factbat.com

David Gregory, following a Meet the Press interview with Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen, in a post-broadcast video, asks the all-important question; "what is the endgame in Libya?" (msnbc.com)

"We're sitting with our round table here, just off the air talking about Libya and its obviously a breaking story that continues to develop" Gregory said. Going on to reveal that what stood out to him during the interview "in speaking with Admiral Mullen, is that there was a reluctance about his defense of the politics," voicing his concerns along with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Mullen who, during deliberations on the Libya crisis, were cautious of implementing the no-fly zone with an act of war.

Gregory reports that Senator John Kerry said that it's not the mission to get rid of Qaddafi.

However, it is obvious that this is the endgame for President Barack Obama. And truthfully, who can argue with him? Qaddafi is no more a leader than he is a ten-year-old school girl. To those who would find some similarities between the two, bravo! But I digress.

Gregory then goes on to say "There's just a lot of questions here about how long this will go on ultimately, and what ultimately will be achieved. Further skepticism in the course of the round table, is that this is an injection of American power into a civil war in Libya, and how it's going to turn out, especially as the rest of the Middle East will. So, how much more to come".

First off, to address the actual timeline of the sea change in the Middle East is a less than amenable journey into the parameters of Universal forces, and thus the best answer is that what is occurring in the region is such that it is only necessary as a result of an excessive detour from the original course this species was expected to evolve upon and thus the correction will entail, not only a trajectory exponentially affected by the spherically cyclic nature of the cosmic realm as pertains to the nature of living things on this planet, but a compliance with the coordinate of time that is relevant to the spiraling negotiation of the original azimuth and attitude of the original vector point. That is the best that can be done there, for now. However, changes will occur swiftly in many requisite areas, as forces are complied with.

As far as the current engagement in Libya, and the question of just exactly what is the endgame. This has largely been made clear, and if not, then one should simply look to their better nature, and the United States Constitution which should be required reading for all American citizens. It most clearly teaches one the rigors of accountability and self respect.

The end game in Libya must certainly be the removal of Qaddafi from his position of "power", since he has no intention of actually honoring it with the realization that it is only a position of accountability. For crying out loud, the man will not even admit he is the leader. How can anyone expect him to do Libya justice.

The fact is that Qaddafi has proven, for the majority of his time as Libya's leader that he does not in any way recognize the accountability that it requires; both to the people of Libya and the rest of the world.

The U.N. Security Council resolution is simply a humanitarian effort that allows the international community to use "all necessary measures" to complete the objective of protecting the people of Libya from Qaddafi and his brutal, deranged and oppressive regimen.

Qaddafi recently threatened the people of Libya with "no mercy", as his paid military force prepared to march on Benghazi. And this declaration came on the heels of a protracted attack on the people that Qaddafi is entirely responsible for. It was his actions which created the crisis and instability in the country when he murdered unarmed citizens who were peacefully protesting his regime, simply demanding change be allowed to take its natural course.

Now, as the military strikes against Qaddafi - that he himself is also responsible for, by his refusal to respect human beings in this world, and by his continued threats - the people of Libya will be able to express their desires with more authority, and can eventually take the reigns as the playing field is leveled and Qaddafi is forced to answer to the people of his country, rather than stand in defiance against them or treat their concerns as inconsequential or illegitimate.

The fact is that Qaddafi is nothing more than a common criminal. He has never once shown any actual honor or wisdom. Furthermore, he is a weak minded fool who has only survived by employing savvy strategies and puissant plagiarisms meant to present a facade of leadership.

That the majority of the world was unable to engage him with intellectual debate that could defeat his ridiculous rhetoric, is just a natural progression of the unsustainable and faulty structures that have been so long believed to be acceptable means of social interaction.

Should the majority of politicians and diplomats be embarrassed that they could not effectively curtail the many apoplectic and deranged idioms Qaddafi employed as bait and switch tactics meant to harangue the world's leaders with confusing analogies that hid his criminality? Certainly. But, that is just the way it is, and the fact that embarrassment of this nature is a tremendously empowering mechanism of learning, and all people should learn to get used to it, because, while it is no picnic to experience, the fact is that once it is engaged honorably, it only happens a few times.

