Article

2003-07-23 Africa: North

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred Pruitt 2003-07-23 11:35|| || Front Page|| [5 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Okay, I'll bite... but he sounds little different than a Saudi, now. From open confrontation they've moved to quiet discussions over tea and biscuits . Does this mean peaceful intentions and honest dealing? I dunno, but... Let's see what they do and ignore what they say for a few years. The Kid ought to be interesting.

Posted by PD 2003-7-23 11:52:12 AM|| 2003-7-23 11:52:12 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 I think Bush's expectation is that the Soddies are going to do something along the same lines, probably not with as public an acknowledgement as Saif's giving. They're hesitation-marking now, but at some point they're going to realize they've lost the covert war they started 30 years ago and start trying to save their bacon, errr... felafel. They probably realize they've been checkmated now.

Their cultural inclination is to talk out of both sides of their mouths. A public surrender by the Keeper of the Holy Mosquesâ¢ would be unacceptable, so I think that over time they'll start talking less out of one side and more out of the other -- see King Fahd's statement that they're going to promote peace and understanding and love and puppies and kittens and baby ducks instead of hatred and jihad the other day. They'll deplore 9-11, religious extremism, all that stuff, and pretend there was never any official involvement, with only a few renegades forming the Council of Boskone. It's the "pretend it never happened" approach. Naturally, if they see another opening they'll try for world domination again, but they see the risks of getting caught at it. Sammy's little princelings buying dirt farms yesterday helps drive that point home.

I'm not saying we should believe what either of them say, but Libya, I'd guess, is under new management. Talk to him. Take him seriously. Set up joint initiatives that'll result in Pepsi and McDonald's and Nike and all the cultural transformation that comes with them. And if he tries to screw us, kill him.

Posted by Fred 2003-7-23 12:18:09 PM|| 2003-7-23 12:18:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 Saif ul-Islam?

Looks like Muamar is still dealing with that megalomania problem.

Posted by Anonymous 2003-7-23 12:33:58 PM|| 2003-7-23 12:33:58 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 Just like the cartoon character, I am always on guard when dealing with G'Daffy. All this talk is great, but the whole nation of Libya does not have an epiphiny in one big collective sigh. In many ways, like Iraq and Saudi, we have had generations of disfunctional behavior, and a little spiritual rain just does not wash it away. It is important to talk to them, but we better have our remote sensors cranked up on high gain in the background, and not be taken in by all the cliches and baby ducks. It may be a change, but I am skeptical. At least we should not give away the farm, based upon smooth talk. And in the spirit of what Fred said, we should keep an updated target list with coordinates, just in case.

Posted by Alaska Paul 2003-7-23 1:47:40 PM|| 2003-7-23 1:47:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 didnt we hear great stuff about Baby Assad before he took power?

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-7-23 1:59:07 PM|| 2003-7-23 1:59:07 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 Fred: I think rather than a checkmate it's a really strong "check." I think that the Saudis go from the strategic offensive to the strategic defensive overall. In places like the NWFP, Kashmir, and Israel, they stay on the tactical offensive. Overt operations against the US end. In Europe, they concentrate on Wahhabi-izing the immigrant Muslims. If they go over to the defensive everywhere, they lose their core constituency and their heads end up on pikes. My conditions for a checkmate are:

* Secular non-Baathist regime in Syria.
* Secular regime in Iran.
* End of all the foolishness in Pakistan (probably the hardest)

IMHO, anyway.

Posted by 11A5S 2003-7-23 5:24:35 PM|| 2003-7-23 5:24:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 I think this ephinany that the Qaddafhi's comments can be pretty much synopsized into "We watched Saddam get his ass kicked and we don't want to go there. These American soldiers just don't mess around and neithere does George W. Hell, I don't want the 3ID or the MEF on my doorstep next. What do you think I am Nuts or something. Lets have some respect for me having a little sanity".

If anyone thinks any of this is happening out of the goodness of his heart you are wrong. The major league butt whipping we have administered over there resonates far and wide....and it has impressed our adversaries in these pocket dictatorships.

Posted by SOG475 2003-7-23 8:54:06 PM|| 2003-7-23 8:54:06 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 A little of both, I'd say. After all, it's been years since Libya challenged the US directly, so it can't all be the Taking of Baghdad 1-2-3. The whole Lockerbie trial back-down began during the Clinton administration, and they were pretty big on whipping out their pragmatic line then, too: Not admitting to the bombing but sort of playing a "nolo contendere" and hoping we could all get back to business soon.

I've often said that El-Gadhafi [his spelling] dearly hoped to eventually lead the Arab League, but realized that Egypt's Mubarak filled that role comfortably and wasn't budging. With that he turned to Africa and found a continent eager to accept a visionary leader who peddled old-hat stuff from the visionary five-and-dime, like an African Union to emulate the EU.

The son definitely seems better educated and more worldly in many ways, which can't be bad. (Assad's son, remember, was an optometrist; it was his older brother who was groomed for the role. In many ways he's little more than a puppet for his father's junta.) When he talks of Libya's technical capacity it's clear he understands the value of interdependence, rather than taking his father's anti-colonial generation's view that throwing off the masters was the first order of business. Whether he would or could lead this way, assuming he eventually takes over, is another matter entirely, but it's evidence that being a revolutionary only goes so far. Heck, China discarded the little red books itself years ago, and has a pragmatic, vaguely pro-capitalist bureaucrat as president.

It's a lot like the simulation game I played in my college government course, where we had teams playing nations, and options of war, internal political struggles, and economic growth. I used my VIC-20 to build a spreadsheet demonstrating the wisdom of the economic growth strategy, exploiting a weakness of the model, but even without VIC-20s so did the other students. By the end of the course we all had stronger economies, higher per-capita GNP, and only one lackluster war had broken out.

Posted by Dan Hartung 2003-7-24 2:41:16 AM|| [http://www.lakefx.nu/] 2003-7-24 2:41:16 AM|| Front Page Top

17:41 Paul
17:26 Paul
17:23 Paul
15:53 Douglas De Bono
09:27 Ptah
06:55 Anon1
06:22 Anon1
02:47 Dan Hartung
02:41 Dan Hartung
23:55 DANEgerus
23:54 DANEgerus
23:31 Rafael
22:54 Zhang Fei
22:41 Matt
22:28 Tokyo Taro
22:25 Rafael
22:18 Frank G
22:17 debbie
22:17 debbie
22:15 Frank G
22:13 Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter)
22:12 Frank G
22:04 Frank G
22:03 stevey robinson