Consequences of USA intervention in Libya

Reference:

Miller, J. (2011, March 27). Rumsfeld: If Gaddhafi stays, U.S reputation damaged, American enemies emboldened.ABC News. Retrieved March 27, 2011, from http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rumsfeld-gadhafi-stays-us-reputation-damaged-american-enemies/story?id=13232616

Kirkpatrick,D.D.( 2011,March 21). Hopes for a Qaddafi exit, and worries of what comes next. New York Times. Retrieved March 24, 2011, from  http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/22/world/africa/22tripoli.html?_r=1&ref=muammarelqaddafi

Summary:

Consequences of USA intervention in Libya

Libya is an African country .Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi has led this country for more than 40 years. Now the people of Libya rebel and are uprising against Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, and they are trying to change the government as much as they can. The United States of America and an international coalition decided to intervene and support the voice of the Libyan people (the rebellion), which contains tribal people, academics, workers, radicals, and liberals. Is the decision to attack logical?  Did the USA have a plan after Qaddafi comes down? Did the USA and the international coalition know who would lead the Libyan country in the future? Will radicalism or liberalism lead the country after Qaddafi? 

Reaction:

I think Mr. Obama's administration made a wrong decision to attack the Libyan government without any plan or arrangements. According to Christian Amanpur's TV program, she interviewed with Congressmen and Congress women about the decision of attacking Libya; they explained that Mr. Obama has no plan about this attack. Did the rebels succeed in their uprising and Qaddafi go down? What will happen if Qaddafi becomes successful in the war and leads the country again? What will happen if Qaddafi attacks with chemical weapons on his people? What will the USA government do if all of those expectations happen? What is the plan for that? Mr. Obama needs to make a plan for the Libyan country after Qaddafi. And also he should know that Qaddafi is a dangerous person; he does not leave a country peacefully, and he’ll fight, destroy the country and kill his people to remain in his position as a leader. All Middle Eastern leaders are the same. They fight, kill, and destroy the country just for remaining in the power as a leadership. Furthermore, the people of Libya are divided into two parts. The first part supports the government and they fight to keep Muammar el-Qaddafi in power. The second part of the people of Libya is against the government, which is called rebellion or revolt; they fight against Muammar el-Qaddafi. As I understood now Libya is divided into two parts, they fight with each other, the situation is becoming worse, and the country has led itself to go through the civil war in the last few days. The USA tries to fight against Muammar el-Qaddafi; for that reason there are American military attacks by land, and airstrikes in Libya, and thousands of civilians are killed because of bombing attacks and airstrikes. Libya is a different situation than Tunisia and Egypt, because the people of Libya are based on a tribal society and most of the tribes are now supporting Qaddafi and fighting with the rebellion. Now in Libya opposition groups have appeared with different ideas and no one is able to predict who will rule Libya after Qaddafi. I think we must pay attention to which of the opposition groups should rule in the future. If a group leads the country but is worse than Qaddafi, what should the USA do? The US forces have to stay in Libya for a long time to rebuild a country and create a democratic government which is elected by the Libyan people, and the USA should support this government for a while. Instead, the USA and international coalition made a decision to intervene to Libya and fight against Qaddafi; they must stay on Libya after Qaddafi, because every group try to reach a power and the country will go through a civil war, a war for obtaining power, a war for oil, and a war for countries money.