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.

 

Why is President Obama sending 12, 000 U.S. troops to Libya?

page: 10
21
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
Apparently this no joke everyone from facebook people in Libya reporting it.
heres my thread on it
Source

#US " #peacekeeping " ground invasion troops, which arrived 1h ago to #Libya already setting up mobile camps & equipment around #oil refinery


Do you honestly think that the Russians that were being hosted on the USS Whidbey Island were asking about the 12,000 troops on the island? The story is as bogus as the claim that the Russian warship Admiral Chabenenko detected the torpedo from the Iranian sub that sunk the Italian passenger liner. As per usual it takes on a life of its own and gullible people fall for it.

Whidbey Island, 22nd MEU Conclude Port Visit in Malta

www.navy.mil...


The reception honored dignitaries from Malta, as well as from Russia and France. They met with crew members during the reception, and enjoy a guided tour of the ship following the meal.




posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   
PressTV reports that the troops have already entered Libya, they have been deployed in Derna.



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 10:50 PM
link   
PressTV article

Yup, PressTV is reporting news reported by another source. Funny how Western mainstream media isn't reporting this, while some posters on ATS have already pounced on the PressTV article for being a "hoax".


+8 more 
posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 11:25 PM
link   
Can anyone confirm that Asharq Alawsat reported this. I don't see it on their webpage.
www.asharq-e.com...
www.aawsat.com...



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 


Sudden Death Dimitri....

We'll see one way or the other if this is true. Soon enough.

Right?

Now what will you say if it is proven that PressTV took a bogus story and ran with it?



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 



It's an opinion piece not fact. Either way. I said it before and I'll say it again. NO US boots on the ground in Libya. I'll wait until we get some corroborating facts to back up this "Story"


I'm not holding my breath.
edit on 15-1-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



I actually saw a picture of a friend's friend on myspace, and he was in the military sitting on a stone wall in uniform in full gear with his rifle in the desert. On the photo caption, it said "I just got to Libya, I'm safe folks, hope to be home soon"

I can't find the guys profile again, but he was in Libya.
edit on 21/1/12 by xstealth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by xstealth
 



I know this is a conspiracy site and all but...

In the meantime I'll remain skeptical. I'm sorry, I'm getting too old to rely on hearsay about a possible myspace pic that we have no way of confirming...



I appreciate the feedback though.

edit on 22-1-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by xstealth
 



I know this is a conspiracy site and all but...

In the meantime I'll remain skeptical. I'm sorry, I'm getting too old to rely on hearsay about a possible facebook pic that we have no way of confirming...



I appreciate the feedback though.



I'd be a little more skeptical of the government when they say we aren't there.

We just can't believe anything they say anymore, we should probably just believe the opposite ad that would really go along with the track record of history.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   
If this is true that would be the 3rd, no 4th, 5th maybe...heck I lost track of all the lies this administration tells.

quote: No boots on the ground!



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by xstealth
 


If this story is true they will first allow a discussion to take place, then they will spread continuous justification for such an occupying force in Libya, then later they will admit it and then say so what?

Like they did in Libya, first they said no ground forces, then discussion spread, then continuous justification for those ground forces, now BBC saying there was ground forces, so what?



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 12:48 AM
link   
12,000

There's that number again. In light of the dubious credibility of the Malta claim, without something a little more substantial to back it up, I'm skeptical of this one as well.

Considering PressTV's spotty track record and this_is_who_we_are's apt observation of the notable lack of a story about this on the Asharq Alawsat website (the English version, at least) at the time of this writing -- the people who supposedly originated this story (and we can be reasonably sure they would be headlining a story this big if they were reporting it), there is little reason to believe PressTV's claims are true.

Unfortunately, most if not all news of this kind seems to originate from vague, questionable sources and then gets bounced around in the Internet echo chamber by those who want to believe it's true, further diluting its credibility.

That doesn't mean U.S. troops aren't deploying to Libya. They might very well be, even as we speak. If they are, however, there are probably enough people in Libya with video cameras and Internet access to make sure word gets out -- with evidence to back it up.

Heck, if Asharq Alawsat were, in fact, to actually run the story PressTV claims they're running, that would be a major improvement and worthy of a closer look.

Who knows? It's still early. 12,000 troops are hard to hide. Maybe some sort of confirmation will emerge in the next day or two.

But until something like that comes along, rumors make a poor substitute.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 01:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by xstealth
I'd be a little more skeptical of the government when they say we aren't there.


Well in this case it's a moot point.
They haven't said anything one way or the other on this story.


We just can't believe anything they say anymore, we should probably just believe the opposite ad that would really go along with the track record of history.


Agreed



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sharpenmycleats
If this is true that would be the 3rd, no 4th, 5th maybe...heck I lost track of all the lies this administration tells.

quote: No boots on the ground!


