Serious thread drift here!

Back on topic ... Gadaffi is talking about throwing open the national armory to anyone who supports him. I can only hope a lot of people will "support" him just as long as it takes to get a gun in their hands, then change their minds.

Kaddafi is done. Toast. Only remaining question is to how much damage he will do to everyone else on his way out. Amazing. Wikileaks never did that much damage. But made some so more angry.

The inevitable in Libya has been a foregone conclusion for about one week. More relevant. What's next where?

I think all children in Vatican City should rise up in rebellion against their sadomasochist masters. Since rebellion is in the air, the greatest victims also should be liberated from their abusers.

Rome is ripe for rebellion. On one side of town is a misogynist. On the other, a protector of pedophiles.

There is some talk that the troubles in Tunisia were warmed up a bit by a wikileaks revelation of a state department document detailing just how corrupt the buggers there were. Not the main factor, but fanned the flames a bit.

Gaddddaffffi (delete consonants to taste) might hold on a while through great brutality. A lot of other African and Middle eastern dictators would like to see it happen, to stop the momentum and scare the mobs. I hope you are right, though.

Heck, if we're speculating, do you think there is any chance this democratic movement might spread as far as the USA? ;)

This is desperation move. He is finished. Maybe he will put down the revolt with thugs, but then he have a country full of armed thugs.

My friend at the university has a saying "the truth will out".

Sooner or later you always get caught.

Right now Kaddafi has two choices, he can go into exile like Amin, the former Shah of Iran, etc., or he can go out like Hussein and Ceaușescu.

Right now it looks like Kaddafi and family are acting like they intend to be, quoting the Hitchiker's Guide, ' "a bunch of mindless jerks who were the first against the wall when the revolution came."

Yeah, I would say it fanned the flames. People were already discontent for quite a while, with the brutality and increasing poverty (the underlying factor) and the massive rise in food prices over the past couple of months, on top of stagnant and/or declining wages seems to have been the trigger.

Which I believe is being caused by financial speculation more than traditional supply/demand issues, but finding evidence either way has been difficult. Commodity speculation on food is technically illegal, unless you get a note from the Fed excusing you. The last time food and oil prices rose this high was in 2008, and that was definitely driven by speculation.

In other news, Gaddafi's mercenaries are apparently pulling down a cool $2000 per day on the job (400 times the average Libyan wage). It was $500/day up until about a week ago, which suggests he is under ever increasing pressure. It also suggests a massive declining curve in the supply of state violence. Which is pretty much a fancy way of saying "revolution".

By contrast, Mubarak was paying around $70 a day for his thugs. Given a year before, according to Reuters (when they were covering the sham 2010 Egyptian election) an entry level thug could pull down $140 a day for his work, this is quite unusual. The demand for violence was much higher, and the thugs are not so stupid as to accept offers of future side-deals in lieu of cash payment, not when the regime is up against the wall. So something very interesting happened there, but I'm not sure what.

And, just to add, it certainly was interesting timing that Libya decided to get violent when it did, since a lot of eyes were looking at the state of Bahrain. Bahrain, of course, has been nearly as violent, but as the world's fastest growing financial centre and with its strategic location in the middle of the Persian Gulf, is much more important to certain key interests in European and American capitols. Gaddafi was, of course, in recent years, also a clien-uh, firm ally in the War on Some Terror, but nowhere of near the importance of Bahrain, home of the Fifth Fleet, who would be the principal strike force against Iran in any war.

Tony Blair was giving advice to Gadaffi, incidentally. Given Blair's spirited defence of the autocratic Egyptian regime, one can only wonder what kind of "good advice" he was giving Libya's leader. Especially when the spiritual guru of New Labour, also had a rather cozy relationship with the man.

I'll be in the corner sobbing, if anybody needs me...

Good stuff Kaliayev, thank you.

Libya. Putting the LIB in liberation.

The Economist of 24 February 2011 provided best reasons for a Libyan uprising.

Basically, Libyan rebels are pushing for the capital now, but they fear that they have insufficient manpower and training to take Tripoli. Tanks surround the city of Zawiyah, which has been captured by rebels, but fortunately Libyan WMDs (such as mustard gas) have no viable delivery system.

The State Department has condemned the violence in the country. And is letting everyone know Hillary is off to Geneva, to do stuff. Rather her than me, Geneva is, for the most part, a horrible city, especially around the international quarter, near the airport.

The "Decent Liberals" who idolize Blair are very confused about everything going on in the Middle East and North Africa right now. It's very amusing. Their reliance on Neocon-funded, pro-dictatorship "think tanks" means they are now essentially parroting lines about the villainous Muslim Brotherhood and their insidious global jihadist network/Iranian proxies taking over in countries where there is rioting right now...which just so happens to be the regime line on many of these protests. Amazing, that.

Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton describe themselves as personal friends of Mubarak, and Blair of course famously holidayed in Sharm-el-Sheikh (where Mubarak is allegedly in a well timed coma right now). Blair and Third Wayists were taking money from the Gaddafi regime. Tunisia's dicator was hailed as a "progressive leader" in western capitals. It's all very cosy, isn't it?

They seemed to have regained some measure of self-respect by demanding the bombing of Libya, but that is really just a reflexive Decent pose when threatened by uncertainty: up with the war planes! Never mind that such planes would be flying from Italy, whose relationship with the Libyan dictator could best be described as "cosy" (or "wingman" if you are feeling ungenerous, as I am this morning). Or that they have a bad track record for predicting when foreign states will greet heavily armed liberators with cheering crowds and so on.

Anyway, I'm off to teach children maths, so no doubt something highly exciting and interesting will happen in the next few hours, which I will miss.

Or not, since it's an inset day.

Col. Gadaffi appeared on Serbian TV today, according to the BBC. Which is interesting, since I heard a rumour that some of his mercenaries may have come from "eastern europe", an especially vague term but one which could indeed include the former Yugoslavia which, as I understand it, has some notable armed fighting groups who are not very popular with Interpol.

France is flying "humanitarian aid" to the rebel held areas.

A national council has been formed in Benghazi (sounds like someone has learnt from the 1848 revolutions).

Italy has "de facto" suspended its non-aggression treaty with Libya. I guess that means no more cruising for chicks by Berlusconi and Gadaffi on their wild nights out (Putin is still free to be Silvio's wingman though).

Man, I'd love to go cruising with SleazySilvio! With MadBadVlad along in case of trouble. You'd be sure of an awesome night.