"...young people were given drugs by al Qaeda and therefore took to the streets." How can anyone in his/her right mind support a person who contends that, that is the answer as to why street protests started? What proof does Qaddaffi have for making such a statement?
Has absolutely no one taken even one drug? Who knows? Are there any "al Qaeda" types in Libya? With some 6 million people, it would seem highly unlikely that not one Libyan agrees with much of what Ayman al-Zawahiri preaches.
Changing the subject a bit, there is nothing wrong with the US Sixth Fleet moving close to Libya for humanitarian reasons. However, if it's about oil in terms of capitalism, then it's the wrong motivation and bodes ill.
It can be also about oil, in that a complete and instant cutoff would hurt many people, even though we really do need to get a handle on the Greenhouse Effect that is very, very real and dangerous — despite the ludicrous assertions of Koch Brother and Exxon sycophants and minions, etc.
To save "socialism" in Libya, Hugo Chavez wants an international mediation to save Qaddaffi. Qaddaffi could have averted all of what is going on by having established democratic socialism subject to losing in what are commonly understood to be free and fair elections. Socialism by force is not much better than capitalism by force.
To the knee-jerk capitalists who call me "scum" for having such feelings, I suggest to them that giving and sharing is better than being self-centered and such self-centeredness does lie at the core of capitalism, regardless of whether some who practice capitalism run a bit contrary to that by giving away a percentage — often to entities that simply further capitalism though rather than giving and sharing for its own sake that is righteousness.
I don't advocate falling short. I say to everyone that if you are bound and determined not to accept the non-coercive giving and sharing economy of Heaven, then the least you can do is give and share as much as otherwise possible while avoiding as much violence as possible. Therefore, it there is to be violence (there doesn't have to be; but regardless, Qaddaffi started it), let it be for giving and sharing and not for greed. If there are to be taxes, soak the rich. Never tax the poor to give to the rich. The rich are not the source of bounty. The idea that the rich are the source is false propaganda promoted by the rich for the rich. Any failures of socialism in terms of suggesting that giving and sharing as the prime impetus is the reason for failure is flat wrong. The idea that creativity can only come out from selfish motivations is wrong. There really is such a thing as altruistic creativity. It is the best kind. The very best inventions have been based upon the altruistic spirit. Those invention always do the greatest good while doing the least harm. The net benefits are always greater. Unlike with the capitalist ideology, the means are never on the path to nihilism.
Coercion is a fundamental problem in the human condition and psyche. We need universal repentance, but I can't find people who can accept it consistently. If it isn't one thing about that they reject, it's another.
"Revolutions in neighboring Tunisia and Egypt have helped to ignite resentment of four decades of often bloody political repression under Qaddaffi and his failure to use Libya's oil wealth to tackle widespread poverty and lack of opportunity." He is credited by many for having used oil money for general social services and the like better than the vast majority of "oil" nations, but criticism of him for lavishing his family and himself are absolutely legitimate. So long as there is one Libyan in poverty, Qaddaffi and his children have had no business whatsoever living in luxury off Libya's oil.
Yahoo News disappears into archives, so forgive me when the link goes dead. You know, they have to archive so they (capitalists) can charge you to see the past — just one of the evils of capitalism.