The logic and luminosity that evolves as a result is also a rather empowering and exfoliating natural proclivity that will have one soon laughing off the embarrassment. Buck-up, folks. It's not all that bad.

As far as the question of what to do with Qaddafi, that should be left up to the people of Libya, as long as it follows the guidelines of human rights and logic. There is no need to stoop to Qaddafi's level. Furthermore, excoriating him with respect and honor is the finest form of rehabilitation. Truly, none in this world actually seek revenge, this is a farce.

What humans are seeking when the fierce fires of fury and retaliation well up in their hearts, is legitimacy. A clear statement that say's "I am worthy, and you have no right to abuse me". The most effective means of expressing this is by indemnifying one's aggressor, and treating them with the respect they did not show to their victims.

Qaddafi would be best punished with a lengthy stay in an institution meant to rehabilitate him, and then given a job washing dishes in a local restaurant for the rest of his life.

The nations of the world must eventually come to realize that revenge is illogical and lethargic. Seeking retaliation (rather than recompense) is a formulae for denial that enables the criminal to win. Furthermore, it prevents true accessibility to the core of the objective, which is to grow and progress to a point that the criminal never evolves because their is no victim. An equative process that is likened to "beating them at their own game". If one owns the situation, and refuses to become a victim, then that "self-professed-owner" learns the proper lesson regardless of what occurs, and the criminal is then rendered powerless. But I digress.

As far as the fact that Qaddafi has been allowed to rule Libya for over 40 years, this was only possible because of failed policies which were deemed legitimate, regardless that they were both full of conflict of interest, and clear violations of basic human rights. Truly, how can a nation that ratified a Bill of Rights, Constitution, and Declaration of Independence ever support a dictator of any kind?

While it is certainly true that each nation in this world must be granted a sovereign status which is respected throughout the entire international community, the fact is that every nation bears a particular responsibility to the rest of the world, as pertains to its exports, both economical and social.

Every nation in the world has something to contribute, whether regionally or internationally. And since there are typically other nations which come to rely upon these contributions, maintaining a logical and respectful order of stability is essential. Primarily due to the fact that instability is a factor that can easily and quickly pervade an entire society to the point that borders are no match for its destructive effects. Far too much of the world's crises can propagate at amazing speed these days since it often is carried long the routes of trade between nations.

Furthermore, when speaking of stability, it must always be accomplished according to established laws which guarantee basic human rights and dignities, or the stability is simply a mirage that will eventually manifest in magnitude in accordance with the length of time it is allowed to evolve unchecked.

As stated in previous articles; the fact is that there is no need to ask "does the ends justify the means?" Since this is merely an indication that one is refusing to admit - or simply unable to comprehend - that the ends can only reflect the means. To ask if the ends justify the means is little more than a rhetorical riddle.

Moreover, to suggest that an illogical equation will manifest a logical result is ludicrous. However, this is what has happened time and again throughout human history. There have also been many instances where violence - or war - has been called a justifiable or logical means for creating a peaceful end. And truly, what must be understood it that war can certainly create peace.

The question is; just why does the world require peace? Peace is a lack of conflict, and humanity inexplicably requires conflict to survive. This in no way justifies aggression, since aggression is the absence of conflict.

The truth is that peace is merely a fallacy that has been fomented by those who would wish to silence the opposition rather than allow all sides equal share in the conversation, and subject themselves to possibly losing the debate.

This is due to the fact that once a power structure places itself on a level playing field, that power structure must comply with the logic that ensues, and therefore is required to perform or relinquish power.

Few of the established realms of "power" - whom quite obviously have abused their station of "accountability thus so - are confident that they could perform as well as those they would be competing with (and they would often be right), and therefore they would rather take their chances as a brutal and despotic ruler whom may be exiled, jailed or face capital punishment. Since this outcome typically allows them to remain in power for an extended period as the criminality is investigated and/or denied.