A friend asked me what I thought about Libya. Here's what I said:
Geez, I don't see the point in trying a no-fly zone right now. The rebels have already lost! And Robert Gibbs has been talking and talking about avoiding a third front in our ongoing war project.
Europe gets a lot of their oil from Libya. You may have heard on NPR, but apparently it was Kissinger who had the idea of solving the US oil problem by propping up corrupt, dictatorial regimes in Libya, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and elsewhere. It backfired in Iran, and now we turn around and the US involvement in the Middle East (i.e. Egypt) makes us look like antidemocratic jerks, but that's been the policy. The US used to be a net exporter of oil in the 1970s, but importing it from the Middle East became so cheap that it allowed US economic growth in the post-Jimmy Carter era.
I remember having a political conversation with a middle-aged coworker when I worked at Best Buy in 2007. He was supportive of some kind of new neocon war strategy and said, "We could have $20 a barrell oil!" I was shocked and said something along the lines of, "Yeah, we would just have to kill a few people with brown skin."
I don't know what our policy should be vis-a-vis Libya proper, but all the Middle East events have been sickening me at the way that the powerful (us) are willing to overlook brutality if it means gaining some sort of "good" (like oil). In this context, it's amazing there aren't more wars. It also makes me realize that the inequality we are looking at in the face at home (like your "no growth for the middle class in 2000s" link) is no different from the inequalities and brutality we export to foreign countries. Enough to make me a socialist, at least of the Bernie Sanders variety.
No profanes - sacred