Sunday, March 20, 2011
Libya Crisis and Oil Supply ( January 13, 2011 )
Protests in Libya caused the oil prices to increase significantly in the past. And members of United Nations agreed to force the Gadhafi Government by placing military actions in Libya. As the consequence, it is expected to bring more damage to the country in terms of death and destroying infrastructures. Would this intervention help Libya to set better country without Gadhafi? Or is this only giving other countries a chance to show their military power, control the oil price and perhaps take over Libya? Do you think current oil price is caused mainly by Libya?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Dictatorships in number of countries may be over soon. Since human rights lawyer Fathi Terbil was arrested on February 15th, Libyans in Benghazi started to stand against their leader, Muammar Gadhafi. The main reason for these protests was to get Gadhafi out of his dictatorship. Gadhafi used the national forces to stop these, but the number of protesters kept increasing and more deaths have been confirmed on the media. According to The Week, his wealth is estimated to be as much as 32 billion dollars, which he made during decades of his dictatorship in Libya. While these crashes between pro-Gadhafi forces and anti-Gadhafi demonstrators continued to worsen, the price of oil went up significantly. To stop the cruelty of Gadhafi, United Nations authorized the military actions to curb the situation in Libya. But I just think United Nations including United States of America, are not really interested in saving civilians in Libya, but they are only interested to do something that is best for their countries by reducing the oil prices. I am concerned that Libya will be the next Afghanistan where United States of America will take over Libya and control most of politics. The rumour that this protest started from US's intervention could be true. United States of America will do anything to get anything they want.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.incendiaryimage.com/sketchbook/fathi-terbil/
http://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/data_graphs/40.htm?selectedTab=daily
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/03/17/uk-libya-idUKLDE71Q0MP20110317
Yea I totally agree with you sung, “ United Nations including United States of America, are not really interested in saving civilians in Libya, but they are only interested to do something that is best for their countries by reducing the oil price” I mean yes the UN went into Lybia to help the basic needs of citizens but in the bigger picture what really bugs me is that they didn’t go in there with a specific set GOAL! I mean there’s a high chance that Gadhafi is still going to be in power even after all this mass media phase is over. Yes the Prime minister of Canada stated that he wants Gadhafi Dead and so did Obama. But it was not agreed upon by the UN! So now this means I’m going to be paying tax money for the next 1-2 years to keep jets/soldiers/tanks in Lybia. There was no SET GOAL when we entered into Lybia and that just means were going to be there for the next few years trying to find another place to get our oil.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us_jet_crashes_in_libya_pilots_safe_gates_says_air_strikes_should_slow_soon/2011/03/22/ABNC0lCB_story.html?wprss=rss_homepage
The amount of money being spent on the military in Libya is Ridiculous! All that money could be put to better use. For example helping rebuild parts of Japan that were hit hard by the earthquake. The United States, with the limited resources that they have, is a humanitarian mission for the Libyan people really in their best interests? They are going further into debt when they could be using the money spent on the military to get their country out of its recession. There is no need at all to send the amount of forces we have now in Libya. The way I see it is, whenever our countries engage in military intervention, it is usually for a really 'good' cause or because of some humanitarian aid, that lacks, like what Tyler mentioned, a clearly defined mission or specific set goal. Personally I don't think this is our fight. They should help protect the innocent civilians that are getting slaughtered but thats about it.
ReplyDeleteRead what John Bolton, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations has to say about this situation in Libya at the nationalreview.com The story there is a whole lot more factual and truthful than this candy coated piece. Bolton, tells National Review Online that President Obama is dithering on Libya. “Every hour that goes by shows me how [Obama] is not ready for this,” he says. “I am feeling sick to my stomach that we are into something where the president does not know what he is doing.”The president, in a short speech at the White House this afternoon, called on Qaddafi, Libya’s leader, to step down and cease fire on civilians or face military action from the United States and its allies. Obama’s remarks focused on a U.N. Security Council resolution, passed Thursday, that authorizes military action.Bolton notes that the president did not establish a deadline for Qaddafi or explain how he would proceed militarily. This lack of a clear strategy, he worries, could inflame the situation.“We have lost a huge opportunity by waiting to act so late,” he says. “A real president would have had his military plan ready to go the minute that resolution was adopted, and he would have implemented it.”“It sounds like [administration officials] are still talking, still considering,” he continues. “The conclusion Qaddafi may draw from this is that he has more time. If that’s right, and we are not prepared to act, the position of the opposition will be even more difficult than it already is.”Earlier this week, Qaddafi allies said that they would institute a cease-fire. However, reports of attacks against civilians continue to emerge. Obama, in his speech, said that any potential military action will be based around his desire to protect civilians.“I also want to be clear about what we will not be doing,” Obama said. ” The United States is not going to deploy ground troops into Libya. And we are not going to use force to go beyond a well-defined goal, specifically the protection of civilians in Libya”
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nationalreview.com/corner/262534/bolton-obama-not-ready-robert-costa
Lybia is in a complete mess since the riots started to get Gadhafi out of power and bring in democracy. He has supporters that are helping him defeat the people who want to bring him down so that means to kill his own people. No wonder the UN is stepping in to help save the protesters from Gadhafi’s forces. The UN does not want to get involved with the revolution there but it will intervene when human lives are at stake. Canada, France, Britain and the US are all over there fighting to get disable the air defense and the tanks that he is using. All of the money that each country is spending on fighting can be spent on helping out their own citizens by getting rid of poverty. With Lybia producing 2% of the world’s oil, it is not the most stable oil supply compared to the western oil supplies. All of this fighting there is driving up the oil price to over $100 a barrel and with summer coming, it is only going to go up. All the country’s there do all love oil and need it to feed the population so they are probably there to get him out of power. The next person in power will be friends with the west thanking them for helping.
ReplyDeleteMoammar Gadhafi has ruled Libya since 1969 and has vowed to fight to the death and show no mercy. Does he not care for the people of his homeland? Is seems to be just about the power and money for him. Now he is drawing other countries in, is it a setup for the UN to come in and help out the people of his country … others will be blamed for the number of deaths as purely innocent people are being killed. In a way Moammar Gadhafi is like the USA. The USA are only in it for themselves most of the time. Them being there to protect the innocent civilians is just a ploy. They are really after getting government control so they can have more control over the oil prices. Thus making it cheaper for their country and their people.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cbc.ca/thenational/indepthanalysis/story/2011/03/21/national-turningpointlibya.html
Unlike Tanveer, I have a different perspective on the situation. It may seem like the situation in Libya right now is getting worse but this is the way that it is for EVERY revolution. The people are taking example from the Egypt, which gave them a spark of hope when they successfully made Mubarak resign from his role as dictator. Unlike Egypt though, I feel that much of the Libyian military is on Gadhafis' side, this makes it a million times harder for the revolutionaries, as they do not have much supplies or man power to back up their cause. While oil might increase at the current turmoil, once the dictator has been removed and democracy reigns supreme, I believe that everything will settle down. This is why the UN NEEDS to step up to the plate. Without any support Gadhafis' forces will be unmatched and will never lose power.
ReplyDeleteOn Peter’s comment, I think this is why most of the communist countries such as China and North Korea, can continue to manage their people although the people in those countries are suffering with poverty. They have so strong military forces that nobody can actually step forward and seek for a change. In North Korea for example, the rules and laws are so strict that people cannot even say their leader’s name, Kim Jung-il. The people literally watch others then they would report to public security once they find such a case, so that they will receive rewards from the Government. Same with Libya, if the local military forces are not removed from the country, it will remain the same as when Gadhafi was in charge. The riots between anti-Gadhafi and pro-Gadhafi protesters will continue, and this will get the country into more troubles and destabilize the oil price as concerns grow. It is very important for the UN forces to intervene and settle this situation, so there will be more peace and security on Libya as well as the rest of the world.
ReplyDeleteI have to completely disagree with Peter, all the other countries need to protect the civilians, but they need to butt out and mind their own business, it is not their revolution so be fighting in. The countries are just there because they have something to gain, they are all in it for themselves. If things keep going the way they are in a few years we will see a war torn country like Somalia. Somalia had a civil war going on, and the United States saw that they could benefit somehow by restoring peace, "FOUR AMERICAN PETROLEUM GIANTS HAD AGREEMENTS WITH THE AFRICAN NATION BEFORE ITS CIVIL WAR BEGAN. THEY COULD REAP BIG REWARDS IF PEACE IS RESTORED". Look at Somalia today the country is still in turmoil.
ReplyDeleteSource:
http://www.raceandhistory.com/cgi-bin/forum/webbbs_config.pl/noframes/read/15