Access Millions of academic & study documents

Libyan War

Content type
User Generated
Subject
Social Science
Type
Homework
Showing Page:
1/5
Surname 1
Student’s name
Professors name
Course
Date
The War against Libya: The Legal and Media Case
The military intervention in Libya occurred in 2011 with the intention to implement the
United Nations Security Council resolution of 1973. The war was led by the north Atlantic
terrorist organization (NATO) to counteract the Libyan civil war. The outcomes of the war
include overthrow of the Gaddafi government and the victory of NATO. The war highly
publicized with different media providing different views on the war; while some publicist
condoned the NATO’s actions, some people condemned them. This paper will provide different
legal and media cases that were made against Libya and Gaddafi.
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya’s article “The Media War on Libya: Justifying War through
Lies and Fabrication” provides an insight on how the media distorted and wrong information
played a vital role in the encouragement of the invasion of North Africa. Nazemroaya affirms
that the media justified the Libyan war by providing a series of lies. According to this article, the
information provided about the war and the analysis of the said information was controversial.
For example, on the onset of the war, unarmed protestors broke into a government facility with
the aim of taking armors and firearms and the police counteracted by opening fires. Most
governments including the USA and Britain accused the act as being inhuman and questioned the
legitimacy of the act. However, according to revolutionaries, the state remarks are hypocritical.

Sign up to view the full document!

lock_open Sign Up
Showing Page:
2/5
Surname 2
Revolutionaries have stated that most states and soldiers open fire on civilians even when
unarmed when they try to attack a police compound with the intent of acquiring firearms.
According to Nazemroaya, the E.U and U.S applied different standards to Libya when compared
to other Arab dictatorship. For example, when violence erupted in Egypt, Bahrain, Tunisia and
other Arab countries, the EU and US called for restraints for the peaceful protestors rather than
the country’s regime; even in scenarios when the state’s military violated unarmed peaceful
protestors. On the other hand, when the Libyan military responded to protesters who were trying
to acquire weapons by opening fire, they were condemned. Furthermore, while Libya is
condemned and numerous sanctions have issued against them, other Arab countries undergoing
the same circumstances have been praised by the EU and US leaders (Nazemroaya, 1).
According to the article legal acrobatics, illegal war” by Bruce Ackerman, it is wrong
for the president of America to fail to seek for congressional approval for taking military action
after the NATO bombs fell on Libya as it is stipulated in the War Powers Act of 1973. The fact
that legal machinations have allowed President Obama to set war without the consent of the
congress has proved to be a troubling precedent since administrations in the future can wave war
for their own conveniences without any legislative balances and checks. The president followed
the law when he notified the congress of military involvement in Libya within 48 hours as it is
stated in the War Powers Act. However, although the congress did not approve his military
involvement in the country, he refused to halt the nation’s military engagement in Libya. His
white house counsel stated that regardless of the War Powers Act, the president has the legal
backing to continue his Libya involvement without legislative support for as long as possible.
Ackerman states that though the president is the same, the dynamics are still the same since
president Bush took the same action after the 9/11 terrorist attacks (Ackerman, 1).

Sign up to view the full document!

lock_open Sign Up
Showing Page:
3/5

Sign up to view the full document!

lock_open Sign Up
End of Preview - Want to read all 5 pages?
Access Now
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Surname 1 Student’s name Professor’s name Course Date The War against Libya: The Legal and Media Case The military intervention in Libya occurred in 2011 with the intention to implement the United Nations Security Council resolution of 1973. The war was led by the north Atlantic terrorist organization (NATO) to counteract the Libyan civil war. The outcomes of the war include overthrow of the Gaddafi government and the victory of NATO. The war highly publicized with different media providing different views on the war; while some publicist condoned the NATO’s actions, some people condemned them. This paper will provide different legal and media cases that were made against Libya and Gaddafi. Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya’s article “The Media War on Libya: Justifying War through Lies and Fabrication” provides an insight on how the media distorted and wrong information played a vital role in the encouragement of the invasion of North Africa. Nazemroaya affirms that the media justified the Libyan war by providing a series of lies. According to this article, the information provided about the war and the analysis of the said information was controversial. For example, on the onset of the war, unarmed protestors broke into a government facility with the aim of taking armors and firearms and the police counteracted by opening fires. Most governments including the USA and Britain accused the act as being inhuman and questioned the legitimacy of the act. However, according to re ...
Purchase document to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.
Studypool
4.7
Indeed
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4