, one held in reserve. Is closer flight time to Libya than American aircraft in Azores, and America has one airbase in Sicily that can reach Libya in about 15 minutes.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Uday

And so? There are 2 American carriers in the Red Sea, one in transit to Mediterranean Sea, one held in reserve. Is closer flight time to Libya than American aircraft in Azores, and America has one airbase in Sicily that can reach Libya in about 15 minutes.

Can't do it with those resources and we couldn't do it by ourselves (US only). Flight fatigue, Fuel, and distance to cover would make this not only very expensive but not obtainable given we are still covering two other theaters of operation.

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Only because there are no carriers in the Mediterranean right now, Sparky! Now since Gquaddafiy is sending aircraft to bomb his subjects, what would you say to establishing a no-fly zone and limiting his options without dropping a single bomb?

I heard a US military Brass chap talking about that.

To establish a no-fly zone, you send in your aircraft to shoot down their air craft.

For that, you need to destroy their air-defence system.

That involves dropping bombs.

That gets messy. Even the smartest bombs sometimes miss, or are poorly targeted.

I think TW has a point. Sometimes, freedom is expensive, and the price is human lives. The world can help, but the Libyans must bear the majority of the burden, else they will end up someone else's vassals. Freezing QGadddafffi's assests was good. If he can't pay his mercenaries, maybe they will go home or even change sides.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by ZenGum

I heard a US military Brass chap talking about that.

To establish a no-fly zone, you send in your aircraft to shoot down their air craft.

For that, you need to destroy their air-defence system.

That involves dropping bombs.

That gets messy. Even the smartest bombs sometimes miss, or are poorly targeted.

I think TW has a point. Sometimes, freedom is expensive, and the price is human lives. The world can help, but the Libyans must bear the majority of the burden, else they will end up someone else's vassals. Freezing QGadddafffi's assests was good. If he can't pay his mercenaries, maybe they will go home or even change sides.

Is there some older SAM tech we can get to the rebels? <can of worms>

When this ends though we may be looking at a pretty screwed up place for a long time due to tribal breakdowns. I wonder how we could improve their communications most rapidly after Gaddafi gets ventilated?

[tw]

Originally Posted by Griff

When this ends though we may be looking at a pretty screwed up place for a long time due to tribal breakdowns. I wonder how we could improve their communications most rapidly after Gaddafi gets ventilated?

An answer is found in the exact same concepts that define failing companies. Attitude and knowledge. Appreciate a great advantage that Egypt has. Most all junior officers in the Egyptian military were taught or at least introduced to American (western) concepts. That the army and government serve the poeple. That a country's fundamental strength comes from the masses they serve. That making war on the people is wrong and counterproductive. A concept that even America did not understand in the 1920s. Yes, these concepts are that new even in America.

As a result, now senior Egyptian officers understand concept on how governments and economics work. What is required from the powers that be. Concepts that Libyans have not been trained or even exposed to. In some venues, a benevoent leader or even a concept of term limits make no sense. In many venues, those who seek power therefore deserve to be the righteous leader.

It is not about the economy, intact towns, or wealth. It is about attitude and knowledge. The ability to learn. To understand what management's (government's) job is. Egypt hopefully will prosper from superior knowledge. Libya may suffer from a massive power vacuum because even the army was neither educated nor trained - except in 'ruthless power' concepts. In which case, an only solution would be massive deaths and civil war to fix a mess that Kaddafi has created.

All that suffering is irrelevant. Should be ignored in the press. All attention should be focused on what Libya is to become. And whether the 'powers that be' understand their purpose - which is not power. Massive deaths affecting every family is how those who would otherwise crave power, instead, start realizing why thinking like a moderate is necessary. Many times pain must be that massive to finally force logical thinking.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Griff

Is there some older SAM tech we can get to the rebels? <can of worms>

When this ends though we may be looking at a pretty screwed up place for a long time due to tribal breakdowns. I wonder how we could improve their communications most rapidly after Gaddafi gets ventilated?

I think after they gave Stingers to the Afgans in the 80's they learned their lesson.