Real reasons for war in Lybia

[ProfTournesol 956]

Hi, for me the real reason for the current war in lybia are:

- Give that land to filo-faszist elements.

- Create a very big space for faszist radical islamists.

- Stablish a radical (faszist) islamist economic zone sharing some "free market values".

- Legitimate the western defence budget with all the previous.

- Keep the power, money and privileges on the hands of the powerfull ones.

That's sumarizing, the reasons that i see behind the current war in lybia, the protests in egyp, tunisia, yemen and siria. Create in the long term a kind of EU made out of filo-faszist islamic radical countrys with a "free market" based on their control and our depency of the oil to favour the people with power, their companys and their asociateds. Let's C ya

You should get yourself some Tunisian friends, like i do, and explain your point of view to them.

Edited June 18, 2011 by ProfTournesol

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

All i see is money being sent into a war machine, and nothing coming out.

It's alright, there's no shame in not knowing how the world works, those 20,000 Chinese oil infrastructure workers in Libya, who had been evacuated by their government don't matter, do they? Arabs as trade partners for the Chinese, supplying them with oil in exchange for domestic projects, like schools, roads et cetera - I suppose, the war doesn't have to do anything with it. Nope, we don't need to cut off Chinese from major energy supplies arteries, like Afghanistan, Pakistan - OH WAIT we have done it already.

La-la-la land, read up on some pre-WW II history on Japan-US relations.

[mrcash2009 0]

Well if we require war as a sole mechanism and backbone for the world to turn we are truly f***ked, oh look, we currently are.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Well if we require war as a sole mechanism and backbone for the world to turn we are truly f***ked, oh look, we currently are.

That's the point, war is required, until we get a monolithic one world gov't in place with every single human being tagged & traceable (not only for control, but safety & convenience).

Clinton 'sold' (gave away) U.S. multi-warhead ICBM tech to the Chinese in the 90s, for what purpose do you think? Do you peeps think that 1000 fucking million (1 billion) people striving to get a place under the sun in some shit-hole of a city in China, while looking up to their role-models of 300 million of alleged middle class Chinese is sustainable? LOL

[mrcash2009 0]

That's the point, war is required, until we get a monolithic one world gov't in place with every single human being tagged & traceable (not only for control, but safety & convenience).

If at some point in this thread somebody mentions anything to do with foil, PM me I will paypal you as a bet :)

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

If at some point in this thread somebody mentions anything to do with foil, PM me I will paypal you as a bet :)

Nah, it's cool. I'm currently living in the European Union, a EU citisen. ;) So much for tinfoil - there will be similar conglomerations around the Globe for various regions: North & South Americas, Africa, Asia/Oceania.

Only thing is that... you need to even out the population a bit, smooth the rough edges of nationalism.

[Baff1 0]

Ghadaffi has a lot of powerful enemies.

He looked weak, so they took the opportunity to try and finish him.

I don't think oil was a significant motivator in this one.

I think it was immigration fears and the opportunity to settle old scores.

Italy, the country that receives all the Libyan oil was less than quick to get involved, rather than being the prime driver.

If anything oil security was a motivation to keep Ghaddaffi in power, not depose him.

[spooky lynx 73]

what I'm saying is that your govt, and your press, is doing the same (often in the opposite way, but the same anyway).

I don't know exactly how the situation is shown to you, but if you tell me to not believe my press, I'll say the same to you.

For example in chechnya, while not denying the acts of terrors done there since long time (if I'm not mistaken, this area is in a regular state of crisis with central russia for centuries, in fact since they are considered russian country... or maybe my source ain't true, I can't really know ;) ), the fact that the area is full of gas & oil is a major factor in the intervention by russian army. They used the terror acts at their advantage to maintain a firm grip on chechnya resources. If the area was empty, you can be sure Putin would let the people live their live there without interfering.

Same for Georgia and their pipeline

As for the Libya, our press is acting just like yours. All reports don't differ much from those at western media.

