The Libya thread

[Nordic]

Here ya go:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... f_oil.html

[8bitagent]

1. so everyone would be happier if, right now, Gaddafi's thugs were killing everyone in Benghazi?

2. does anyone really think the alliance forces are intentionally targeting civilians with the intention of killing them? You could do a better job of selecting targets? Gaddafi's entire loyal military ALREADY deserve to die for what they've already done. Lot's of them quit a long time ago.

3. I know, this can be fit into a pre-determined narrative, but just maybe Europe and the US decided to actually act, for once, weeks late, to help a pro-democracy revolution before it's exterminated? and bear in mind, this wouldn't seem to be happening at all if France and Brittan hadn't insisted, on principle, that they were not going to stand idly by and watch another mass slaughter unfold.

4. hopefully they get someone to blow Robert Mugabe's skull off soon. too.

fuck the Arab League. Since when do we give a shit what they say. Of course those two-faced jackals what it both ways.

Of course noone here would have liked to have seen Gadhafi's forces run rampage by air and ground on Benghazi, which would certainly have happened.

Many of us here are just noticing a pattern, and seeing the ultra duplicitous nature. Remember, the US/UK/Italy/etc were best pals with Gadhafi just a few months ago. Lots of weapons, oil, etc deals.
He's suppose to have blown up 270 Americans in 1988, yet was all the sudden totally ok in the eyes of the West.

Now Yemen's government has killed just as many or more protesters as did Gadhafi around the time of the calls for international action, AND Yemen is attacking rebels in the north. Saudi forces have been attacking Yemen rebels and Bahraini Sunni protesters. But noone is calling for action there. Actually, I can imagine there are those who would love to see a big US invasion of Yemen to "get neo al Qaeda".
(Wouldnt be surprised if theres a huge US terror attack with Anwar al Awalaki and Yemen as the fall guy)

Now if we're going to list off nations in the Muslim/North African/African/Middle East world who should be taken out, I'd say chiefly; Saudi Arabia. Also, Sudan and any other government engaged in genocide in Africa. But the globalist corporations make too much money from arms sales/lithium/copper/drugs/oil/etc to do that

[8bitagent]

Finally, 'sometimes end justifies the means' thinking was also trotted-out to rationalize NATO's bombing of Serbia & Kosova -- not only was the pretext of Serbian 'genocide' later found to be totally contrived, but it actually encouraged Kosovar & Albanian massacres of their citizens disguised to blame Serbian troops under Milosevic in order to engender greater 'world community' support for their seperatist movements AND led to far greater casualties than any committed by Yugoslavian troops.

As well as establishing a semi-autonomous Kosova that has since become the most corrupt unofficial capital and major fundy Muslim center of operations for organized crime and corruption in Europe that NATO STILL ineffectively occupies, leading to the ACTUAL persecution of, crimes and murders and reprisals against Serbians. IOW, results that are totally at-odds with initial justifications and that weren't anticipated beforehand.

Tho the US's airbase at Bondsteel which is Europe's largest was probably NOT unforeseen but rather a primary goal of US-led intervention.

I'm just surprised to see you regurgitating the same retreaded faux-liberal do-gooder psyops bait.

Just wanted to say, I agree with most of your points, but wanted to point out that the parapolitical view that the Serbian massacres were a hoax is not really correct. The degree, detail and severity of mass genocide by the Serbs, as well as mass rapes is very well documented. There were some infamous massacres attributed to the Serbs that in fact were carried out by Muslim forces, and some where no massacres had taken place at all. It seems clear that Pentagon linked proxies were arming and funding al Qaeda linked jihadists who ended up carrying out massacres. But from Albania, Macedonia and Bosnia to Croatia to later in Kosovo, I have no doubt the Serbs were chief among the ones carrying out the horror show.

I agree on two points: 1) the PTB(NATO, etc) did have their own agenda. I'm sure a lot of civilians too, died from US airstrieks

and 2) Kosovo(as well as Albania) is a MAJOR drug, arms(and sadly, sex slavery) route for the globalists.

Also, I agree that in Kosovo, Albania, and the former Yugoslavia there has been a post 90's sickening epidemic of "reprisal" attacks against innocent Serbs, just like the problem of white farmers killed in post apartheid South Africa

if the PTB had it's way, nothing would be happening at all except status quo.

If there is a PTB, they absolutely are chiefly behind the Libyan war. Now, I like the rebels. They seem likeable, relatable...but its like Animal House given a few tinker toy weapons and setting them off on a 600 mile desert stretch. I really can't call these "rebels", they're like young party kids, many of whom simply have no weapons or just pocket knives, some with WW2-60's era guns. No idea how to load or fire a weapon, no dicipline. Hell the only "leader" with experience(a Gadhafi defector) took the day off to hang at home. The US saying they're providing a path for the rebels to march to victory is a joke, because the rebels are a joke. If they magically get to Tripoli, they'll just be massacred, NATO will get involved there, and it'll be a civilian bloodbath.

