Muammar Gaddafi is Dead, But Was the Nato Intervention Worth it?

What a year it has been so far: we have seen the downfall of Tunisia’s Ben Ali, Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, the killing of Bin Laden, and, today, Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi was captured and then killed.

Gaddafi, who had oppressed his people for 42 years, was inevitably on the brink of meeting his fate after the rebels had taken over the dictator’s last remaining town of Sirte.

However, he did do some good for his country: Libya is one of the richest African nations, the average life expectancy is 77 and the literacy rates for women are 72%, according to the, erm, CIA. (Okay, you might not like the CIA but their statistics are probably true).

Gaddafi had the opportunity to flee with his wealth and his, err, ‘voluptuous, blonde, Ukranian nurse’ as she was described. But he chose to stay in his country and fight till the bitter end. And so he did. He has died – in his opinion – a ‘martyr’ but wouldn’t it have been better to have captured him? Perhaps even trial him?

Hmm, whatever the case, the Libyan’s – with the help of NATO – have got rid of a despot who will no longer cause them misery. That’s all the matters.

But the controversy lies within the following statement: were NATO right in intervening in Libya?

NATO decided to intervene when Gaddafi said his troops would go from house to house and murder everyone who opposed him. The NATO intervention has been labelled as ‘hypocritical’ – and so it is: what about the people around the world who have been suffering from bloodthirsty dictatorships for decades – where have NATO been? Why Libya? Was it for oil? The truth is, regardless of whether NATO were right or not, hypocritical or not, whether they did it for oil or not, they did play a key part in the end of the Gaddafi regime. They weakened Gaddafi’s regime to an extent which allowed the rebels to succeed and end up where they are today.

Gaddafi took control of the country in 1969 – taking over from King Idris in a military coup. King Idris wasn’t a particuarly popular figure amongt the Libyan people, and, according to Hamza Yusuf, some Libyan’s use to chant: ‘“Iblis wa la Idris” ([Give us] the devil and not Idris). They got what they asked for.

‘Momar’ – as western journalists pronounce his name – was a complete nutter. He did everything from masterminding terrorism to passing wind in a BBC interview. Alas, after seven months of fighting – which has seen 40,000 people killed (for what! one crazy man) – the people will need to rebuild the country, restore sanity and chose a democratic party to lead them forward. Things can only get better.


Add yours →

  1. …and look at Egypt, and Syria now, seems like they’re following in Libya’s footsteps. They’ve seen that they can’t be treated like that, and that their leaders can’t just chose to put their sons/cousins/brothers etc. in power just because they want to keep the ruling in the family. They’re fed up,they’ve seen what the power of protest can do and are trying to make a difference.

  2. For oil? No! Rather West is interested in Central Asian countries for gas and oil.

    A common man is confused who armed Misratans that overcame and captured Gaddafi in Sirte (where Gaddafi was guarded by his tribesmen, loyal guards and quite a number of mercenaries of Tauregs. The pointation of arming is towards West, but it remains skeptic and without any confirmation.

    Someone is greatly mistaken if they think NATO forces under the umbrella of UNO resolution # 1973 are close to Libyan coasts in Mediterranean Sea “to safeguard the innocent Libyan lives” that were endangered due rebels and loyals clash. NATO there have a great task ahead. They are not going anywhere unless the southern borders of Israel are ensured peace and safety after new regimes emerge in Egypt and Libya. This is not the only mission for NATO there but this is sure a lion’s share of the multi-objectives.

    Gaddafi remained a terrorist ruler in the eyes of West, so his elimination is a great heartening for them (West). Besides, two major success (Osama Bin Laden and Muammar Gaddafi) will play a key role for Obama’s and Democrats’ bid for next Presidential election.

  3. No one has the right to indulge and create violence in other country’s boundrys …. those who talk high of the human rights are the biggest of violaters ….

  4. I agree with what you said about NATO possibly going to Libya for oil, as when there are other dictators/ political disasters in the world, where is NATO then?
    You would think that dictators would learn from what happened to previous dictators, and how they ended up. Evidently not, if there are still people that think they can rule their country like how he did and not expect some kind of rebellion. Even if he did good for the Libyans at first. I suppose he wasn’t crazy at first but maybe the power went to his head.
    Personally I think although the Libyans probably felt that they did what was best for them at the time, killing him wasn’t the right thing to do, as they could have tried him in court, so he would have to account for the attrocities he committed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: