Friday, August 26, 2011
I have totally turned off on Libya. Vietnam was a total fiasco, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc etc. Other countries always have civil wars and by their very nature there is little outsiders can and should do. If they were genuine they'd have stopped the genocide in Rwanda which was widely reported and known about and somehow the UN and NATO filtered it from their agendas. But Libya is an internal issue miles away and you don't see foreign powers running to help or invade, depending on your point of view, when the west has issues. The sole consequence here of invading/helping Libya was a huge rise in the oil price, so it's going down now but only as it looks like it all might be over soon, if we hadn't gone there it would probably have been far less of an effect. But we can't be involved in everyone else's business without an extremely good reason. Rwanda was a rare one and we didn't, Zimbabwe is another, ditto. Very selective and in my opinion if there are far worse atrocities elsewhere and you choose somewhere different it's clearly a bad move. So if the Iranian people kick off next (and they really should under that regime but would be wiped out in days compared to elsewhere) will we go there as well? Syria has been well avoided so far, despite being a lot smaller than Libya, and I really no longer know or want to know why, Britain has major problems with debt, investments down to almost zero and prices doubling, and all we're doing is falling at the same rate China is rising till we meet in the middle and then end up like Zimbabwe. Pre-Nazi Germany printed money when they didn't have it and it started off the last war. We are going the same way, making the same mistakes and at this rate we'll be invaded by the Chinese when weakened enough and the few troops we have left will be in Afghanistan getting themselves shot by terrorists. Does it make sense? Not to me.