Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Libya to Join US and UK In 'War on Terror'
The Financial Times of London ^ | Friday March 26, 2003 | Christoper Adams

Posted on 03/25/2004 4:02:04 PM PST by threat matrix

Libya on Thursday brought to an end decades of international isolation as a pariah state with a promise to join forces with the United States of America and the United Kingdom to fight the global war against terrorism.

It is to provide intelligence to help root out Al Qaeda and on Thursday secured a gas exploration deal with Shell that could be worth billions of dollars.

Tony Blair, UK Prime Minister, held two hours of talks with Col. Muammer Gadaffi in a bedroom tent a few miles outside of Tripoli, the first time a British leader has set foot in the country since 1943.

He emerged afterwords to declare the Libyan leader an important ally and urged other Arab countries to follow Tripoli's example.

The historic talks sealed a dramatic and rapid transformation of Libya's standing in the international community, a process that started in earnest in December when it unexpectedly renounced its pursuit of weapons of mass destuction.

That decision followed more than a year of secret negoiations with Britain and the US.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.ft.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: bushdoctrineunfold; bushdoctrineunfolds; gadaffi; jointhewinningteam; libya; livinghistory; tonyblair; tripolivisit; uk; waronterror; willingcoalition
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-78 next last
To: Dog Gone
Hey, that Bush Doctrine seems to work. Somebody tell the US media.

Speaking of media. I was listening to the Peacenik radio station this afternnoon and the host of one of their terrible shows told about seeing Helen Thomas in a coffee shop after the 911 hearings.

She said she asked Helen if Clarke would do Bush in and Helen said, " Oh God, I hope so. We must get rid of that lying, murdering BASTARD!" Not biased at all, right?

21 posted on 03/25/2004 4:57:09 PM PST by ladyinred (Weakness Invites War. Peace through Strength.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton
Got to admire his taste in women at the least.
22 posted on 03/25/2004 4:58:24 PM PST by StriperSniper (Manuel Miranda - Whistleblower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: threat matrix
If John F'em Ke(rr)y or Algore were President, would Libya be joining our side in the War on Terror, even symbolically?
23 posted on 03/25/2004 5:02:04 PM PST by steveegg (It takes more than just a bit of double-secret probation to keep a good website down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: threat matrix
We really trust them that easily?? How naive.
I thought it was rather convenient that no WMD were found in Iraq but at the same time Lybia chooses to come clean and try to make nice with the civilized world by surrendering it's WMD's. Sounds to me like Hussein slipped them out the back door to Lybia whilst the UN was stalling the invasion, giving Lybia a nice stock pile that cost them nothing to surrender to the free world.
Meanwhile, hidden somewhere in the most remote reaches of North Africa lies the fruit of Lybia's labor to be sold on the black market.
I wouldn't be surprised if theres a nuke hidden somewhere in this peace offering.
24 posted on 03/25/2004 5:05:29 PM PST by Pipeline (A common man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StriperSniper
Got to admire his taste in women at the least.

Absolutely. Compare Jackie-O to Hillary...*shudder* or Monroe to the Fat Intern...
25 posted on 03/25/2004 5:06:15 PM PST by BJClinton (France has elevated their threat level from "run" to "hide".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred
Helen is probably doing us more favors than she's doing harm. She's repulsive and so obviously biased that she can't ask a reasonable question, or write a column that would appeal to undecided voters.

Anyone who agrees with her or respects her is already entrenched in the Dark Side. She makes a great liberal spokesman.

26 posted on 03/25/2004 5:07:27 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
Although the Libyan gov't has indeed changed its tune and (hopefully) joined the civilized world, there are still quite a large # of nutty Islamists over there. .....so I think I'll wait a bit before thinking about surfing their beaches.

Yep, the change is incredible. .....the fall of the Soviets, the Islamization of Western Europe, the pro-American sentiments of many in Eastern Europe. Making those predctions in the early 80's would certainly elicited some laughs.

But in retrospect I think the most important event of the past quarter century was the fall of the Shah and the subsequent rise of radical Islam, and Carter's ineptitude in dealing with it from start to finish. It convinced Islamists that the U.S. can be messed with without consequence, and thus encouraged the spread of this disease that we're now trying desperately to eliminate.

27 posted on 03/25/2004 5:09:59 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
The dark side is true, the host reporter person on this show is a wiccan and her response on air to Helen's comment was the infamous, "So mote it be!" :-)
28 posted on 03/25/2004 5:11:10 PM PST by ladyinred (Weakness Invites War. Peace through Strength.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Pipeline
We really trust them that easily?? How naive.

When inspectors oversee a cooperating disarmament, they look over all sorts of papers; the history of the equipment and stockpiles. The idea that Libya is giving up Saddam's secreted weapons is ridiculous.

