[Marxism] Arm the resistance – Victory to the Libyan revolution – No to the NATO/UN No Fly Zone

Eli Stephens elishastephens at hotmail.com
Fri Jul 1 07:27:56 MDT 2011

Recognizing that this statement came out in April, I assume it is still valid, with the possible exception (as noted by Fred) that NATO and the UN [sic] have gone way beyond a "no-fly zone". I have a few questions for Dayne, or anyone else who would like to defend it:

1) The statement starts with this: "We do not believe that there is any progressive role that western powers with their oil-soaked agenda could play in support of these uprisings." How does that square with calling for "arming the resistance," "seizing Libyan assets and handing them over to the resistance," and "recognizing the Transitional National Council as the interim government of Libya"? If you believe in "victory to the Libyan revolution," those things would certainly sound like a "progressive role" for the western powers to me.

2) If you really believe in "victory to the Libyan revolution," why WOULDN'T you support a no-fly zone? After all, the evidence was that this "revolution" was going to be defeated in the absence of US/NATO intervention. And if you're going to support the US and NATO arming the resistance, and seizing the assets of the Libyan government, is it really THAT big of a step to support them also shooting down Libyan planes? After all, war is offense AND defense. Why would you support the US and NATO helping to support the offensive side of the revolution with arms and money, but not support them helping the defensive side by providing a shield against air attacks?

Eli Stephens
 Left I on the News

More information about the Marxism mailing list