{"id":9734,"date":"2011-05-16T09:24:38","date_gmt":"2011-05-16T17:24:38","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/?p=9734"},"modified":"2011-05-16T09:24:38","modified_gmt":"2011-05-16T17:24:38","slug":"on-expanding-and-extending-the-libyan-war","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/2011\/05\/16\/on-expanding-and-extending-the-libyan-war\/","title":{"rendered":"On Expanding and Extending the Libyan War"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.telegraph.co.uk\/news\/worldnews\/africaandindianocean\/libya\/8514034\/Nato-must-target-Gaddafi-regime-says-Armed-Forces-chief-Gen-Sir-David-Richards.html\">NATO commanders are demanding<\/a> that the intervention in Libya, initially limited to the aim of protecting civilians, be expanded to <a href=\"http:\/\/www.telegraph.co.uk\/news\/worldnews\/africaandindianocean\/libya\/libya-video\/8504747\/Tripoli-bombarded-by-Nato-missile-strikes.html\">destroy the civilian infrastructure<\/a> of the country and <a href=\"http:\/\/uk.reuters.com\/article\/2011\/05\/16\/uk-libya-idUKTRE74E1I420110516\">remove Qaddafi from power<\/a>. Civil institutions \u2013 not military \u2013 are now being targeted in the bombing campaign and even hospitals have been <a href=\"http:\/\/www.reuters.com\/video\/2011\/05\/10\/nato-strike-damages-libyan-hospital?videoId=209297507\">damaged<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>As it happens, top <a href=\"http:\/\/news.antiwar.com\/2011\/05\/15\/libya-pm-agrees-to-un-truce-if-nato-stops-bombings\/\">Libyan officials have agreed to an immediate ceasefire<\/a> provided NATO stop bombing the country. The <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2011\/05\/11\/world\/africa\/11benghazi.html?_r=1&amp;ref=world\">terrorist rebels<\/a> that we\u2019re supporting have publicly <a href=\"http:\/\/www.voanews.com\/english\/news\/africa\/Butty-Libya-Ceasefire-Offer-React-Shalluf-16may11-121876664.html\">rejected the offer<\/a>, but it remains to be seen whether the U.S. will agree. They both may prefer he be <a href=\"http:\/\/www.npr.org\/templates\/story\/story.php?storyId=135170182\">arrested and face trial at the International Criminal Court<\/a> for crimes against humanity.<\/p>\n<p>If the U.S. ultimately chooses a continuation of the war over these other options, it should be understood that the responsibility of prolonging the war &#8211; which <a href=\"http:\/\/articles.boston.com\/2011-04-14\/bostonglobe\/29418371_1_rebel-stronghold-civilians-rebel-positions\">may have ended promptly<\/a> \u2013 is on America. This is no longer an \u201cintervention\u201d between two belligerent parties; we are a primary actor now. Further targeting of civilians by Qaddafi, further crimes committed by our rebel allies, and further civilian casualties from NATO bombs all rest on the shoulders of U.S. leadership. We can be reasonably sure, though, they won\u2019t be held to account.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, now that it has become an open policy to change the regime in Libya, it\u2019s clearer and clearer that the U.S. government has renewed, post-Bush zeal for their long held motto: <a href=\"http:\/\/www.chomsky.info\/articles\/20080101.htm\">We Own the World<\/a>. We choose the leaders of men. Our jurisdiction extends across the globe.<\/p>\n<p>Of course, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2010\/10\/23\/world\/middleeast\/23casualties.html\">we know<\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/www.foreignpolicyjournal.com\/2011\/05\/09\/the-face-of-humanitarian-intervention\/\">what that looked like in Iraq<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>NATO commanders are demanding that the intervention in Libya, initially limited to the aim of protecting civilians, be expanded to destroy the civilian infrastructure of the country and remove Qaddafi from power. Civil institutions \u2013 not military \u2013 are now being targeted in the bombing campaign and even hospitals have been damaged. As it happens, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":86,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-9734","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"meta_box":{"disable_donate_message":"","custom_donate_message":"","subtitle":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9734","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/86"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9734"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9734\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9736,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9734\/revisions\/9736"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9734"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9734"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9734"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=9734"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}