Libya, The war no one understands.

Its a surrogate war. The old saying rings true on an internationl scale. 'Governments create criminals. Then they punish them.'

This 'dictator' if you will has been enabled by the same governments that are now warring with him. No sanctions, no warnings or chances to cool things off. Just bam. Die Fuhrer Die!!!!

It almost looks like another Balklands conflict. Not in the manner this started, but in the manner the UN has acted out. Airstriking the crap out of everything that looks like it would kill a civilian.I'm not hearing any news about collateral damage because this is a blitzkreig attack and there no time to talk about the innocent casualities.
I love how calls for peace are being disregarded. This is just another pull for control of oil and humanity. The damage will be weighed up when Gaddafi hangs but not before a "relief effort" invades the nation and cleans out any "pro-Gaddafi" terrorist.

Can't wait till they discover proof of Al-qaeda operating in the nation. But that will come after a false flag attack on the France or the UK.

There's a rule of thumb going around right now:

If you are an ally of the US in the middle east, you will be the enemy 20-30 years down the road. For example:

Bin Laden ---> CIA trained to fight the Russians out of Afghanistan
Saddam ----> he was sold weapons by the US to fight the Iranians
Gaddafi ----> After accepting responsibility for the Lockerbie bombing, economic alliances were made between US and Lybia

And the list goes on and on...

In other words, don't get involved with the US... They will find a way to get to you in the long run...

Meanwhile

Darfour, Somalia, and other countries are going through hell which they should be stopping but they are ignored for economical and political reasons... Mostly because they are not oil producing countries...

Magnum

A blind eye is turned in when Israel does things like: bombs civilians in Gaza or invades Lebanon. Blind eyes are turned to many other issues besides this one. You are right to be concerned with this recent action, it is truly an unmistakable power grab. A game of chess...

reply to post by spearhead


Curious as to why you assumed otherwise. History and recent events all point to what you mention, so why are you or indicating that you have been caught off guard. Does the fact that i am typing the obvious seem odd ? , it shouldnt, since those who are aware know exactly how the majority will react and obviously pose no threat.

reply to post by tristar


Perhaps, instead of being so blahzay about the whole issue, you would voice your concern and your opinion.

I'd rather see that than, "You knew it was coming, you know its how they role. So just role with it...".

Originally posted by spearhead
reply to post by tristar

 

Perhaps, instead of being so blahzay about the whole issue, you would voice your concern and your opinion.

I'd rather see that than, "You knew it was coming, you know its how they role. So just role with it...".

Well i am who i am, they decided to play ball, so its more or less...how many strikes before your taken off the field.

The world still runs on diesel. When raw materials are mined, planted or harvested, diesel powers the heavy equipment responsible for the work. The huge freighters crossing the ocean to deliver our cheap foreign goods are powered by diesel. The trains and big rigs that haul the product from port to store also move on diesel.

Libya produces some of the worlds best crude which in turns produces the worlds best Diesel fuel. Compared to Saudi crude you would need twice as much to produce the same as Libya. Not all crude in the world is the same. Just like coal you get different grades that can only be used for certain products.

No matter how much we try to change to alternative fuels we will still need diesel to power our large machines. Batteries will never have the power to do the same job.

This a good reason to be at war with Libya. Libya had the ability to strangle the worlds trade buy limiting its oil production.

People forget how much we need diesel today.

Originally posted by greenfruit
The world still runs on diesel. When raw materials are mined, planted or harvested, diesel powers the heavy equipment responsible for the work. The huge freighters crossing the ocean to deliver our cheap foreign goods are powered by diesel. The trains and big rigs that haul the product from port to store also move on diesel.

Libya produces some of the worlds best crude which in turns produces the worlds best Diesel fuel. Compared to Saudi crude you would need twice as much to produce the same as Libya. Not all crude in the world is he same. Just like coal you get different grades that can only be used for certain products.

No matter how much we try to change to alternative fuels we will still need diesel to power our large machines. Batteries will never have the power to do the same job.

This is as any a good reason to be at war with Libya.

Well said,

Deeply apologize the one liner but certain things are often best said with little or no comments.

