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.

 

West rushes to grab its Libya reward

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 06:00 AM
link   

It certainly didn't take them long. Literally one day after the gory images of Muammar Gaddafi being dragged, kicked and stabbed through the streets of Sirte were broadcast worldwide, the announcement was made. It seems it was what everyone was waiting for. Some newspapers even called it "the starting pistol".

Britain's new defence secretary, Philip Hammon, announced that British companies should "pack their suitcases" and head to Libya to snap up lucrative reconstruction contracts.

It all sounds disturbingly familiar. Think of the American companies streaming into Iraq to aid the "reconstruction effort" after the invasion. If there was any doubt, this modus operandi may soon define what seems no more than a new form of neocolonialism in the Middle East. American, Nato (or both) armies will destroy your country under the guise of ushering in democracy, and Western companies will assume the lion's share of contracts to build it up again.

And with Libya's National Transitional Council having already announced it would "reward" those countries that were in its corner during the "revolution", it's anyone's guess who will be the biggest of the war profiteers.


Source: mg.co.za...





The global elites have accomplished their latest objective with heavy bloodshed, thanks to the New World Order forces of NATO and the NTC rat 'rebel' militia brigades, fooled into fighting for freedom when in reality they have fought for Sharia law and the recolonization of Libya and freely plundering its wealth in return for reconstruction contractions and a Rothschild controlled fiat funny-money private central banking system that will financially enslave them to their eyeballs.

What do you think?




posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 06:18 AM
link   
reply to post by ironfalcon
 




head to Libya to snap up lucrative reconstruction contracts.
So they go in and destroy their infrastructure. Then Libya pays them to rebuild. Talk about absurd.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 06:22 AM
link   
reply to post by ironfalcon
 


It should be illegal to use resources or make money out of anything you helped to destroy......END OF WARS FOR PROFIT.

Made illegal by ...WE THE PEOPLE....
edit on 6-11-2011 by dontlaughthink because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by ironfalcon
 



What do you think?


Like most everything in life, it's about perspective. I think they destroyed their own infrastructure in their own uprising and may need help repairing it. People need jobs, and many will travel to where ever they can find work.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 06:55 AM
link   
reply to post by ladyinwaiting
 




I think they destroyed their own infrastructure in their own uprising and may need help repairing it
Yep, the hundreds of NATO airstrikes certainly had nothing to do with it.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 





Yep, the hundreds of NATO airstrikes certainly had nothing to do with it.


kinda goes without saying - which is why she didn't say it

so - without NATO ivolvement - better?

better outcome - happy shiny people living free all over Libya?

We'll never know I guess - but one thing is clear - nobody would be doing business with Libya in Libya

not the US, Not Europe, not China, not Russia...



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by ladyinwaiting
 


That made me chuckle lol, are you joking? From what I've observed it looks like war profiteering at its finest but I guess if the news tells you something it must be true.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Slickinfinity
 




From what I've observed it looks like war profiteering


do you think there is such a thing as a war without profit?



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 11:29 AM
link   
like a flock of buzzards.....


www.truthistreason.net...


The rebels in Libya are in the middle of a life or death civil war and Moammar Gadhafi is still in power and yet somehow the Libyan rebels have had enough time to establish a new Central Bank of Libya and form a new national oil company.


independentnewshub.com...


Associated press recently reported that Libya’s rebel militants have named a new “prime minister” this week. AP depicts the latest unelected Western proxy, Abdurrahim el-Keib, as a progressive academic who has spent decades in the United States teaching at Alabama University and leading the local Muslim community. Mentioned briefly as a “former employer,” however, is the Petroleum Institute, based in Abu Dhabi, Dubai and sponsored by British Petroleum (BP), Shell, France’s Total, the Japan Oil Development Company, and the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company. El-Keib is listed as a “Professor and Chairman” in his Petroleum Institute profile which also describes extensive research conducted by him sponsored by various US government agencies and departments over the years.


reminds me alot of Hamid Karzai, Afghanistans "elected" oil goon.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 01:30 PM
link   
Regardless of whether it was a rebel uprising, NATO airstrikes, or what have you...

Should the rest of the world just stand idly by now with a crumbling and destroyed infrastructure in Libya?
Reading some of these responses here, it seems that is what some people think. Do we applaud the rebels for fighting back and rising against their (former) ruler, and then say 'hey the devastation is your problem.'

Or do we blame them for beginning an uprising that left many portions of the country in ruins and again tell them its their problem.

Or should we have simply sat by and watched as the rebels fought against their ruler and done nothing to aid them? If the rest of the world had done that, would we even be having this discussion?



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 07:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Slickinfinity
 


As I said, it's all about perspective. NATO was there for a reason. They didn't start this fight. Consider the reasons they went in to begin with, if you will. I'm not saying I agree with the reason, but there were, nonetheless, reasons.

My ideas include our staying out of other people's wars altogether. People are going to have civil wars and coup's, especially in those countries with dictatorships.

But it's not what happened here. NATO did go in, and the infrastructure must be repaired. NATO did not singularly cause the destruction, as much as some of you would like to make that claim.



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join