[tazmic]

Turkey blocks no-fly zone role for NATO

France calls for non-NATO body to lead mission as Erdogan says Turkey will "never point a gun at the Libyan people".

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2011/03/2011322181336891487.html

[stefano]

It seems pretty hard for Americans to look at any story without instinctively relating it to themselves and assuming that a Yank is (must be! we're number one!) pulling the strings somewhere. This happens irrespective of what their attitude to their government is. This isn't Iraq. It's an operation issuing from an Arab League request and following on a UN resolution led by France, and it won't lead to a ground occupation without a new resolution. I support it, despite the hypocrisy of these countries taking the opposite action elsewhere. Russia's attitude of letting the uppity rabble get shot and shelled is worse. And the official line of Russia (and China and Turkey) is in this case far more evidently venal than the UN's. Not every enemy of the "West" is ipso facto a goodie. You might gain a lot more insight if you took the time to relate this to France's domestic politics where Sarkozy is being challenged from the right by Martine Le Pen, but as I say that'll take an outlay of time that an increasing number of posters on this forum is unwilling to put into anything. Really frustrating for someone who used to read a lot here to learn about politics, it is enough to make you forget your manners.

As for the devil BP - BP hasn't shipped a barrel from Libya, they were still exploring and had contracts in place with Libya Oil, so are losing money on this thing. As is Total, and Eni is taking the opposite line to Berlusconi on this. Enough to make you consider that you haven't got it all down pat?

FACTBOX-Libya oil production, outage, exports, customers

[Nordic]

Not every enemy of the "West" is ipso facto a goodie.

Well, see, that's the false equivalency I see from people who support the war.

It's a strawman, a big one.

Which means it's bullshit.

[Jeff]

US troops open fire on villagers as fighter jet crashes: report
March 23, 2011 - 7:43AM

US troops opened fire on villagers in an operation to rescue two jet fighter crew after their plane crashed in eastern Libya, according to a British report.

Channel 4 News is reporting at least six villagers were injured when US Marines came in with "all guns blazing" to extract the pilots.

London's Telegraph website is also reporting six "were believed to have been shot by a US helicopter during his rescue".

The Telegraph also says one of the downed crew was recued by troops on an Osprey "transformer" aircraft, which can turn from a plane into a helicopter.
United States Africa Command confirmed the US F-15E Strike Eagle fighter jet crashed and that two crew members were rescued.

But a US spokesman "100 per cent" denied any civilians were injured by US weapons fire in the rescue operation.

Reporter Lindsey Hilsum, at the crash, said the US helicopter came in and opened fire on Monday night, local time, as villagers were handing over one of the downed pilots to local rebel forces.

A man described as a military policeman, Omar Sayd, told the reporter: "We are disturbed about the shooting because if they had given us a chance we would have handed over both pilots."

In Benghazi, Hilsum interviewed one of the injured villagers, who was in a hospital bed. Local people had been giving a "party" for the crew when they were fired on.

...

http://www.smh.com.au/world/us-troops-o ... 1c5fz.html

[seemslikeadream]

Retired CIA Officer Ray McGovern: Libya Will Remain a Transnational Oil Fiefdom 1/2

[82_28]

It seems pretty hard for Americans to look at any story without instinctively relating it to themselves and assuming that a Yank is (must be! we're number one!) pulling the strings somewhere. This happens irrespective of what their attitude to their government is. This isn't Iraq. It's an operation issuing from an Arab League request and following on a UN resolution led by France, and it won't lead to a ground occupation without a new resolution. I support it, despite the hypocrisy of these countries taking the opposite action elsewhere. Russia's attitude of letting the uppity rabble get shot and shelled is worse. And the official line of Russia (and China and Turkey) is in this case far more evidently venal than the UN's. Not every enemy of the "West" is ipso facto a goodie. You might gain a lot more insight if you took the time to relate this to France's domestic politics where Sarkozy is being challenged from the right by Martine Le Pen, but as I say that'll take an outlay of time that an increasing number of posters on this forum is unwilling to put into anything. Really frustrating for someone who used to read a lot here to learn about politics, it is enough to make you forget your manners.

As for the devil BP - BP hasn't shipped a barrel from Libya, they were still exploring and had contracts in place with Libya Oil, so are losing money on this thing. As is Total, and Eni is taking the opposite line to Berlusconi on this. Enough to make you consider that you haven't got it all down pat?

FACTBOX-Libya oil production, outage, exports, customers

Well see, I think that money talks and it has very little to do with the US ever. However the US is the main node, the mother node and thus, as "news" is presented to us here, as the "global economic situation" is presented, it is presented in such a way that "our president" is always on the job. Believe me, it's getting real old. We're also told endlessly, I am assuming worldwide, just how important this "dollar" is. For sure, America is losing her old heft. But that which she still has, shall be enforced as she goes down. I am certainly no, at all, and in no uncertain terms a US firster, but when America decides to do it's hopefully final deed, there may not be a soul standing. Hoo-ah!