Originally posted by greenfruit
No matter how much we try to change to alternative fuels we will still need diesel to power our large machines. Batteries will never have the power to do the same job.

This a good reason to be at war with Libya. Libya had the ability to strangle the worlds trade buy limiting its oil production.

Pardon my naiveté but I don't think that's a good enough reason. Certainly not almost forty years after the first oil crisis when the world realized we needed to pursue alternative energy sources and decouple from the despots and fanaticals who control oil.

Instead of pursuing a rational, self-sustaining energy policy, we quietly funded these regimes and removed all barriers against oil companies subverting our national interests in pursuit of profit. Their checks are more powerful than our votes when it comes to policy making - whether it's energy, diplomacy, the environment, worker's rights or consumer safety.

I was struck in Obama's Libya speech by his comment on self-determination

I want to be clear: the change in the region will not and cannot be imposed by the United States or any foreign power; ultimately, it will be driven by the people of the Arab World. It is their right and their responsibility to determine their own destiny.

I was stunned by both the hypocrisy and absurdity it. The U.S. has participated in denying the Libyan people self-determination for 30 years by funding Moammar Qaddafi. They've had an uneven playing field subsidized by oil companies and American interests who gambled that the devil they knew was better than the one they didn't know. So they paid him off and funded his lavish lifestyle and military might at the expense of his nation. To say now that we will commit assets in support of the Libyan people is laughable.

The only thing we're really committing to is buying time for a failed policy of supporting strong men who give us access to oil. At least that's what we'll do until we can decipher our next step, which is likely just another dictator or general regional chaos, whichever gets the oil pumps flowing easier.

That's part of why it feels so weird. Cognitively, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that a strategy of U.S. funded dictators or puppets didn't work in Iraq or in Afghanistan and so it's unlikely to work in Libya, especially as it hasn't for the last 30 years. Yet, they are going forward anyway, at break neck speed to avoid Western dissent and protest.

IMHO, this action in Libya is just more evidence that they care little about peace or what the people of the World think but only for profit and power.

I'm sure glad i'm an indivudal, who is ripe with lots of survival training and a can-do attitude - cause guess what folks... the POOP has started to hit the fan in an unorganized fashion. Entropy rules, and things are about to get really disorderly

I don't want things to get messy. I just want to see accountability. Unfortunately that accountability will come at the expense of our indiviual security.
Our conformity has allowed this abuse of peace annd basic human rights to go unchecked. Not in Libya, Iraq or Afghanistan, but here in the Australia, the US of A, the UK and the EU. The abuse and exploitation of third world resources has come to bite the hand that take from them. The hand of our governments.

Watch, whilst our governments put the responsibility back on the people of the nations.

You are correct OP

no war should ever be understood though.

reply to post by spearhead


I am not at all surprised at this I was expecting it. It is part of the agitate the heck out of them until they strike back.

See: Napolitano sets stage for False Flag Terrorist Attack


I document stage three in that thread.

This time we KNOW they are preparing a False flag to scare the public into accepting an even nastier and permanent version of the Patriot Act or as a start of WWIII. If you have any doubts that the US government would allow its own people to be killed, here are the historical facts showing that they have done so before and in exactly the same way to justify WAR. Days of Infamy and The War on Terrorism

The formula, as shown in those articles is:
The first stage is to aggravate, literally to goad the "enemy" until they had no choice but to strike back (sound familiar?)

Here is just one of the news stories about the USA aggravating the Muslims: US Diplomat Guilty of Murder: Pakistan Police Report and the update Us Caught in Big Lie

This snippet from that news story leads us to the second stage of the tried and true formula: The second prong of the strategy is to insulate.

Furthermore, the US government, according to the Guardian, induced major US news organizations to hide what they knew about Davis's real role from the American public. The paper reported that several US news organizations had also learned on their own that Davis is a spy, but then voluntarily withheld the information from the American public "at the request of the Obama administration," which preferred to stick to the fictional story line that Pakistan is holding an American "diplomat" in "violation of the Vienna Convention" on diplomatic immunity.