Just as South Africa before showed what disarmament really looks like (compared to Iraq's deceptions), Pervez Musharraf's Pakistan shows what cooperative anti-terrorism looks like (compared to Iran's nothing). It's bloody.

29 posted on 03/25/2004 5:16:55 PM PST by NutCrackerBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo
Jimmy Carter has the be the worst President in the 20th century, even worse than Clinton. There is nothing he touched that he didn't make worse, from Iran to the Panama Canal, not to mention the economy.

And not content to be pleased with the damage he did during his term, he has continued to screw things up in Haiti, North Korea, and Venezuela with his continued meddling. Enough with this loser. Lock him up at Gitmo.

30 posted on 03/25/2004 5:17:33 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred
We must get rid of that lying, murdering BASTARD!" - Helen the Terrible

Murdering? I wondering if Helen was referring to the scores of Taliban, Al Qaeda, and other assorted terrorists killed under Bush's watch? Of course Clinton's bombing of innocent Christians attempting to defend themselves against Islamists in the Balkans was perfectly okay with her.....

31 posted on 03/25/2004 5:17:54 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: threat matrix
Holy crap ... you gotta be kidding me.

The Bush Doctrine etches itself even more deeply in the history books as the Clinton Legacy keeps getting smalllllllllller.

32 posted on 03/25/2004 5:23:48 PM PST by The G Man (John Kerry? America just can't afford a 9/10 President in a 9/11 world. Vote Bush-Cheney '04.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
Ex-Rat Presidents seem incapable of keeping their pieholes shut. Is it too much to ask them to exercise just a little dignity?

Ford, GHWB, Reagan (before his illness got bad), Nixon. .....all were dignified in retirement.

Carter is a wretched weasel, and I agree with you that he was probably the worst President since .......possibly ever.

33 posted on 03/25/2004 5:26:27 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo
Murdering? I wondering if Helen was referring to the scores of Taliban, Al Qaeda, and other assorted terrorists killed under Bush's watch?

Helen is preparing for an eternity in hell. She'll be cloned 72 times for each terrorist "martyr."

34 posted on 03/25/2004 5:29:22 PM PST by Moonman62
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo
According to a report i heard on the radio, we have captured or killed 60% of AQ's top leadership.

But we are no safer. (eyes rolling)

35 posted on 03/25/2004 5:37:46 PM PST by No Blue States
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: threat matrix
Can we have their old 'friends' list?
36 posted on 03/25/2004 5:38:31 PM PST by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paradox
"I wonder if Kadaffi can survive this. He (and his country) will certainly be set upon by the terrorists. "

As I remember, Libya’s like Cuba, cold war era Romania or Iraq last year. There’s near absolute control of the people from neighborhood cells that report up to cells above that report to cells above etc.. up to Kadaffi. There’s no room for descent or terrorism.

37 posted on 03/25/2004 5:54:40 PM PST by elfman2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: threat matrix
Wha???
38 posted on 03/25/2004 6:04:24 PM PST by KevinDavis (Let the meek inherit the Earth, the rest of us will explore the stars!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: threat matrix
Libya's Gadaffi and Pakistan's Musharraf have both made very intelligent choices. Musharraf was smart enough to realize that Pakistan was high on the list of likely retaliatory targets after 9/11. Gadaffi was smart enough to realize that Libya would be high on the list of likely retaliatory targets if a future 9/11 happened. They both realized that the U.S. wasn't bluffing anymore, and that there would be lethal consequences for terrorist attacks on U.S. soil.

So each decided that his best hope for survival was to cooperate. And that meant cooperating fully. Half-hearted cooperation would just piss off both sides and gain nothing. Full cooperation would piss off the terrorists but would be rewarded by the U.S. and would safeguard them from U.S. retaliation. They both obviously concluded that U.S. enmity posed a greater risk than Al Queda enmity and the hostility of their own Islamist-sympathizing citizens.

So I don't see Gadaffi's actions as a trick. He's made his choice, and there's no going back. Now he might as well go all the way in joining the War on Terrorism so as to reap the benefits (e.g., the Shell deal).

39 posted on 03/25/2004 6:09:17 PM PST by dpwiener
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elfman2
There’s near absolute control of the people from neighborhood cells that report up to cells above that report to cells above etc.. up to Kadaffi. There’s no room for [dissent] or terrorism.

Good point. If there is a downside to Qaddafi's moves, it is a boost in legitimacy to an oppressive dictatorship. Though, I understand that there are some reforms in the offing that will bring more freedom to the populace.

40 posted on 03/25/2004 6:24:16 PM PST by NutCrackerBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-78 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson