French Magazine Reports That Western Militaries Have Begun Preparing For Direct Intervention In Syri

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 01:36 AM
link   
Is there such a thing as a "relatively small amount" of special forces ?!

Are they trying to convince us or themselves ?





posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter
 


So, in essence, you actually cannot dispute that the only country not to have an Islamist Government with MB ties is actually Libya, the only country to actually receive outside support from the west?

It's telling you skipped over the whole point of my post and end up proving it for me. You did not mention LIbya once in your reply and instead point out Tunisia has an Islamist (although moderate) government, cheers ;D!



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter
 


So, in essence, you actually cannot dispute that the only country not to have an Islamist Government with MB ties is actually Libya, the only country to actually receive outside support from the west?

It's telling you skipped over the whole point of my post and end up proving it for me. You did not mention LIbya once in your reply and instead point out Tunisia has an Islamist (although moderate) government, cheers ;D!






you actually cannot dispute that the only country not to have an Islamist Government with MB ties is actually Libya, the only country to actually receive outside support from the west?


In regrades to Libya and its Current re sacked new Government, the Current Libyan Government is a collation of two parties, one is an Islamist party, which has agreed with the ruling Libyan party to make a collation.

I have been following the news you know.




instead point out Tunisia has an Islamist (although moderate) government


There's that word again "moderate" just like how Turkey is moderate while still at the same time they are destroying freedom of the press, killing massacring the Kurds.

Oh i am quiet that word moderate is very moderate. If Tunisia was moderate, they wouldn't be protesting the government.
edit on 6-12-2012 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
It's telling you skipped over the whole point of my post and end up proving it for me. You did not mention LIbya once in your reply and instead point out Tunisia has an Islamist (although moderate) government, cheers ;D!


This sounds like it was typed by a child. Na na na naa!! I win!!

You want to talk about Libya? Libya is overrun with Al-Qaeda. Did you miss the part about Ambassador Stevens? The anti-Islam movie excuse is bunk, the raid was proven to be pre-planned. Al-Qaeda freely operates there. They even have convoys as they move around unharassed.



The black jihadi flags have been seen to be flying at the top of official buildings in Benghazi. What's more, American arms shipments to Libya have found their way into the hands of Al-Qaeda elsewhere, with devastating consequences for ordinary people.


Some of the arms since have been moved from Libya to militants with ties to Al Qaeda in Mali, where radical jihadi factions have imposed Shariah law in the northern part of the country, the former Defense Department official said.
frontpagemag.com...


The "government" may be moderate in name but it is evident it doesn't control the country. It can't even protect the U.S. consulate. Al-Qaeda can operate out in the open. Libya is a mess because of western interference. Ghaddafi was branded as a crazy conspiracy theorist when he spoke of the uprising being the work of predominantly Al-Qaeda associated Jihadi groups. Now we see he was correct.

There's far more but I do not have the time to waste on someone who cannot research for themselves.

According to you, Libya is a success story? What planet are you living on?
edit on 2012/12/6 by SteveR because: -



posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 09:33 AM
link   
Good post. Not only that, but according to their own reports, the US knew they were there in 2007, the date of the report. Will post the link when I find it.

They are saying they'll be using 'the Libya model' on Syria, which ironically means different things to different people. Backing terrorists to overthrow the govt is what it is, in both cases.

Man, they obviously think 'we' are #ing stupid, and obviously most of 'us' are...

edit to add:

This article here refers to the 2007 reports.

www.globalresearch.ca...


The report definitively exposed a regional network used by Al Qaeda to send fighters into Iraq to sow sectarian violence during the US occupation. This exact network can now be seen demonstrably at work with NATO support, overrunning Libya and now Syria. The terrorists in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi that US Ambassador Stevens was arming, is described by the 2007 West Point report as one of the most prolific and notorious Al Qaeda subsidiaries in the world.

….
The first report, “Al-Qa’ida’s Foreign Fighters in Iraq,” was extensively cited by historian and geopolitical analyst Dr. Webster Tarpley in March of 2011, exposing that NATO-backed “pro-democracy” rebels in Libya were in fact Al Qaeda’s Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), listed by the US State Department, United Nations, and the UK Home Office (page 5, .pdf) as an international terrorist organization.

The West Point report exposed Libya as a global epicenter for Al Qaeda training and recruitment, producing more fighters per capita than even Saudi Arabia, and producing more foreign fighters than any other nation that sent militants to Iraq, except Saudi Arabia itself.



Clearly, the US military and the US government were both well aware of the heavy Al Qaeda presence in Cyrenaica since as early as 2007. When violence flared up in 2011, it was clear to many geopolitical analysts that it was the result of Al Qaeda, not “pro-democracy protesters.” The US government, its allies, and a complicit Western press, willfully lied to the public, misrepresented its case to the United Nations and intervened in Libya on behalf of international terrorists, overthrowing a sovereign government, and granting an entire nation as a base of operations for the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG).

A similar scenario is now playing out in Syria, where the West, despite acknowledging the existence of Al Qaeda in Benghazi, Libya, is using these militants, and the exact same networks used to send fighters to Iraq, to flood into and overrun Syria. This, after these very same Libyan militants were implicated in an attack that left a US ambassador dead on September 11, 2012.


So, when Gaddafi said in the beginning it was terrorists, he was right; the US had themselves previously declared them to be terrorists, and still, they managed to twist it to make him look delusional.

Unbelievable.

edit on 7-12-2012 by curiouscanadian777 because: add comment



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
So, in essence, you actually cannot dispute that the only country not to have an Islamist Government with MB ties is actually Libya


No response? Did you miss the news that Libya is instituting Sharia Law? How is that not Islamist?

The Telegraph: Libya's liberation: interim ruler unveils more radical than expected plans for Islamic law



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter
 


I bet that number of NATO countries involved in Syria would only be the U.S. and U.K., everyone else likes to sit back and let us do all the work, and then point the finger and bitch about it when it all goes south.





top topics
 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join