Noam Chomsky is a leading linguist and philosopher. I think he is emeritus now at MIT. He is considered ‘father of modern linguistics’. But it is just a mere one reflection of his personality. He is more than an academician. He is dissident political activist, and harsh opponent of ‘political hypocrisy’. So you might have figured it out, yes, he hits hard on US foreign policy. I am planning to write an entire article on his academic accomplishments but this time I would like to refer his most recent article elaborating why and when US changes its bet on dictators. And as a test case to Chomsky’s theory you may input ‘Musharraf’ and see whether it resonates with the same frequency or not. His website: http://www.chomsky.info/bios.htm, caters for virtually all the information about this giant polymath. Let’s scrutinize it for the heaven’s sake.
Firs thing introduced as a corner stone in this analysis is the notion of ‘stable dictators’. And most rightly so, since dictators have the capacity of ruthlessness in the disguise of benevolence for his indigenous people. Democracy is a process that brings upon a change in people’s favor through evolution and selection. But it doesn’t come in a system where there are numerous back-doors from polling station to the counting table.
Another reason of US support to the dictatorship esp. in Arab countries is because of lack of trust of Arab’s on US and their animosity with Israel. First priority of US is to safeguard Israel’s interests, even if it has to veto (14 favor of it, only US is to veto) a resolution condemning Israel’s growing settlements in the disputed areas.
Although Chomsky didn’t elaborate through what means US is supporting Gaddafi. I don’t see any such thing, though it can be said in case of (disbanded Mubarak, King of Jordon, Monarch of Bahrain, and other top notch Arab dictators and so called ‘his eminences’)
You better read it but I have given you the crux of it.