As NATO and its US masters edge the US and EU closer to war with Russia over Ukraine, it might be appropriate to have a look at NATO's last "success" story.
Yesterday in Libya, where NATO bombs fell just over three years ago to "liberate" the people from Gaddafi, Islamist militias in Benghazi were under helicopter and warplane attack by a paramilitary force headed by former general Khalifa Haftar. The former general first emerged in Libya back in 2011, having left his long-time home base in the US state of Virginia where his ties to the CIA were an open secret.
Yesterday's attack by Haftar's paramilitary group was said to have been joined by some of the Libyan armed forces. At the same time, Libya's acting prime minister, Abdullah al-Thinni, condemned the attacks as "a coup against the revolution." The acting prime minister continued, "Air force units that bombed targets in Benghazi today did so illegally, without any orders from us."
Ironically, the Islamist militias under attack in Benghazi -- presumably at the behest of the Obama administration -- were not long ago instrumental to the US and NATO when they started the uprising against Gaddafi.
So who runs the government in Libya when some armed forces units attack "the revolution" in Benghazi at the command of a CIA-affiliated former general?
As the Interventions Watch blog points out, claims that Gaddafi was bombing Benghazi from the air provided the main trigger for the NATO attack on Libya. So what will western cheerleaders for that attack say when now a CIA-affiliated militia and parts of the country's armed forces are actually bombing Benghazi from the air?
If the 2011 NATO attack on Libya was such a success, why is chaos the only thing that reigns in Libya? And why are US military assets being moved from Spain to Sicily over fears of increasing unrest in Libya?
With this great "success" under its belt, we can hardly wait for NATO's next act: a war with Russia over Ukraine.