Hacker News Reader

Comment by PedroBatista | Hacker News Reader

I already see there is no point in continue this conversation.

I notice your standards for US/EU intervention are very very high and basically nobody should ever being killed.

Why don't you apply the same reasoning to Gaddafi's regime and Syria/Russia/Al-Qaeda? You seem to have every problem existing in the Universe when the evil West does something ( and also a problem when it doesn't, also a problem that the West exists I suspect ), yet not a peep when these regimes torture and kill people by the thousands, or are you going to tell me that's just a fantasy? Or when they do it it's justify because it's the West's fault too, so those poor victims have no other choice than to kill everyone who doesn't agree with them?

Btw, I'm not even "defending" the US/EU track record in Libya. I think they did a really bad half-assed job, but I also recognize the context of it all.

Anyway, I've had it.

View on HN

Please don't post in the flamewar style to HN. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.

I realize that other commenters have also been breaking the rules, but your post here stands out in that manner.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

> but I also recognize the context of it all.

The context is that Sarkozy didn't want Gaddafi muscling on the Franc's domination of Africa's economy.

https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/12659

https://www.vice.com/en/article/gy9d49/libyan-oil-gold-and-q...

> intervention

We used to call this war. Is Russia just ‘intervening’ in Ukraine right now?

We didn’t use to call it war, so you’re wrong about that.

We used the term “intervention” to describe limited military action. Countries throughout history have conducted interventions as opposed to full-scale war.

Russia’s assault on Ukraine isn’t an intervention and is instead a war and we know this because of the size and scale of the operation but also the intentions of the operation, which, are to take over the entire country of Ukraine.

Sounds like a bunch of wars we were engaged in the ME for no reason.

Don't you mean interventions? ;-)

cognitive dissonance is strong with this one.

If Lybian forces were on the verge of committing war crimes and killing thousands, then "intervention" would be an appropriate word to describe what the Western powers did. They "intervened" to prevent an imminent atrocity, if you believe them.

And I am inclined to believe them, not because of what Western governments have said, but because the whole Arab Spring played out in real time on social media.

I agree that what happened to Gaddafi himself was horrific. It would have been a much better thing if he had been arrested and brought before a tribunal. But he was killed by Libyans, who were angry about the Libyans that Gaddafi himself had killed. The contribution that Western Governments made to those events was to stop the killing of thousands of people who opposed the regime. Arguing against intervention is arguing in favor of what would have happened without intervention—which is, effectively, what we have seen in Syria.

Now, was Volodymyr Zelenskyy on the verge of murdering tens of thousands? Were Ukranian forces gathered, ready to rain artillery shells down on a major Ukrainian city? If not, I don't think it would be appropriate to describe the Russian invasion as an "intervention". What would Putin have been "intervening" in? Ukranian self-determination?

> But he was killed by Libyans, who were angry about the Libyans that Gaddafi himself had killed.

Sorry, I suggest you dig deeper. He was killed by Misrata fighters who were directly NATO sponsored and equipped. There were lots of articles on how NATO supported Misrata at the time.

Misrata is in Libya, no? Were the people who captured and killed Gaddafi not Libyans?

Are you saying that these people were working under orders from NATO? What was their motivation, if they were not fundamentally angry about how Gaddafi had treated their fellow countrymen?

> Are you saying that these people were working under orders from NATO? What was their motivation, if they were not fundamentally angry about how Gaddafi had treated their fellow countrymen?

Yes, there were under orders from NATO. They even coordinated air-strikes. This is no real surprise to anyone. Hell, I think some of the NATO generals even complimented the coordination. Can dig that up if needed.

Anger at a nation's leader does not justify NATO intervention. Most of these rebels were quick to take Libya back to the barbaric ages where women were treated as cattle. Libya also became an ISIS HQ. No one talks about human rights violations after Gadaffi was kicked out and tens of thousands killed. Media attention became nil at that point. Of-course NATO nations pat themselves on the back - hey we took out the bad guys. So what if our "good guys" kill 10x more ?

I find the hypocrisy and justification used for NATO wars utterly sickening.

Why don't you apply the same reasoning to Gaddafi's regime and Syria/Russia/Al-Qaeda?

What reasoning? First of all I'm an American citizen, so I concern myself more with what my country does with my tax dollars than what other countries do, especially within their own borders or in situations that don't directly affect American citizens. I don't believe America's job is global law enforcement. It's like asking an American "why don't you apply the reasoning that President Trump is corrupt to President Ali Bongo of Niger? Why aren't you calling for President Ali Bongo's arrest? Double standard?"

also a problem that the West exists I suspect

It's fascinating that my criticism of the US/NATO bombing and invading and occupying other countries leads you to suspect I have a problem "that the West exists". In your conception perhaps "the West" would cease to exist as such if it were not the global hegemon?

yet not a peep when these regimes torture and kill people by the thousands

Saudi Arabia tortures and kills people by the thousands. If China or Russia invaded Saudi Arabia and attempted to turn it into a client state using the justification of Saudi misdeeds, would you support them? I suspect not, but we're back to "when the US/NATO does it it's good, when US/NATO adversaries do it it's bad" being the "rules-based order" many believe should exist.

> but we're back to "when the US/NATO does it it's good, when US/NATO adversaries do it it's bad"

You're talking about the hypothetical situation when China or Russia would invade a country to stop the regime from torturing and killing people by the thousands. And you proceed to claim that when they would do it, the West would say "it's bad".

There have been plenty of occasions in, say, the last 75 years where China or Russia have invaded some country. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but not one single time was it to stop the regime from torturing and killing people by the thousands.

Otoh there have been, and still are, plenty of regimes that are killing and torturing like that, and which receive the full support from China and Russia.

> Please correct me if I'm wrong, but not one single time was it to stop the regime from torturing and killing people by the thousands.

This is literally one of the arguments put forth by Putin for intervention in Ukraine. The most often-cited example I hear from Russians is the fire in Odessa: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/02/ukraine-dead-o...

And the government was resorting to airstrikes the same month: https://www.timesofisrael.com/ukraine-launches-air-strikes-a...

Can you imagine if the US response to CHAZ/CHOP was to drop JDAMs on Seattle?

Now one can counter-argue "not enough people were dying to justify foreign intervention", to which the obvious retort is "who gets to make that determination?"

Small correction. Bongo is (was) the ruler of Gabon, not Niger.

Please don't perpetuate flamewars on HN. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

I wish your home is never fortunate enough to suffer such a US/EU "intervention"

Remember that in this global power model, everyone is either under US, EU, Russian, or Chinese influence (and maybe a couple smaller players).

From those, I'd much rather be under the US or EU sphere of influence.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com