Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

White House denies regime change is part of Libya mission

page: 1
4

log in

join

posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:39 PM
link   

White House denies regime change is part of Libya mission


thehill.com

The White House strongly denied Tuesday that regime change is part of its mission in Libya, despite a statement earlier in the day that characterized the goal there as “installing a democratic system.”
Ben Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser, issued a statement acknowledging that President Obama would like to see a democratic government in Libya, but explained that the aim of the U.S. military’s intervention there is not to enact regime change.
“We're clarifying, as we’ve said repeatedly, that the effort of our military operation is not regime change, that as we actually sa
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:39 PM
link   
As the story continues, on one hand we have those who state we are there for oil. This story suggested a regime change, though they swear up and down that this invasion, was of the Humanitarian nature.
One is left to suggest that both agendas, are being played out. One, to establish a military stronghold in the region, and 2) to enact a regime change, ( I mean how else is Qaddalfi going to rekindle his power ), and option 3) which is a side note, OIL! Though Libya produces 1% of the global accumulation, but he who has the most valued commodity wins, does he not?

thehill.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


OMG!
Obama really?


The cats WAY The F--- out of the bag!



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


To much slayer.....you never cease to amaze me with your wit~



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:47 PM
link   

The White House strongly denied Tuesday that regime change is part of its mission in Libya, despite a statement earlier in the day that characterized the goal there as “installing a democratic system.”


That has to be one of the most contradictory things I have heard in a while.... How do you install a democratic system there without ousting the power? Wow....



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


That's my sentiments exactly! How do you off one person, or PC terms, remove someone, only to turn around and finance a knew dictator?



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:52 PM
link   
So what is the goal? WTF is going to happen when the US puts boots on the ground? And they will.

Going to City Hall? No.

Going to the oil fields? No.

Where ya going?



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:52 PM
link   
One figure I'd be interested to see is what percentage of Libyan oil is exported to the U.S. I know that the U.S. imports only 3% of their oil from Libya, but what is the percentages exported? I



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by CoincidenceX
 


Actually, Libya only produces about 1% oil globally. Ill have to find the article in my archives that states the actual numbers for ya, but regardless, its low level output.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   
1% Globally, 3% U.S and I appreciate you checking your archives.... I'm very anxious



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 07:34 PM
link   
I wonder if they'll use the excuse "Oh Saddams WMD's actually got shipped off to LIbya, that's why we couldn't find them in Iraq, so that's why we're in LIbya"

Stupid stupid response from White House if they're wanting to install a democracy then why aren't they pushing around the world in every nation with isn't democratic ?

No doubt they'll touch down in Libya kill alot of Jihads then foot the bill to the LIbyan's.

They're going to be getting something worthwhile out of this otherwise they would have left Libya to rot like the majority of non democratic countries littered around Africa

Democracy isn't about freedom it's about control



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 07:51 PM
link   
Yeah, not about regime change, eh? Is that why the US-led coalition has been bombing Gaddaffi's command structure? Without an effective command structure, the rebels gain an edge and the fighting will only intensify with more US backing.

The US may not plan to instill regime change in Libya, but they surely plan the rebels to do it. Sorta like how the US trained, funded and armed the contras to overthrow the socialist sardinistas.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 07:56 PM
link   
Maybe given the way regime change has worked out in Iraq and Afghanistan he figured that "Third time is the charm."?



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Is that why they targeted 2 tomahawks directly on his compound?



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Discotech
 


Well Said Discotech



Democracy isn't about freedom it's about control


Just look at the recent places where NATO Brought the so called Democracy, Bosnia is still hell heck there are more mosques then there are rebuild houses or buildings for that matter, breads cost like 3 dollars or more in bosnia.


Just look at eastern eupore and tell me what good did Democracy bring?
And as for the elections sadly i think the elections are always fixed, the elites are just toying with the people and voting booths.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


Obama and his administration are now truly and fully "on the run" as far as Libya and most other decisions go. They are now totally reactionary and on the defensive to anything that happens instead of using planning and leadership to try and anticipate situations and have the plans to deal with them already in place, ready to just be implemented.

A day in obama's life:

One doesn't have to try very hard to see obama feeling like he was taking a PR hit for not doing the no fly zone, so deciding to react to that and order one, but without any other plan. Then when asked for the plan, he reacts with the regime change plan. Until someone reminds him that the other muslims he's been sucking up to won't like the Americans attacking yet again another muslim country and his liberal left-wing base is pissed. Crap! What to do, what to do? Uh, OK, put out (another) new press release saying obama didn't really mean regime change when he said regime change, he was, uh, misquoted ... And Valerie (Jarrett), PLEASE have someone call the military and the secretary of state so we can all attempt to get on the same page (for the next couple of hours or so) until the latest plan/explanation collapses!

This is what U.S. foreign policy as devolved to become.

But this "change" is obviously not good in anyone's eyes.

In fact, this kind of foreign policy is very dangerous for the U.S. since other countries looking for any U.S. weakness will have had it gift wrapped and handed to them.

edit on 3/22/2011 by centurion1211 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 01:52 AM
link   
Is Washington on crack? That article makes no sense.



Rhodes said. “We support their aspirations, their democratic aspirations, and have stated that Gadhafi should go because he’s lost their confidence.”


The African Union is against these attacks allafrica.com... and this is more of an issue for them than the western alliance. So who is Gaddafi ? www.encyclopedia.com... . Some one who helped unite Africa, a divided Africa is much easier to dominate and control. Not about regime change? put that pipe down, that stuff is no good for you.





new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join