As for Chechnya... Let me try to tell all this shortly, what I've seen there:

1) Dudayev and nationalists get the power there (seize all local authority facilities, some MVD weapon caches etc)

2) later he proclaims independence of Chechnya and starts to try to seize all army caches and facilities with the help of civilian crowds and taking hostages among the families of officers

3) our government... orders to give almost all heavy weapons from all facilities to Dudayev's guys (tanks, IFVs, APCs, SPAAGs, AAA, MANPADS, heavy and light artillery, planes) - so he got all for building his own army

4) then the war between Dudayev and opposition broke out, opposition also got some heavy weapons and few Mi-24s that were used during assault of Grozny in November of 1994

5) then our dear president Yeltsin woke up and said "WTF?! Some dude's trying to make his own country!!!111 Let's kick his butt!" and the army entered Chechnya again in 11 of december 1994

...btw, in 1994 Dudayev honestly said "I can give up the idea of independence, just give me a chair of the minister of defence in your government, and I'll quit all this, (but Yeltsin refused it)"

6) finally, full scale war broke out.

And the matter is not only in local oil. You can't imagine, how many billions of dollars were spent a little bit later on the reconstruction of all infrastructure officially. Most of them were stolen, but until 2009 I've heard monthly that "Today the government ordered to give xxx millions of dollars for rebuilding of [something]". Of course, real money that were spent on reconstruction are about 30-40 times smaller, all other was stolen.

So, this war is the perfect way to steal infinite amount of money. They may be given for rebuilding of all that was destroyed, for all that is connected with military...

Edited June 19, 2011 by Spooky Lynx

[-martin- 10]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13828762

NATO hits more civilian buildings in Libya.

[ProfTournesol 956]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13828762

NATO hits more civilian buildings in Libya.

What, how can you believe Western press :confused::D

[Innomadic 10]

By all your logic, no one can trust anyones news, and even if you go there yourself you can't trust your own experience because they're all liars in the first place.

This argument over legitimate news makes no sense.

[Baff1 0]

What, how can you believe Western press :confused::D

It's the BBC mate. They don't lie.

But they only tell the bits that suit their agenda.

Actually, that is what I would like to believe....

In truth, they only want a good story.

They will lie if it helps them to make one.

A good story is more important than the turth in the eyes of every story teller.

[Innomadic 10]

It's the BBC mate. They don't lie.

But they only tell the bits that suit their agenda.

Actually, that is what I would like to believe....

In truth, they only want a good story.

They will lie if it helps them to make one.

A good story is more important than the turth in the eyes of every story teller.

Doesn't apply to every news source, i'd rate SBS and the ABC as two of the best news sources we have. 7, Win and Ten are just your usual Fox/CNN crap.

[ProfTournesol 956]

By all your logic, no one can trust anyones news, and even if you go there yourself you can't trust your own experience because they're all liars in the first place.

This argument over legitimate news makes no sense.

It's the BBC mate. They don't lie.

But they only tell the bits that suit their agenda.

Actually, that is what I would like to believe....

In truth, they only want a good story.

They will lie if it helps them to make one.

A good story is more important than the turth in the eyes of every story teller.

I was sarcastic, guys :rolleyes:

[Baff1 0]

Doesn't apply to every news source, i'd rate SBS and the ABC as two of the best news sources we have. 7, Win and Ten are just your usual Fox/CNN crap.

It applies to every news service and media source.

They all have an agenda.

It could be the agenda of their sponsors, it could be the agenda of their owners it could be the agenda of their editor or even reporters. It could just be the agenda of their target audience.

*The editors job is to control the news agenda. To publish stories that his target audience wants to hear.

You can't take the human element out of the equation.

Perhaps SBS and ABC are just closer to your own political persuasion than some of the others?

I don't know what SBS is, but I've seen ABC many times and it is just another American news broadcast from where I sit.

With regards to the truthfulness of their stories, the factual accuracy... listen to people who are regualrly featured in the media talk about it. Pop stars, film stars politicians. Pretty much all of them are going to tell you they are routinely lied about. Sensationalism is a factor.

Edited June 19, 2011 by Baff1

[mrcash2009 0]

The phrase goes:

Chew on the meat and spit out the bones.

[Innomadic 10]

It applies to every news service and media source.

They all have an agenda.

It could be the agenda of their sponsors, it could be the agenda of their owners it could be the agenda of their editor or even reporters. It could just be the agenda of their target audience.

*The editors job is to control the news agenda. To publish stories that his target audience wants to hear.

You can't take the human element out of the equation.

Perhaps SBS and ABC are just closer to your own political persuasion than some of the others?

I don't know what SBS is, but I've seen ABC many times and it is just another American news broadcast from where I sit.

With regards to the truthfulness of their stories, the factual accuracy... listen to people who are regualrly featured in the media talk about it. Pop stars, film stars politicians. Pretty much all of them are going to tell you they are routinely lied about. Sensationalism is a factor.

http://www.sbs.com.au/

http://www.abc.net.au/

They have a reputation for being the most balanced news sources as they regularly get their info from sources in the field rather than from third party sources like 7, 10 and 9.