"No boots on the ground" was skewing the truth as it was said. Special forces (at least SAS and JTF2) and CIA were on the ground in Libya early on in the "revolution", aiding in assassinations, training and logistics.


SLAYER69-
Sudden Death Dimitri....

We'll see one way or the other if this is true. Soon enough.

Right?

Now what will you say if it is proven that PressTV took a bogus story and ran with it?


All I've done is put up the articles. I've never said that the story is completely true, but the sources are definitely not Western and I doubt that Western sources would promote news about troop deployments conducted in Libya in order to secure oil fields. What a PR disaster that would be for Obama; it would make him look like Bush and Iraq.

Frankly, I don't trust any news anymore. We live in an age where it is all biased and filtered through so many sources and rumors that the story is far from the reality. This is why I put emphasis on reporting from news sources from non-aligned news sources, because at least they have to gain by reporting real events that would discredit the west.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   
News Of The World


Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
[Frankly, I don't trust any news anymore. We live in an age where it is all biased and filtered through so many sources and rumors that the story is far from the reality. This is why I put emphasis on reporting from news sources from non-aligned news sources, because at least they have to gain by reporting real events that would discredit the west.

Amen to that, although I have yet to see anything even remotely resembling a "non-aligned news source". Everybody has an agenda, no matter what they might say, and it's always a good idea to keep that in mind.

The best approach I know of for separating fact from fiction is to compare news from as many different sources as possible, and regard all of them with skepticism at all times. Trust no one, suspect everyone, as it were.

Even doing that, it's a solid bet that what we can glean from all of it will still be incomplete, skewed, biased, filtered and, in far too many cases, just plain false. Such are the realities of an imperfect world.

Nonetheless, I still think it's worth looking for truth, however rare, exotic and unfashionable it may be, because when it does occasionally surface, it's always worth the hassle of finding it -- even though it may not be what we really wish was true. In fact, it rarely is.


But in the pursuit of truth, the more sources the better. Which is why, although I'm skeptical about the validity of these reports, I still appreciate your posting them, and wholeheartedly agree that it makes no sense to shoot the messenger if we disagree with them.

Far better to save our ammo for when it's really needed.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Majic
 


By "non-alligned", I mean it as a political term meaning not alligned with the West (Occident vs Orient perspective).

And yes you are right, every source is biased. For that matter, every individual perspective is biased too. That's just a fact when it comes to politics. When things heat up in the world, it is only nature for politically-minded people to draw their lines in the sand as ideologies and perceptions diffuse from the harmony of a peaceful world. Political thinking is competitive thinking, and trying to retain some neutral stance during times of tension will only lead to stagnation of your position.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Precision Alignment


Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
By "non-alligned", I mean it as a political term meaning not alligned with the West (Occident vs Orient perspective).

Ah, got it.

And when it comes to sources, I think we're very much on the same wavelength.



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 


Perhaps this is why 12,000 troops have been secretly positioned in Libya:

Egyptian Official: War with Israel, US in Three Months
www.abovetopsecret.com...
by alchemist2012
started on 2/21/2012 @ 11:40 AM



Egyptian Presidential Candidate Tawfiq Okasha declared last week that the Egyptian Army will engage in armed warfare against Israel, the United States and the European Union within three months.

The declaration, made in a segment translated into English by The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) on February 9...
www.israelnationalnews.com

edit on 2/21/2012 by this_is_who_we_are because: formatting



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
 

So far, this whole business of 12,000 troops in Malta/Libya seems to be more fiction than fact -- if there are any facts behind it at all.

Has anyone seen anything credible which has actually established 12,000 U.S. troops are in Libya?



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majic
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
 

So far, this whole business of 12,000 troops in Malta/Libya seems to be more fiction than fact -- if there are any facts behind it at all.

Has anyone seen anything credible which has actually established 12,000 U.S. troops are in Libya?





Nope. And its not like you could hide something like that.



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 02:34 PM
link   
US plans Syria invasion via Jordan with 20,000 soldiers
www.abovetopsecret.com...
by 727Sky
started on 4/20/2013 @ 09:05 PM

The OP:


Originally posted by 727Sky
presstvchannel.tumblr.com...


The US military is deploying more forces to Jordan as part of a plan to dispatch 20,000 more soldiers there in a bid to invade Syria under the pretext of securing the country’s chemical weapon arsenals.


The Pentagon is sending nearly 200 troops from the 1st Armored Division to establish a “small headquarters” near Jordan’s border with Syria and plan potential military operations, “including a rapid buildup of American forces if the White House decides intervention is necessary,” The Los Angeles Times reports on Thursday, citing ‘senior US officials





“As I sit here today, Senator, I do not see the introduction of military force would produce the outcome we seek,” Dempsey said. “I don’t think it should be left unaddressed, let me be clear about that. But the introduction of military power right now certainly has the possibility of making the situation worse.”


PressT.V. had this article with a date of April 18, 2013 and quoted the L.A.times as a referance source.


Hmm...



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join