The second prong of the strategy is to insulate. Keep the victims (that's us) from getting the information needed to protect themselves. Dir. of Nat. Intel lies to Congress or adopts politically correct stance on Muslim Brotherhood and Arizona Governor Jan Brewer asks Obama's Admin. for help and is told the borders are more secure than ever before Meanwhile out of the other side of her mouth Napolitano is saying to Congress The terrorist threat to the U.S. homeland has continued to "evolve" and may now "be at its most heightened state" since the September 11, 2001, terror attacks pointing the finger at "homegrown terrorists" that is Americans. Gee, I wonder why they are stirring up Union and Teaparty protests.

The third and final stage is to Facilitate the attack: make it easy by offering no opposition. Napolitano sets stage for False Flag Terrorist Attack

I outline how Homeland UN-security removed hundreds of border patrol agents from the Mexican Border, derailed the border fence authorized by Congress in 2006 and then cancels the Border Fence Project in January of this year. Ms. Napolitano justified to lawmakers a 30 percent budget reduction for U.S. Customs and Border Protection. (March 17, 2010) Finally in June and July of this year three of the four border states are losing their National Guard troops Worse while Minuteman civilian patrols are keeping an eye out for illegal border crossers, the U.S. Border Patrol is keeping an eye out for Minutemen -- and telling the CORRUPT Mexican government where they are!


Here is the reality on the border:

Administration Will Cut Border Patrol Deployed on U.S-Mexico Border - September 24, 2009
Even though the Border Patrol now reports that almost 1,300 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border is not under effective control, and the Department of Justice says that vast stretches of the border are “easily breached,” and the Government Accountability Office has revealed that three persons “linked to terrorism” and 530 aliens from “special interest countries” were intercepted at Border Patrol checkpoints last year, the administration is nonetheless now planning to decrease the number of Border Patrol agents deployed on the U.S.-Mexico border....

....the Obama administration on May 7 said the Border Patrol “plans to move several hundred Agents from the Southwest Border...

Opening the borders wide to "invite attack" as the government did at Pearl Harbor in 1941, is the only explanation for this insanity.

Libya: the West and al-Qaeda on the same side

www.telegraph.co.uk...

Originally posted by AnotherYOU
You are correct OP

no war should ever be understood though.

Even the ones who pull the trigger don not understand war.
In Yemen, Bahrain, Egypt,Tunisia etc innocent civilians liky you and me were slaughtered. For what? Freedom....
Yet Libya as so an different event, that that is the country we must invade. Oil is that last things on our minds, fellow citizens. Nonetheless its legal what they do, according to de laws they appointed to themselves.

reply to post by spearhead

I love how calls for peace are being disregarded. This is just another pull for control of oil and humanity. The damage will be weighed up when Gaddafi hangs but not before a "relief effort" invades the nation and cleans out any "pro-Gaddafi" terrorist.

Calls for peace are being disregarded because they aren't genuine. And this is not at all about 'pro-Gaddafi' terrorists. The threads in this unfortunately real story are so tangled it's almost not believable even as a work of complete fiction.

Can't wait till they discover proof of Al-qaeda operating in the nation.

And they will. Count on it. It might not go by the name of Al-qaueda - but it will amount to the same thing in the end.

Will that be proof that Gaddafi was right all along - and that he was treated unfairly?

This isn't a TV show - and life is never that simple. People seem to want their situations to be very neat and tidy and easy to understand.

So, there will be that element in it after all, and the argument will be made that that is what this was all about all along.

Or, is it about oil?

Or is poor, poor Gaddafi just another unwitting pawn in the enormous game of Risk being played by 'TPTB'?

There are any number of people involved behind the scenes this - many of them unsavory types, and much of this is about control of anything from territory, to religion - to oil.

Unfortunately - there are a great many people who are innocent, decent human beings that stand to lose everything in their lives - including their lives - because of it. These people have nothing to do with any of the power plays, aggression - none of it - they just happen to live there. Gaddafi would just as soon see them die as anything else - he doesn't care about them - any more than any of the other players do.

