It is sad to note the furious and seemingly demented leader of Libya, Moammar Gadhafi has unleashed military might against innocent civilians in recent days, and sworn in endless publicized rants that he would die a martyr, rather than step down. Not surprisingly, the citizens of Libya have been protesting and calling for change, much like the rest of the Arab world.
Any sane, otherwise genuine leader in a country populated by people calling for change in the real world would remember that any leadership holds ONLY a mandate to do what is best for, and to protect the civilian population, but Gadhafi clearly thinks otherwise. He believes he can murder unruly segments of his population with impunity and without recourse.
At his orders, crowds of protesters have been shot, --not with rubber bullets, but with live ammunition. Gadhafi's military, henchmen and even reportedly foreign mercenaries have killed hundreds of innocent people and the Libyan air force has bombed civilian targets with military aircraft.
The pointed question must be asked:
Why is the response of the civilized world not one of immediate action instead of political correctness? Are we, yet again, limited to merely "condemning" crimes against humanity?
In CIVILIZED CANADA, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said it was "outrageous and unacceptable" (1) . Since when is murder of hundreds of innocent people merely "outrageous and unacceptable"?
It is, in the real world, mass MURDER. Let us call it what it IS, an ongoing criminal act that must be stopped.
Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff was equally "politically correct", saying in a statement:
"The brutal attacks on the Libyan people by Libyan security forces are an affront to every standard of human rights," .
Again, that description is hardly strong enough; we believe we should call such attacks what they ARE, the blatant and inexcusable, abuse of power, murder and a crime against humanity, --and insist upon a global response. Political correctness is not sufficient.
Innocent protesters being killed viciously by their own military is outrageous, unacceptable, and indeed "an affront to every standard of human rights", but the result, of that " affront" , is clearly mass murder, genocide, and a crime against humanity which needs to be addressed immediately by the global community.
Millions of people in the so-called ' modern, civilized world' have watched and tolerated this rabid, mad dog wandering around in the desert heat long enough. Is the world to stand by mute, and watch another instance of mass genocide?
In the real world, the time for political correctness has ended. The "man" in Libya with "an alternative reality", "anger management issues" and "delusions of grandeur" --- to be "politically correct", must be removed from any position of authority and brought to justice by the global community, and soon.
That's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it, politically correct or not.
(1) cbc.ca.news.yahoo.ca
hi, me again!
ReplyDeletehow can anyone watch the unfolding drama, i mean tragedy in north Africa and not respond with a surge of empathy for the slaughtered tribes..in the case of Libya, the clear division between controlled tribes and uncontrollable dictator was tolerated as long as he sold oil to the greedy nations.
there is nothing incorrect in the assumption of murder when masses or individuals are mowed down savagely.
The North African situation is an unspeakable tragedy unfolding before the critical eyes of the world. Hopefully, the global community of nations will not only see the potential economic damage, but also the brutal damage that is being done to humanity and the human psyche as a whole.
ReplyDeletethis is a scene which was played several times in history...imperialistic nations sowing discord and discontent across competitive sheikdoms to insure easy reaping of neglected wealth.
ReplyDeletefrance and britain held a prominent stage across the middle east before and during the construction of the suez canal...
the human collateral was of moral concern, yet the separation of humanity and resources has been evident through every war--treaty --and colonization scheme.
value-- oil-or-man? a precarious balance..or diplomatic nightmare.
I find it ironic that the leaders of the oil-rich nations, essentially tribal leaders, since oil was discovered to be useful, --hoard all of the wealth happily, going along with the separation of humanity and wealth, as long as it is in favour of their personal off-shore bank accounts.
ReplyDeleteTheir people seem to mean absolutely nothing to them. In the case of madman Gadhafi, his own people are his enemy, apparently.
With the uprisings, a precarious balance AND a horrific global diplomatic nightmare is clearly in play,--but IMHO, in the end, human collateral must be the priority if humanity is to remain at all civilized....
that's what we need--tribal leaders--oh, we do have some according to the above described criteria--hoard wealth happily, separation of humanity--favor personal offshore accounts, yep, i recognize so many at all levels, hard to count the yatchs..
ReplyDeletebut madman Kadhafi does have most of them surpassed..he does the crazy ruler role so well, he may be a form of hatertaiment for many generations yet.
he can scare other extremists and give new names to dictatorship..the tribal system has served him well--progress is encroaching onto his realm. the french are deeply involved in solar and nuclear tech down there..but at least 15.000 foreign workers have left yesterday, so the help will be hard to get..ask former colonialists.
Wow, Nadine, we DO have some, well said!
ReplyDeleteYou have the amazing, uncanny ability to hit the nail right on the head. Madman Gadhafi does set a new, higher bar for any enterprising, nasty and narcissistic wannabe mad dictator to surpass....