It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NATO, China, Russia reach informal consensus: Gadhafi must go

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 07:46 PM
link   

NATO, China, Russia reach informal consensus: Gadhafi must go


www.worldtribune.com

Diplomats and analysts said the Western alliance, led by Britain, France, Germany and the United States, have informally agreed that Gadhafi should be quietly but quickly removed from power in Libya. They said special forces from several NATO countries have begun helping the Libyan opposition to destroy regime assets.
The NATO position has been discussed with China and Russia, diplomatic sources said. They said Beijing and Moscow have also determined that Gadhafi must not be allowed to remain in power.

(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 07:46 PM
link   
Well here ya go. Looks like all the big boys are in agreement when it comes to energy supplies being threatened. Nothing unites the big powers like energy LOL. So i guess all those folks who like to hold up Russia and China as defenders of the little countries are wrong on this one. Looks like Libya will be "fereed" in the name of OIL. Thats right OIL. Where are all the China and Russia apologists now?

www.worldtribune.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Given that Libya exports about 11% of her oil to china, what exactly would you expect ?
China needs the oil for her growing economy and to eventually become overlords for the US.


The problem here is that there appears to be a groundswell of support for Gadhafi. There seems to be people not wanting US intervention for obvious reasons. This could be a propaganda campaign but the fact remains. If that is the case and support continues to grow it could complicate matters exponentially.

brill
edit on 3-3-2011 by brill because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


I'm not sure how much weight should be put on the issue of oil, at least for the United States. Libya isn't one of our five leading suppliers, and a NY Times article says this:


But few oil experts are surprised that the unrest has so unnerved the market. The world is thirsty for oil, and supply and demand are in delicate balance. There is little room for more disruptions in supplies. Indeed, spare capacity — essentially that amount of extra oil that OPEC members are able to produce in a pinch — is now about five million barrels a day. That is about 6 percent of the oil that the world consumes every day. That cushion is greater than in 2008, when it equaled about 2 percent of daily consumption, but it remains worryingly thin. And that is not even taking into account the loss of about one million barrels a day exported from Libya.


Oil might be a small part of it, but my guess is that Qadaffi (SP?) is clearly going down the tubes and everyone wants to give him a final push to appear to be on the right side of history and avoid later problems with Africa.

As I said, just my guess.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 08:05 PM
link   
IMO keep NATO out of it. They would not be thanked for liberating the population and the people they go to help would turn on them just like Iraq and Afghanistan. Lesson learned here, stay well away. If the Russians and Chinese want to get involved, them i say let them.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


and how much of a trust we should put we into worldtribune.com ?



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


If you think Russia is in this for the oil, then you're mistaken.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   
Just to add. A recent poll of 1000 americans indicated that 67% wanted to avoid conflict and stay out of the picture. Yah I know stats like this blow but I truly believe that a strong majority do not wish further military involvement outside of the iraq and afghanistan debacles. Problem is the US needs cheap oil to keep whats left of her economy afloat. Now the Saudi's are declaring days of protest in March and that is a massive poopstorm if the revolution gears up in that country. 5/gallon gas will be a bargain.

src

brill



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 08:47 PM
link   
"The NATO position has been discussed with China and Russia, diplomatic sources said. They said Beijing and Moscow have also determined that Gadhafi must not be allowed to remain in power. "

Diplomatic sources said huh?.. isn't that CIA dude in Pakistan Raymond Davis a "diplomat"?.. obummer said so anyway.

Let me get this straight.. unnamed "Diplomats and analysts" said a group called "the Western alliance".. the "rank 10 Lord of the Rings Online kinship"??.. LMAO thewesternalliance.org "informally agreed" Gadhafi must go.

Wow.

The article goes on... "diplomatic sources said", a "Western diplomatic source" was quoted, "leading members have agreed", "a Western analyst close to the alliance said", "Analysts said", and some Russian dude, an "analyst" opined.. lol what an amalgamation of tripe.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 09:44 PM
link   
LOL. And that is different from YOUR news source why? OH...because "they" have names.



Originally posted by GovtFlu
"The NATO position has been discussed with China and Russia, diplomatic sources said. They said Beijing and Moscow have also determined that Gadhafi must not be allowed to remain in power. "

Diplomatic sources said huh?.. isn't that CIA dude in Pakistan Raymond Davis a "diplomat"?.. obummer said so anyway.

Let me get this straight.. unnamed "Diplomats and analysts" said a group called "the Western alliance".. the "rank 10 Lord of the Rings Online kinship"??.. LMAO thewesternalliance.org "informally agreed" Gadhafi must go.

Wow.

The article goes on... "diplomatic sources said", a "Western diplomatic source" was quoted, "leading members have agreed", "a Western analyst close to the alliance said", "Analysts said", and some Russian dude, an "analyst" opined.. lol what an amalgamation of tripe.



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 10:25 PM
link   
You know what I don't get? All we hear is how we have to "take action" in Libya. I saw something on CNN asking people to weigh in on "at what point" we should take action in Libya. To me, the question is "why?" Even if everything we hear about what's going on there is true, and I don't believe it is, so what? If the US had to jump in every time some two-bit dictator started killing his own people, we would need a military five times the size of what we have now. Does the MSM really think that people will believe that the US Government is getting involved for humanitarian reasons?

The sad fact is, the US is desparate. It is becomming increasingly obvious that our fiat currency is doomed to fail. Resources are the only true currency, and oil is king of resources right now. The US will use it's only true strength, its military, to control resources like oil; and it will use any excuse to use it. It's getting so bad that the US doesn't even bother to come up with plausible excuses to justify military force any more.

Anyone who has read a few of my posts knows that I try to be light-hearted here on ATS. I may make a joke of something, while still trying to make a point, because I feel that if I'm not so aggressive in trying to make a point, more people might listen. But in this case, I just want you to rely on your own intelligence and common sense. Ask yourself why the US is so dead set on using the military against Libya? With all the problems here and abroad, is this really something so important that we have to dedicate this amount of money, time, and lives for whatever we hope to gain? If so, what is it we hope to gain? Why do we need it so much?

If you can see the answers to those questions for yourself, then you probably know what you need to do to survive the next three decades. If you can't, well, that's where the First Law of Nature comes into play.
edit on 3-3-2011 by VictorVonDoom because: tequilla induced spelling



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 08:18 AM
link   
I havent seen where the US is dead-set on using force in Libya. In fact it appears they are doing next to nothing really.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join