I find it interesting that the argument is repeatedly made that America - Europe - the West - cares nothing for the actual people - they only care about their interests.

That in and of itself is a value judgment - and no one hears what they themselves are actually saying:

We have no business there - let them die. In our opinion - we would rather see us do nothing because our cause is not honest or just.

So, a people that have been living under a brutal dictator - that the West has largely ignored unless he happens to do something obvious - are in fact just as expendable to the non-involvement crowd as they are to 'TPTB'

The people who benefited from this military 'invasion' (which - it is not - at least, not yet) are not only the innocent victims of a monster over which they had no control - the new monsters have also benefited.

Libya, unfortunately, may have to face yet another, newer monster. Or monsters - depending on who is looking and who is keeping count.

Life is messy - isn't it?

So, I have to ask - is Qaddafi an unwitting, innocent victim - or has he brutalized his own people for the past 40 years? Interesting question - does anyone care really - if it doesn't fit their theory about this entire event?

Would he have slaughtered thousands without mercy? There are more than a few people who know that he would.

There are no clean hands here - it's not possible.

My personal opinion, for what it's worth, is that we aren't psychic. There's no way to know what might have happened if we hadn't gone in. People are right to fear another Iraq (along with plenty of other mistakes and outright crimes that are part of our history alone). The truth is seldom clear at the moment and we have more often than not found that we were lied to after the smoke has cleared. Not that the smoke ever really clears.

It's not over yet, and who knows what will happen next. I for one don't want to rationalize a bad situation to make it look better than it is - but what other choice is there?

The only other choice would have been to hang them all out to dry - because of how it looks based on past events. It's not a popularity contest and this isn't high school - many thousands of lives have quite probably been saved. Even if they were saved for the wrong reasons - they were saved.

Every cloud has a silver lining I guess

The fact that the UN has sanctioned the airstrikes/no fly zones shows that gaddafi's time is up. He overplayed his hand, outlived any usefullness and pissed off the world powers. The oil supply is the primary concern, not jsut for the US. That is why the UN is involved. Attacking civilians only made it plattable for the US and others to join in because now you have a humanitarian position that allows you to protect claim to resources.

Russia, China and the rest of the security ocuncil need the availability of oil markets. Hence why they are so obessessed with the demonstrations within these countries. The conflicts are shutting down the oil markets. Not only libya but yemen and Egyptian demonstrations have as well.

The late US response has a couple factors:
1: The US needed to wait for the Arab League to step up before they made their move due to PR reasons. They also needed the UN's backing for similar reasons.
2:We are already fight two wars over there already and have too much money already sunk into those conflicts

reply to post by cypruswolf


So essentially, the U.S. and the U.N. will intervene for "humanitarian" reasons when a country has oil or other corporate interests but not if they are dirt poor, say like many other African nations who have deplorable human rights violations such as Somalia, Rwanda, Angola, etc., and the list could go on....


reply to post by Spiramirabilis


It is messy, to say the least. The U.S. can't even commit to saying we want to get rid of Moammar Qaddafi. I mean really - WTH!? If nothing else, let's agree to that or the whole endeavor is pointless and no one will have achieved anything. Right?

reply to post by kosmicjack

It is messy, to say the least. The U.S. can't even commit to saying we want to get rid of Moammar Qaddafi. I mean really - WTH!? If nothing else, let's agree to that or the whole endeavor is pointless and no one will have achieved anything. Right?

:-)

seriously - WTH?

It's pretty easy to see that most of the world agrees about Qaddafi's 'sell-ability'

You're right - it's not exactly politically incorrect saying he's got to go. But, I do understand why most people want to steer clear of anything that looks like hands on regime change these days - even when the regime clearly needs to change.

What's telling is the list of countries or leaders that actually get behind him - if even only just barely

Looking in the mirror is not always fun - those countries are about to deal with some home grown issues of their own

So: good luck with all that you guys

Lets see. . . .
Korea wa a "conflict"
Vietnam was a "police action"
Libya can be an "issue"

Lord help us all!

Though if you read my thread, it may explain why we are there. . .
www.abovetopsecret.com...