Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Trust Gadaffi?

  1. Jan 10, 2004 #1

    Can Anyone Trust Gaddafi?

    byJo-ana D'Balcazar

    Jan 01, '04 / 7 Tevet 5764

    Politically, Libyas unexpected announcement that it will dismantle its program of weapons of mass destruction was the topping on the cake, strengthening President George W. Bushs foreign policy. Libyas announcement is support for President Bushs decision to deal with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction. It is no secret that Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi sensed President Bush is a straight-forward leader who keeps his word. Therefore, Gaddafi just weighed the pros and cons and opted for a wiser decision, to avoid being sent into early retirement. However, can the world ignore Gaddafis human rights abuses and support of terrorism only because he promised to dismantle his weapons of mass destruction program?

    Does it mean that Libya is becoming a friendly state with its disarmament? No. It is most likely that Libyas decision is a result of external pressure and not from a true reformed leader wanting to set the path for a free democratic state. Clearly, the capture of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein played a role in Gaddafis decision. U.S. policymakers should be careful and verify each move. Has Gaddafi denounced publicly support for terrorists? No. Instead, he challenged the Arab world by saying that he would withdraw his countrys membership in the Arab League for their inaction to stop foreign forces from invading Arab homes. This was in reference to the Iraqi case.

    Disarmament does not mean that Libya will stop supporting terrorist groups. Let us not forget Gaddafis words during the Iraqi war. Gaddafi stated, according to Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, a Saudi newspaper, that "the only option available to Iraqis is the resistance: to kill or be killed." Hence, now, Ronald Reagan's historical words are the best advice: "Trust, but verify." In Gaddafi's case, perhaps it would be even better to: "Verify, and then trust." Gaddafi remembers he barely escaped when attacked by Reagan, so now he figured out his best, and perhaps, only move was to declare a dismantling.

    On the one hand, an indirect effect of Gaddafis sudden change of heart is that it presents the opportunity for the return of U.S. oil companies that left Libya in 1986, when President Ronald Reagan imposed sanctions, as the U.S. is expected to lift part of the Iran and Libya sanctions.

    On the other hand, it is critical for the U.S. and any other democratic country to stand firm by the ideals of freedom, liberty, respect for human rights and democracy. Unfortunately, Libya has one of the worst records of human rights abuse. Moreover, to add insult to injury, the UN rewards Gaddafi by sitting Libya as head of the UN Human Rights Commission. What a farce! Just as Saddam Hussein and Yasser Arafat, Gaddafi must be accountable for his crimes and for supporting terrorism. There is no other way out.

    Libya cannot be considered a friendly nation, yet (or never, while Gaddafi remains in power). It would be contradictory. What the world is seeing is the process of the New World order after September 11. Sure, President Bush praised Libyas actions and said it was a "path to better relations with the United States and other free nations." Gaddafi is no dummy. He calculates his moves. And by announcing the dismantling, he is securing his authoritarian leadership. Consequently, all the fuzz about Gaddafi becoming a friend of free nations is only smoke and mirrors.

    Simply, it will be like dealing with Palestinian Authority leader Yasser Arafat. The U.S. must keep a consistent foreign policy and not deal with dictators who support terrorism. In the war against terrorism, there is no room for dictators masquerading as fighters against terrorism. The memory of Arafat before the U.N. General Assembly on November 13, 1974, asking the world to decide between "an olive branch or a freedom fighter's gun," still shows its bloody results: no democracy, no freedom, no olives and no peace, just fools strapped with explosive belts. Does Libya's offer represent the same deal?

    The fact that Libya finally agreed to pay over $2 billion to the families of the victim of the Pan Am 103 bombing over Lockerbie, Scotland, does not erase the fact that it is still supporting terrorism. In the Lockerbie episode alone, 259 died aboard the plane and 11 on the ground. But what about the disappearance of hundreds of Libyans, the Lebanese Shiite cleric Moussa Sadr, and Gaddafi's abuse of human rights, including the whereabouts of Libyan human rights activist Mansour Kikhya?

    In other words, Libyas intentions should be considered only a partial success. The complete success will be when Libya stops supporting terrorist groups, as well as pursuing weapons of mass destruction. Nevertheless, the year 2003 ended positively for President George W. Bushs foreign policy with the capture of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, and with Libyas intention to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction. Will 2004 see the capture of Osama Bin Laden, the discovery of Iraqs weapons of mass destruction, and the solution of the Arab-Israeli conflict? That will be a real and powerful achievement for President Bushs foreign policy, and might transform him into one of the most effective presidents the U.S. ever had.

    Meanwhile, what do you think, can anyone ever trust Gaddafi?
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 12, 2004 #2

    jimmy p

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    yes....and no. i couldnt be bothered to read all the drivel so i thought i would give a mutual answer, both yes and no.
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2004
  4. Jan 12, 2004 #3
    I trust him cos he likes football (soccer).

    People where ignoring Bens posts for a reason jimmy.
  5. Jan 12, 2004 #4

    jimmy p

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    i enjoy humouring people. maybe it will be frustating if i never answer fully. heh. maybe i shouldnt have typed that.
  6. Jan 12, 2004 #5
    Yea he does type aload of crap, maybe doing this will get rid of him.
  7. Jan 12, 2004 #6

    jimmy p

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    actually i revoke my first post. David you are wrong.
  8. Jan 12, 2004 #7
    as wrong as left from right.
  9. Jan 12, 2004 #8
    Trusting Khadaffi? I'd take a check from Don King first!
  10. Jan 14, 2004 #9
    Or even King Dong!
  11. Jan 19, 2004 #10

    jimmy p

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Call me ignorant (please dont!!) but who is Don King?
  12. Jan 20, 2004 #11


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    He's a boxing promoter: black guy, white stripe through his hair, lotta gold, big smile, and crooked as the day is long.
  13. Jan 20, 2004 #12

    jimmy p

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    OOH yeah. i have seen pictures of him....Yeah, he's a little more trustworthy than Gadaffi
  14. Jan 21, 2004 #13
    TRUST BUSH?????

    trust no goverment leader or officall
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

Similar Discussions: Trust Gadaffi?
  1. In God we Trust (Replies: 22)