wausfpp.org
In the 16th century Libya became part of the Ottoman Empire. In 1911 and 1912 Italy conquered Libya. In 1942 the Allies ousted the Italians. After World War II the Allies agreed to give Libya "independence."
The Soviet Union tried to get Libya independent with no foreign military bases, but the US and the UK prevailed. They set up Libya with a big US base and a big UK base, rather than as a truly sovereign country.
Others - notably Egypt - tried to get Libya set up with a real democracy. But again, the US and the UK prevailed. They set up "independent" Libya with a monarch hand-picked by the US and the UK.
Libya got its "independence" in 1951 under King Idris al-Sanusi, but this was not real soveriegnty because of the dependent relationship to the US and UK.
For example, this hand-picked monarch granted oil concessions to US companies.
On September 1, 1969 Colonel Muammar Qaddafi took over the country in a coup.
Qaddafi began nationalizing a lot of industry, notably the oil.
In 1970 he kicked the US and UK out of their bases.
In 1986 someone bombed a disco in Germany. The US said it was Libya. Some German authorities said there was no evidence for this at the time. Fifteen years later a German judge, who sentenced four people for the crime, did say that Libya had been involved.
The US bombed Libya, specifically targetting Qaddafi's family. About a hundred people were killed including Qaddafi's adopted daughter.
Since the turn of the millenium, Libya has somewhat gotten back in the good graces of those who toe the US party line. How did it do so? By paying reparations for the terrorism it allegedly supported, by shutting down its weapons programs, and - yep, you guessed it - by letting US oil companies back in.
Libya has gotten a lot of press for three things: 1) for likely being behind several bombings - notably the bombing of a Berlin nightclub in 1986, the bombing of a PanAm airliner over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988, and the bombing of a French passenger plane over the Sahara in 1989; 2) for its attempts to develop weapons of mass destruction; and 3) for its staunch refusal to accept the legitimacy of the state of Israel.
Ironically, these three points give us a great entry into taking a new look at the myth and reality of US foreign policy.
Did Libya have a part in the bombings? Very likely, at least some of them.* In the three cases mentioned, Libya agreed to pay damages. Does anybody consider Libya the bastion of justice and lawfulness? No. Does the US have a part in similar bombings all over the world? Yes. Does it admit its guilt and pay reparations? No. Do people consider the US the bastion of justice and lawfulness. Yes.
Did Libya attempt to create weapons of mass destruction? Yes. Does it have a right to do so under international law? Yes. Yet Libya abandoned its weapons programs and opened itself up to inspection. Does the US have weapons of mass destruction? Yes. Does it use them? Yes. Is it abandoning its weapons programs? No.
Is Libya one of the few countries to staunchly deny the legitimacy of the state of Israel? Yes. Is Israel the home of the Palestinian Arabs? Yes. Were the Palestinian Arabs driven out of it in 1948? Yes. If I drive you out of part of your home and then "defend" that part of your home from you, does that make it not yours? No. Compare Libya's stance on this to that of the US, which is the staunchest supporter - and indeed was the most active creator - of the state of Israel and Israel's greatest supporter in the ongoing dictatorship and land theft being carried out against the Palestinian Arabs.
*We don't really know about all the details on these cases. There seems to be most doubt about the Lockerbie case. For more on this, see:
http://
http://
http://
Sources for the rest of the material above:
http://
http://