For a bit of refreshing sanity, consider British author and essayist Peter Hitchens’ trenchant take on the Libyan conflict and, broadly, the “Arab Spring.” Hitchens affirms the obvious but oddly soft-pedaled truth that the thugs who will control Libya after Gaddafi are likely to be worse – much worse. This can be confidently stated without shying from the sure knowledge that the Gaddafi regime is indefensible.
So why are NATO troops there? Hitchens effectively swats aside the quaint hope that it’s about principle. If it were, “…we would be bombing Bahrain too, and demanding the withdrawal of the Saudi troops who arrived there in such sinister fashion last Monday [March 7, 2011]. But Bahrain’s the base of the U.S. 5th Fleet, so we won’t be doing that. And as I’ve said here before, this supposed objection to rulers killing their own people is not consistent. Sometimes–as in China, Bahrain and Syria–we’re happy to let them do it. “
Astute blogger and author Lawrence Auster effectively stitches together a couple of Hitchens’ Libya columns – here.
A Decent Respect 
0 Responses to “Protecting Civilians in Libya?”