The Good Slaughter And The Bad Slaughter
April 6, 2011 by Bob Livingston
The United States corporate media and political elite warmongers—champions, they would have you believe, of the little people in Libya being slaughtered by troops loyal to Moammar Gadhafi—have been strangely silent about the slaughter of civilians in Bahrain and Syria.
Now we know why. President Barack Obama made a deal with the House of Saud: We take out Gadhafi and you can have free reign to quash pro-democracy protests in Bahrain (Syria is another story we’ll deal with shortly).
Two foreign diplomats—one from a European country and another from the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) group—told Asia Times Online about the deal.
According to the article, one of the diplomats said, "This is the reason why we could not support resolution 1973. We were arguing that Libya, Bahrain and Yemen were similar cases, and calling for a fact-finding mission. We maintain our official position that the resolution is not clear, and may be interpreted in a belligerent manner."
So the U.S. stuck its nose in another country’s civil war and unleashed its air power and dropped bombs on Tripoli—killing countless civilians in the process—in order to halt the killing of a group of rebels who were learning that it takes more than a good idea to make a rebellion. Never mind the fact that the “nice rebels” the U.S. is so keen to protect includes al-Qaida terrorists who have shot at American troops.
Meanwhile, Saudi enforcers entered Bahrain—home to the U.S. Fifth Fleet—and shot peaceful protestors seeking reforms in their government. And according to reports coming across Twitter, more than 400 people who had blogged or Tweeted in favor of the protests are now either missing or in custody, many of them grabbed on the streets by masked thugs imported from other Arab and Asian countries.
To Obama, Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.), Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.), Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) and other lovers of the military-industrial complex, that’s acting humanely.
For Saudi Arabia, it’s a win-win. They see their hated enemy Gadhafi humiliated—if not eliminated—and are allowed to squelch any popular uprisings before they spread into Saudi Arabia. And to put a cherry on it, Saudi Arabia cements itself as “the” player in the Arab League.
For the U.S.-led coalition, eastern Libya is the prize because of its oil fields. Already the rebels are making oil deals with European nations. And let’s not forget that Libya would make a great location for another NATO base, giving the U.S. a foothold it needs on the African continent.
As for Syria, the Obama administration can’t seem to make up its mind whether that country is friend or foe. On March 27, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told Bob Schieffer on CBS’ Face The Nation that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was a reformer, even as dozens of pro-democracy protesters were being gunned down and more activists were disappearing by the day.
But Clinton forgot to tell Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who labeled Syria as one of only three repressive regimes in the whole of the Middle East, along with Iran and Libya.
Make no mistake: The assault on Libya is a shot across the bow of both Iran and Syria. “Play with us or feel our wrath.” NATO is the new police force and it’s going to rule the Mediterranean.