I'd be surprised by such cohesion within the Republican party. There are all sorts of schisms, and in general they are all looking out for their own political careers. No one really cares about protecting Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, or others since they no longer have significant power.

I agree that it's unlikely that this was deliberate. But it's an interesting coincidence, no?

By the way, do you really think it's only those four who would be involved or have knowledge? It must go much further down into organisations like the CIA and the military.

I'm sure others would know.

dan

Could the Republican opposition to helping to topple Gadaffi have anything to do with the revelations that the US was sending people to Libya to be tortured by the regime?

No. Their opposition to Obama's actions regarding Libya are just knee jerk opposition. Whatever he's for they have to find a way to oppose it. (Excepting McCain who's never seen a war he didn't like, and opposses Obama because the Marines weren't landed.)
I'll bet the revelations on rendition of Libyan opposition members by the CIA and MI6 won't even get significant coverage in the US media or become an issue in the election in any way.
Kind of makes the air support only policy even more reasonable though, when one understand that a lot of the opposition owe their incarceration and torture by Ghaddaffi to the US. The General in command of the Rebel military forces appears to be the highest ranked Rebel official who wa victimized by the CIA. His televised response to the revelations is remarkable. All he really wants is an apology.

rickyp wrote:dan

Could the Republican opposition to helping to topple Gadaffi have anything to do with the revelations that the US was sending people to Libya to be tortured by the regime?

No. Their opposition to Obama's actions regarding Libya are just knee jerk opposition.

That's just idiocy.

Plenty of us, including me, did not support the mission because its aims were ambiguous. "Saving lives" would justify our intervention in at least a dozen countries today. I also thought the "leading from behind" approach was a mistake. That's not knee-jerk. It's something you can't grasp: principle.

rickyp wrote:dan

Could the Republican opposition to helping to topple Gadaffi have anything to do with the revelations that the US was sending people to Libya to be tortured by the regime?

No. Their opposition to Obama's actions regarding Libya are just knee jerk opposition. Whatever he's for they have to find a way to oppose it.

Even when he makes a decision they earlier said they'd want to see, they can't help but snark (not putting through the EPA changes). It's fun to watch the contortions, though.

I'll bet the revelations on rendition of Libyan opposition members by the CIA and MI6 won't even get significant coverage in the US media or become an issue in the election in any way.
Kind of makes the air support only policy even more reasonable though, when one understand that a lot of the opposition owe their incarceration and torture by Ghaddaffi to the US. The General in command of the Rebel military forces appears to be the highest ranked Rebel official who wa victimized by the CIA. His televised response to the revelations is remarkable. All he really wants is an apology.

I do wonder how this is being covered in the US. It has been picked up by the UK media (well, the non-stupid parts). I am so glad that David Milliband did not win the Labour leadership elections.

Anyway, back to the topic. The rebels are slowly advancing on Sirte and despite surrounding Bani Walid appear to be bending over backwards to negotiate a surrender rather than going in for the attack. Things are looking better, to be honest, for hopes that the new leaders will be more reasonable.

However, the accusations of attacks on black Africans assumed to be mercenaries are worrying. Looks like some sub-saharans were press-ganged into joining the loyalist forces.

danivon

I do wonder how this is being covered in the US

Got zero coverage hasn't it? (Other than one report in the New York Times 4 days ago.)

In case the USA is still undergoing a news blackout on events in Libya, Gadaffy was killed today:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15389550

danivon wrote:In case the USA is still undergoing a news blackout on events in Libya, Gadaffy was killed today:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15389550

thanks ... the news has made it all the way across the Atlantic. I should mention that I happen to be listening to the BBC.

Is that the modern analogue of Radio Free Europe nowadays?

It's just that accent; it makes you all seem so intelligent.