libya: UN refuses to take lead...so who will.....?

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:02 PM
link   
i wrote this as i want to make people aware of what is happening...if you dont know already!

ok...the attacks on libya...are being led by namely the US and France.

france and the US are having their own little sqabbles, namely over the enivitable `prizes` of war.

though as it is a UN mandate that the US and france are upholding, it would be inconceivable for the world to sit back and let these two dictate libyas future.

now the UN has rifts internally over this `attack` namely from the germans and turkey.
turkey say: " internal issues of a country is none elses concern"
and germany refuse to be made puppets by zionists...again...also moneywise..they dont want to destroy business ties, in this manner!

both germany and turkey are taking the lead from the arab league...who thought a no-fly zone meant a no fly zone...naive hey!

as the UN are stalling taking control, the US are recomending an alternative body to take the lead...i will list three bodies, you can choose who shall lead:

1) the African Union
2) the Arab League
3) or wait..halt attacks untill the UN lead this..legally

now guess who the US are trying to use as an alternative to the UN??.....NATO...the North atlantic Treaty organisation....cmon WTF!...this isnt N.atlantic..its N. Africa (in case they didnt do geography in schoo)l

the excuse is that all of the NATO countries bar germany are already involved...i dont like this controlled argument where they pretend one of the allies disagrees....like france disagreed attacking iraq but i guess their troops didnt get that memo.

NATO is not an alternative to the UN....it like getting and force made up of asain countries, going to save UTAH.

my main concern is:

it will be NATO vs LIBYA....this only means one thing.....LIBYA WILL ENLIST MANY ALLIES FROM THIS MOVE...including a split egypt, turkey, syria, lebanon, algeris, morrocco....even countries that depend on the US like saudi and jordan will not like this.

if they try to hide behind NATO....It could be a very bad move in the long run of this odessey. (see what i did there:lol


has anyone else noticed that this could be very big if NATO take control
edit on 22-3-2011 by thePharaoh because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:13 PM
link   
Someone here had a thread recently attempting to point out the insanity of a standing u.n.security force by advocating for it.
Touche' Sir here's the proof you were looking for. I remember during the Iran hostage crisis they kept playing Nostradamus stuff on t.v. describing the "Antichrist" or catalyst for ww III as a "star" rising coming from the middle east ( we all thought t it was the Iranian "ayatollah khomeini"because of the current events at the time..
perhaps Nostradamus will have the last laugh after all
edit on 22-3-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by 46ACE
Someone here had a thread recently attempting to point out the insanity of a standing u.n.security force by advocating for it.
Touche' Sir here's the proof you were looking for. I remember during the Iran hostage crisis they kept playing Nostradamus stuff on t.v. describing the "Antichrist" or catalyst for ww III as a "star" rising coming from the middle east ( we all thought t it was the Iranian "ayatollah khomeini"because of the current events at the time..
perhaps Nostradamus will have the last laugh after all
edit on 22-3-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)


iran hostage crisis.....thats the night i was born....

im really intrigued....what did the tv say about nostradaumus, any links??
edit on 23-3-2011 by thePharaoh because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:21 PM
link   
Sigh.
Everyone needs to remember that it was France and the UK who were the ones who were first itching to go into Libya with guns blazing-not the U.S.
So I say let France and England handle it since they are so eager.
But the U.S. will somehow (as always) will be made out to be the "bad guys".....
edit on 22-3-2011 by Skippy1138 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 12:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skippy1138
Sigh.
Everyone needs to remember that it was France and the UK who were the ones who were first itching to go into Libya with guns blazing-not the U.S.
So I say let France and England handle it since they are so eager.
But the U.S. will somehow (as always) will be made out to be the "bad guys".....
edit on 22-3-2011 by Skippy1138 because: (no reason given)


lol....



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 12:16 AM
link   
First party to form a gov't to get voted in democratically...?



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 12:52 AM
link   
England and France with the Revolutionary elements within Libya will take over by the 2nd or 3rd week of April.



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 03:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
England and France with the Revolutionary elements within Libya will take over by the 2nd or 3rd week of April.


i dont think it would be as smooth sailing as that.....lets see how it pans out



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 03:31 AM
link   
If any organisation has the right to step in the it is the African Union, which is demanding an end to the Military strikes allafrica.com... . It is the role of the African Union to be involved in political issues such as confronting undemocratic regimes. en.wikipedia.org... . There has been a lot of tension in the Ivory Coast recently as its leader refused to leave after an election. Their where many reports of France wanting to send in its military to take him out, which would have resulted in a civil war. The African Union has been working on this situation and is making progress towards a peaceful resolution.

If the west is interested in promoting peace in the region then it should be supporting the African Union. If the west just wants another crusade then it is on the right path. Military boredom, oil and other plunder, political control, destabilising the region and promoting global conflict are the main reasons I see for this invasion.

Gaddafi is also a promoter and supporter of the introduction for a standard, gold backed dinar currency for the African and Arab region. Just looked what happened to JFK when he tried to get rid of the fiat.



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by thePharaoh

Originally posted by 46ACE
Someone here had a thread recently attempting to point out the insanity of a standing u.n.security force by advocating for it.
Touche' Sir here's the proof you were looking for. I remember during the Iran hostage crisis they kept playing Nostradamus stuff on t.v. describing the "Antichrist" or catalyst for ww III as a "star" rising coming from the middle east ( we all thought t it was the Iranian "ayatollah khomeini"because of the current events at the time..
perhaps Nostradamus will have the last laugh after all
edit on 22-3-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)


iran hostage crisis.....thats the night i was born....

im really intrigued....what did the tv say about nostradaumus, any links??
edit on 23-3-2011 by thePharaoh because: (no reason given)


No I think he meant the Antichrist would be born on that day
Secondline



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 03:50 AM
link   
and gadaffi has a pile of gold
CRUSADE!





top topics
 
0

log in

join