Get help now
  • Pages 5
  • Words 1042
  • Views 340
  • Download


    Verified writer
    • rating star
    • rating star
    • rating star
    • rating star
    • rating star
    • 5/5
    Delivery result 6 hours
    Customers reviews 268
    Hire Writer
    +123 relevant experts are online

    Being Sold A Lie: War on Libya (1042 words)

    Academic anxiety?

    Get original paper in 3 hours and nail the task

    Get help now

    124 experts online

    What Americans and the rest of the world were told about the War on Libya was not true. We were sold a lie to kill people who opposed us and to eliminate the threat of gold-backed currency in another country. We were told, by our own government, that American troops “needed” to go into Libya – despite a no fly zone – because it was a “humanitarian intervention;” because Muammar Gaddafi was slaughtering people in the thousands.

    In 2011, former President Barack Obama announced to Congress that the American military was going to become involved in Libya, Africa within 48-hours, per the rules of the War Powers Act. An opinion-editorial article, “Legal Acrobatics, Illegal War,” by Bruce Ackerman for The New York Times, stated that after President Obama made this announcement, he had 60 days to receive Congressional approval. “If he failed to do so, the act gave him at most 30 days to halt all ‘hostiles.’”

    We know today that despite not receiving approval from Congress, American troops still bombed Libya. We know this as a fact. In the same New York Times opinion-editorial article by Bruce Ackerman, he wrote:

    “His [Barack Obama’s] White House counsel, Robert F. Bauer, has declared that, despite the War Powers Act, the president can continue the Libya campaign indefinitely without legislative support. This conclusion lacks a solid legal foundation. And by adopting it, the White House has shattered the traditional legal process the executive branch has developed to sustain the rule of law over the past 75 years… Mr. Obama is creating a decisive and dangerous precedent for the next commander in chief, who is unlikely to have the Harvard Law Review on his résumé. From a moral perspective, there is a significant difference between authorizing torture and continuing a bombing campaign that may save thousands of Libyans from slaughter by Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi. But from a legal viewpoint, Mr. Obama is setting an even worse precedent.”

    Entering into Libya under the pretense that a ruler is slaughtering their own people by a large number without any actual confirmed information of such is reckless and irresponsible. It puts far more people at risk and in danger to “shoot first, ask questions later.” Waiting 60 days to receive Congressional approval and solid, concrete evidence that either confirms or discredits what it allegedly happening should have been what happened.

    Brad Hoff wrote “Hillary Emails Reveal True Motive For Libya Intervention” for the Foreign Policy Journal. In the article, Hoff uses direct quotes from the emails to shed light on some of the language used. For example, Hoff writes: “While the illegality of extra-judicial killings is easy to recognize (groups engaged in such are conventionally termed “death squads”), the sinister reality behind the “foreign mercenaries” reference might not be as immediately evident to most.” Hoff states that “black Libyan civilians and sub-Saharan contract workers, a population favored by Gaddafi in his pro-African Union policies, were targets of ‘racial cleansing’ by rebels who saw black Libyans as tied closely with the regime.” Hoff adds that because of how black Libyans were perceived by others, they were deemed to be “foreign mercenaries” and were vulnerable to torture, murder and “liberation” of their towns (ethnice cleansing).

    Even after Gaddafi was murdered, “hundreds of migrant workers from neighboring states were imprisoned by fighters allied to the new interim authorities. They accuse the black Africans of having been mercenaries for the late ruler. Thousands of sub-Saharan Africans have been rounded up since Gaddafi fell in August.,” Hoff stated. Before America initiated the war on Libya, the country was one of Africa’s most successful states. It was ranked first in Africa and number 53 globally on the Human Development Index. Furthermore, Liyans received free education, health care, housing, amongst other positive things. There was no evidence that Gaddafi had plans to kill thousands of people. In the article, “How Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton Contributed to Libya’s Slavery Crisis” by Solomon Comissiong in the Black Agenda Report, Comissiong wrote:

    “The Obama administration knew all of this. They used the CIA to deliver arms, advice and even cash to terrorist rebels, in an effort to overthrow Muammar Gaddafi and the Libyan Jamahiriya. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton desperately wanted to halt the advancements of Gaddafi and his government. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama lied to the public regarding Muammar Gaddafi and Libya in order to create a “justification” to topple Gaddafi and his government. There was not a shred of credible evidence that he was planning to murder Libyan civilians. However, he was resistant to the United States’ neo-colonial machinations with Africom. And, knowing that the US dollar was rapidly dropping in value, he wanted the US to purchase oil from Libya in the form of gold. He called for a United States of Africa. He also wanted to rid his country of terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda. Muammar Gaddafi and the Libyan Jamahiriya was just the kind of leader (and government) the United States hates and historically loves to overthrow.”

    The Libyans of today are suffering and dying. Human slavery, rape, torture and public lynchings are commonplace, according to Comissiong. The War on Libya was illegal. It was for selfish, greedy reasons. There was no “humanitarian intervention.” The politicians, particularly Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, wanted to make sure that the United States retained its power in all aspects: in oil, military, and most importantly, gold.

    Everyone involved in the attack on Libya should be jailed for war crimes. It’s childish and pathetic for someone – especially a country – to throw a tantrum when someone has something you don’t have but want. But it’s egregiously despicable when that tantrum turns bombings, torture and murder.

    1. Works Cited
    2. Ackerman, Bruce. “Legal Acrobatics, Illegal War.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 21 June 2011,
    3. Comissiong, Solomon, and Solomon Comissiong. “How Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton Contributed to Libya’s Slavery Crisis.” Black Agenda Report, 6 Dec. 2017,
    4. Fitrakis, Bob, et al. “France and US Killed Qaddafi for His Gold and Oil.” Canadian Dimension,
    5. Hoff, Brad. “Hillary Emails Reveal True Motive for Libya Intervention.” Foreign Policy Journal, Foreign Policy Journal, 28 Feb. 2018,

    This essay was written by a fellow student. You may use it as a guide or sample for writing your own paper, but remember to cite it correctly. Don’t submit it as your own as it will be considered plagiarism.

    Need custom essay sample written special for your assignment?

    Choose skilled expert on your subject and get original paper with free plagiarism report

    Order custom paper Without paying upfront

    Being Sold A Lie: War on Libya (1042 words). (2021, Dec 21). Retrieved from

    We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy

    Hi, my name is Amy 👋

    In case you can't find a relevant example, our professional writers are ready to help you write a unique paper. Just talk to our smart assistant Amy and she'll connect you with the best match.

    Get help with your paper