However, once it does decide to do this "final deed" it will be done to preserve the global empire, which, I believe, never ended.

[stefano]

Well, see, that's the false equivalency I see from people who support the war.

What false "equivalency"? What did I compare to what? False equivalence is an actual rhetorical fallacy, Nordic, not just a synonym for "bullshit". And it's not a strawman either - 'West bad, not-West good' was the implicit position of Keith Harmon Snow, who's been quoted on this elsewhere, and the explicit one of lupercal who supported fascists (on an anti-fascist board!) as soon as there was a movement protesting their rule.

You nicely proved my point on the Americanocentrism, though, with that "people who support the war" line. You seem to believe the war started on the weekend when whitey got involved. The war, I think you'll find, has been going for a few weeks and lots of people are dead. I very definitely do not support the war, and so I support a UN operation to impose a ceasefire. This is the UN doing what it was founded to do, and I'm for it. It might also result in an operation to kick Gbagbo out of Côte d'Ivoire, which I'd support as well.

[norton ash]

Americanocentrism is looming very large in American media right now. As though the no-fly and intervention were all Obama's decision, not UN or NATO, with beaucoup related Repub-Dem pundit bullshit flying back and forth.

Very different story in Canadian news, as Canadian forces are involved. It's a UN resolution involving many nations. Which didn't stop an old Canadian geezer at the pub on Saturday from looking at the TV screen and saying 'Looks like Obama got his war' , but he revealed himself pretty quickly as a FOX fan.

Ahh, shit, breaking news on a bus bomb in Jerusalem.

[Bruce Dazzling]

Full stories and lots of links at Cryptogon.

Libya’s Sea of Fresh Water Beneath the Desert, But Wait, There’s More!

March 23rd, 2011

We all know about the obvious oil component to what is happening in Libya, but that’s definitely not he full story. Here are some other factors to keep in mind as the U.S. leads a war in Libya for “humanitarian” reasons.

Saudi Aramco, Seas Beneath the Sands:

Libya is already pumping water from the Kufra Oasis, in its southeast corner, through a four-meter-diameter pipeline to its thirsty coastal cities. When fully operational, that project will pump some 3.6 million cubic meters per day. Still, at current extraction rates, the aquifer is not likely to be depleted for a thousand years.

Christian Science Monitor, Libya’s Qaddafi Taps ‘Fossil Water’ to Irrigate Desert Farms:

While many countries in the Middle East and North Africa bicker over water rights, Libya has tapped into an aquifer of ‘fossil water’ to change its topography – turning sand into soil. The 26-year, $20 billion project is nearly finished.

As I was reading about how bone dry (on the surface) and sunny Libya is, I thought, “Wow, sounds great for solar power.” And then I found this, from the Tripoli Post:

Moreover, since this report came out, there has been some encouraging progress in Libya on the practical front regarding the issue of solar power. In October this year (as reported by the Tripoli Post in issue 171) the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announced that it was sending a team of experts from its National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Colorado to collaborate on concentrating solar power in Libya. The DOE confirmed that Libya, with its low humidity and numerous sunny days, had the ideal conditions for the possible exploitation of solar power technologies.

This is indeed encouraging news. Libya has an area of almost 1.8 million square kilometres, 90% of which is hot sunny desert. Libya, through its proximity to mainland Europe, already supplies Europe energy by pipeline via the Greenstream pipeline – the longest sub-sea pipeline in the Mediterranean. If this new technology is realized, it would hopefully put Libya in the centre of any future post-oil era energy industry.

[Nordic]

Thanks for that, Bruce, I came here just now to post that very thing!

And Stefano, do you really think the U.N. exists somehow independently of the U.S.? I'd say it's a European conceit to think that the U.N. is anything but a complex puppet of the United States.

I wish it wasn't, but all evidence that I've seen convinces me that the U.N.is just for show, and the U.S. is president-for-life of THAT little club.

[Bruce Dazzling]

Thanks for that, Bruce, I came here just now to post that very thing!

And Stefano, do you really think the U.N. exists somehow independently of the U.S.? I'd say it's a European conceit to think that the U.N. is anything but a complex puppet of the United States.

I wish it wasn't, but all evidence that I've seen convinces me that the U.N.is just for show, and the U.S. is president-for-life of THAT little club.

Does anybody really think that the U.S. and the U.N. exist somehow independently of the corporate elite?

I'd say that all of this talk of nations is the problem. We're all focusing on the shadows projected onto the wall when we should be focusing on the projectors of the shadows.

"We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies, Mr. Beale. The world is a college of corporations, inexorably determined by the immutable bylaws of business."

We need to start thinking of the U.S. and its military as nothing more than the main Resource Procurement Branch of the corporate elite™, while the U.N. is nothing more than the P.R. agency hired to give it all a sparkly sheen, via its stamp of approval.

The no-fly-zone is like a big ad campaign with slogans and buzzwords like save the civilians! and humanitarianism!, and the U.N. approval is like the Good Housekeeping Seal letting everyone know that it's all perfectly acceptable.

[Nordic]