Not saying they are perfect, probably a bad choice of words before, but for the most part they are the most reliable sources we have in Australia, often willing to take a line that often contradicts Government aims/beliefs

[-martin- 10]

Nato 'killed 15 civilians' in Sorman air strike

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13843798

Here we go again

What, how can you believe Western press :confused::D

Bah Western press, Eastern press they are all partly liars. They only tell us what makes a good story, fits government views or helps them with their agenda. But even so, there are some stories that you don't have to believe but you can trust the source 50%, the other 50% if left for you to speculate about.

Communist press was the same and any other press will be the same. You can’t blame em' though, that’s how they make money

EDIT:All in all this fits in to my theory that society is like a big school playground, whispers and rumours go round to help certain people, but adults do this on a much bigger and more sophisticated scale.

Edited June 20, 2011 by -Martin-

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Not sure where to put this, MENA related,

Turkey warns Assad: You have less than a week to start implementing reforms

http://www.haaretz.com/news/mideast-in-turmoil/turkey-warns-assad-you-have-less-than-a-week-to-start-implementing-reforms-1.368717

Published 12:15 20.06.11

A senior Turkish official warned Monday that Syrian President Bashar Assad has less than a week to start implementing long-promised political reforms demanded by Syrian protesters before foreign intervention begins.

Turkey, Syria's biggest neighbor and main trading partner, has been trying to persuade Assad to halt a military crackdown on demonstrations that have killed more than 1,300 civilians and forced thousands to take refuge across the border.

Is Turkey giving voice to NATO's thoughts? If so, that's pretty cool if Turkey is in the fold, and will become a secular country in the future.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Is Turkey giving voice to NATO's thoughts? If so, that's pretty cool if Turkey is in the fold, and will become a secular country in the future.

In a lot of aspects, Turkey is a lot more secular than most of Western countries, including mine.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

In a lot of aspects, Turkey is a lot more secular than most of Western countries, including mine.

Well then, in a decade they'll be ready for the Union. Here's to another invasion - Viva the Revolution. :D

[ProfTournesol 956]

Well then, in a decade they'll be ready for the Union. Here's to another invasion - Viva the Revolution. :D

Yeah, i'm all for it, in fact i always thought Turkey deserves a place in the EU much more than other actual members. The only thing is to consider it is geographically in Europe, which isn't really the case, apart for a small part.

Edited June 20, 2011 by ProfTournesol
EU not UE

[Baff1 0]

I think Turkey is on the brink of becoming non-secular.

As the army loses power and democracy replaces it.

Like it or not give people democracy and lots of them will become Islamic democracies. (And all the christian democracies will cry "hey! you are not a real democracy you muslim bastards!")

Germany seems to have a real bee in it's bonnet about Turkey.

I have never really thought to find out why, I sort of assumed it was an immigration thing.

Any insights into that one?

[-martin- 10]

I think Turkey is on the brink of becoming non-secular.

As the army loses power and democracy replaces it.

Like it or not give people democracy and lots of them will become Islamic democracies. (And all the christian democracies will cry "hey! you are not a real democracy you muslim bastards!")

Germany seems to have a real bee in it's bonnet about Turkey.

I have never really thought to find out why, I sort of assumed it was an immigration thing.

Any insights into that one?

Well after what the Ottoman empire did to our bros in Jugoslavia I'm not very keen on Turkey entering the EU myself, I'm glad we got rid of them in the first place.

Having said that, it doesn't mean that I don't like them or that I don't like Muslims, I'm just not keen on my country getting flooded with them because I know what's going to happen. A Turkish community will be set up which will isolate itself from us, they will not learn our language, they will not respect our traditions or religion, they will write everything on their shops in Turkish (As they do in Germany), we will react in a hostile way towards them and eventually multiculturalism will fail like always.

I'm ok with them entering the EU and moving around the Shenghen and I think that the EU will only become stronger with Turkey onboard but as for Turks moving to Europe permanently, not so sure about that, there is a big cultural difference between them and us.

I think people should stay in their own country and not flood other countries in millions or everything will look like London, you don’t even know if you’re in the UK or not.

[ProfTournesol 956]

I think people should stay in their own country and not flood other countries in millions or everything will look like London, you don’t even know if you’re in the UK or not.

But you are living there, aren't you ? (God that's offtopic...sorry).