Russell's commentary on Libya was very interesting. I have for some time wondered why they're making such a deal about Libya.
There are plenty of other places to draw attention to in the world, they were not a lot problems there until the Muslim Brotherhood went in the there and decided to take over the country.
I've said this since the whole thing started, "I smell a rat". There has got to be some money trail or something involved with this.
Being Muslim and having lived in the Mideast several times, perhaps I can either shed some light or cause more questions.
The Muslim Brotherhood originated in the 1930s as a Charitable organization dedicated to using the then emerging oil wealth to assist impoverished Nations.
At about the Same time the al-Saud family began completing conquest of the various nations on the Arabian Peninsula. People have fast forgotten Saudi Arabia is a new nation and the Arabian Peninsula was composed of small independent Nations and City States.
Add to this the al-Saud Family conquered the entire peninsula and joined into partnership with the newly formed oil conglomerate Aramco. (Short for Arab American Oil Company)
Add more fuel the Saud Family was/is supporters of the Wahhabi movement which was formed by one of the Saud Family ancestors Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. It pretty much died out until the Al-Saud family came into power.
Jumping ahead by the 1980s every Mideastern oil country was headed up by a dictator or Monarch with lucrative oil contracts through Aramco. A strong supporter of US politicians.
Qadafi was a tyrant. also quite insane. but he did have the backing of Washington DC. But, during this era the Muslim Brotherhood became a political rather than charitable organization and became political advocates of Wahhabism.
To get the populace of Libya to seek freedom was an easy task. But, nobody was aware it was simply trading Qadaffi for Wahhabism. sadly because there are so many tyrants that came into control of the Oil Nations, it is now easy for the "Muslim Brotherhood" to encourage revolution. Only to replace it with Wahhabism.
Moral: Overthrowing a tyrant is not always the best path.
Second moral it is best if nations do not interfere with the economy or politics ot other Nations. As cruel as it sounds the best choice is let each sink or swim on it's own. Helping is not coming in and taking control of matters. Unless you live in a land you do not know who is friend or foe to the people having to live in it.