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.

 

If the West is to help the East; the East should pay the Gas.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 12:36 PM
link   
If the West is to help the East; the East should pay the Gas.

There are two basic ways, and two basic ways only, to conquer a nation; force of arms or by economic control.

At present, the West is spending much of it’s wealth in helping the Eastern revolutionary forces stabilize, organize and rid itself of the old political ways. At the same time, the East is attacking the West on the economic front, and preventing the West from helping it’s own Eastern political transition in a swifter fashion. IOW, the East is shooting itself in the foot by shooting the West in the foot. The East should recognize that it is hard for the West to put the hammer down when it is too expensive to put the hammer down. China is not helping at this point in time on the economic conquest of the western world with their dollar either. They should think globally a bit more. So should we all.

The East would be well advised to reduce the price of fuel to the West and thus fuel it’s own political aspirations.

I personally wish to contribute more to democracy, secularism and the individual freedoms that the East aspires to. If democracy is not about ending tyranny then it is worthless.

One of the founding notions of democracy, it seems to me; is that reciprocity is fair play.

In the case of fuel, it does not serve the East nor the West and the freedoms that both seek in terms of personal autonomy by having a high gas price.

Regards
DL




posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


You have posted this twice........

EDIT: In differenct sections....you like the stars and flags eh hahahaha
edit on 2-7-2011 by loves a conspiricy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 01:01 PM
link   
I think you've mistaken the words 'helping' and 'robbing'..



posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beavers
I think you've mistaken the words 'helping' and 'robbing'..


I do not define what I see and hear the East asking for.
one does not usually ask for help from robbers.

Regards
DL



posted on Jul, 11 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   
You do realize that we are "helping" the east just to push our own agendas, right? Who is to say that they even asked for our help? And if they did, how do you know that it isn't a ploy that a brilliant individual devised to screw the United States? There is a beautiful little country called Afghanistan that was going through their own struggles in the early to mid 80s against what were thought to be revolutionaries for good called the mujahideen. The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan called on the Soviet Union to assist in the civil war and quell the uprising. Charlie Wilson and the CIA saw an opening to defeat the Soviet Union and potentially bankrupt them by assisting the rebels by supplying them with American made arms and to shoot down the USSRs most vital instrument of war, the Mi-24 Hind attack helicopter. The majority of the US aid was handed to Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who later became a senior Taliban leader and supporter of al-Qaeda. You saw how history unfolded with those two factions.

Charlie Wilson

Not everyone who "asks" for help should automatically receive it. I'm a believer that the US should stay out of Middle Eastern conflicts at all costs. Us being there just rattles up the hornets nest even worse. The only reason for us being there is oil. It is the most important commodity on the planet, and whoever controls it, controls the world IMO. I doubt Obama or his policy makers or anyone else gives a s*it about the Libyan population or Syrians or anyone for that matter. Just as long as their actions promote American "interests", all is well.



posted on Jul, 11 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   
And they will NEVER pay for our gas! Why would they when they have us by the balls with it? That is certainly out of the question.
edit on 11-7-2011 by olliemc84 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by olliemc84
And they will NEVER pay for our gas! Why would they when they have us by the balls with it? That is certainly out of the question.
edit on 11-7-2011 by olliemc84 because: (no reason given)


You are living in the past. Move on.
Was Libya not asking for the U N's help?

Regards
DL
edit on 11-7-2011 by Greatest I am because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-7-2011 by Greatest I am because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2011 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


No, Libyans weren't asking for the U.N.'s help. The U.K and France proposed the no-fly zone and brought it to the U.N. for a vote. The U.S. didn't get involved until Qaddafi's forces were on the verge of taking Bengazhi, which is the economic epicenter for Libya, what the rebels were fighting for. China, Russia, India, Turkey, and Romania, choose not to vote on Resolution 1973 because it would risk business ventures with Qaddafi and his oil in the future.

And I live in the past because history usually repeats itself in one form or another.



posted on Jul, 13 2011 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by olliemc84
reply to post by Greatest I am
 


No, Libyans weren't asking for the U.N.'s help. The U.K and France proposed the no-fly zone and brought it to the U.N. for a vote. The U.S. didn't get involved until Qaddafi's forces were on the verge of taking Bengazhi, which is the economic epicenter for Libya, what the rebels were fighting for. China, Russia, India, Turkey, and Romania, choose not to vote on Resolution 1973 because it would risk business ventures with Qaddafi and his oil in the future.

And I live in the past because history usually repeats itself in one form or another.


I agree that we were slow to move, not with the rest.

Regards
DL



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join