This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Ron Paul Asks If Libya Is Indeed "Mission Accomplished"
Ron Paul has released the following extended rhetorical inquiry on what the utility of the recent expansion (through very military means) of US and European interests in Libya has been, which more than anything exposes US hypocricy when it comes to foreign national interests. To wit: "Gaddafi may well have been a tyrant, but as such he was no worse than many others that we support and count as allies. Disturbingly, we see a pattern of relatively secular leaders in the Arab world being targeted for regime change with the resulting power vacuum being filled by much more radical elements. Iraq, post-Saddam, is certainly far closer to Iran than before the US invasion. Will Libya be any different?" And he follows up: " With the big Western scramble to grab Libya's oil reserves amid domestic political chaos and violence, does anyone doubt that NATO ground troops are not being prepared for yet another occupation?" Unfortunately, we will get the answer to this question quite soon, especially if a counter revolution in Libya, as many expect, does occur.
From Ron Paul:
Mission Accomplished in Libya?
Even as a major hurricane hit America's eastern seaboard, the administration is determined to expand the war in Libya while threatening the regime in Syria. Is there any limit to government's appetite to create more problems for our nation and economy?
Americans may be tempted to celebrate the apparent victory of US and NATO backed rebels in Libya, since it seems the Gaddafi regime is overthrown. But I believe any enthusiasm for our Libyan misadventure is premature.
The Obama administration attacked Libya without a constitutional declaration of war, without congressional authorization, without meaningful consultation with Congress -- and without a dollar being authorized from the House or Senate. It was a war started by a president who turned to the United Nations for its authority and ignored the authority of the US Congress.
Are we better off as a nation by ignoring and debasing our Constitution? Are we better off having spent more than a billion dollars attacking a country thousands of miles away that had not threatened us? Are we more financially sound having expanded the empire to include yet another protectorate and probable long-term military occupation? Are we more admired throughout the world for getting involved in yet another war?
Still, many will claim that getting rid of Libyan ruler Gaddafi was worth it. They will say that the ends justify the means. As the civilian toll from NATO bombs adds up in a war started under the guise of protecting a civilian population, even the initial argument for intervention is ridiculous. We should not forget that there were no massacres taking place in Libya before the NATO attack. The attack was a dubbed a preventative humanitarian intervention. But as soon as NATO planes started bombing, civilians started dying.
Gaddafi may well have been a tyrant, but as such he was no worse than many others that we support and count as allies. Disturbingly, we see a pattern of relatively secular leaders in the Arab world being targeted for regime change with the resulting power vacuum being filled by much more radical elements. Iraq, post-Saddam, is certainly far closer to Iran than before the US invasion. Will Libya be any different?
We already see grisly reprisals from the US-backed rebels against their political opponents. There are disturbing scenes of looting and lawlessness on the part of the rebels. We know that some rebel factions appear to be allied with Islamic extremists and others seem to have ties to the CIA. They also appear to have a penchant for killing each other as well as supporters of the previous regime. The tribal structure of Libyan society all but ensures that an ongoing civil war is on the agenda rather than the Swiss-style democracy that some intervention advocates suggest is around the corner.
What is next after such a victory? With the big Western scramble to grab Libya's oil reserves amid domestic political chaos and violence, does anyone doubt that NATO ground troops are not being prepared for yet another occupation?
Neo-conservatives continue to dominate our foreign policy, regardless of the administration in power. They do not care that we are bankrupt, as they are too blinded by their desire for empire and their affection for the entangling alliances we have been rightly counseled to avoid. They have set their sights next on Syria, where the US moves steadily toward intervention in another domestic conflict that has nothing to do with the US. Already the US president has called for "regime change" in Syria, while adding new sanctions against the Syrian regime. Are US bombers far behind?
»
- 14252 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
"The military NCO's and officers I know, that follow politics, can't stand paul - he would destroy the military's capability to defend this nation and it's interest, devastate research - which means more American troops have to die in future battles due to lack of equipment and technological superiority. "
They would not have to worry about being killed if we were not constantly invading countries 1000s of miles from us who do not directly threaten us.
I served 6 years. I support Ron Paul. Many, many, many, many people that I served with also support Ron Paul.
Judge is an idiot. That is all.
I served 6 years. I support Ron Paul. Many, many, many, many people that I served with also support Ron Paul.
Judge is an idiot. That is all.
thank you hood. I see two paths to our own revolution. Civillians shutting down the economy and soldiers speaking out and shutting down our international crime.
I did my best the spread the message while I was in. Many servicemen supported Bush, not because of his policy, but because he promised raises to the military every year. Since Obama started "cutting" servicemember re-enlistment bonuses and not giving those raises, people started paying attention. Turns out, soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen don't like going to war.
I hope that when the day comes our military and police come to the aid of the people.
You are a true soldier for the Constitution. Thank you.
"he would destroy the military's capability to defend this nation and it's interest, devastate research - which means more American troops have to die in future battles due to lack of equipment and technological superiority. "
Oh rubbish.
If you had to DEFEND your nation from a foreign attack, you would have the majority of the world helping. The last actual time you've had to DEFEND your nation is post Pearl Harbour.
Unless of course, you mean defending your nations interests. Which, as far as I can tell, your nations interests are everything that anyone is doing. You make other nations business your business. If whatever is happening disagrees with your leaders view, they get bombed to the stone age.
As for the killing of R&D and technological superiority, you spend more than every other nation on earth combined. Using conventional weaponry, it would literally have to be the entire world vs the USA for any chance that the USA would lose.
What're the odds of that happening? Well... I guess considering how many countries you've invaded over the last century, we might actually hit a tipping point on that one in the not too distant future. After all, if you make everyone your enemy, then by default, using the logic of the enemy of my enemy is my friend, then their enemies become their friends. Defending your interests to the extent that you do, could concievably breed a near-global coalition of countries determined to eliminate your military power. Just keep pissing people off and eventually it will happen. I think Ceaser or someone of his ilk said something along the lines of controlling people was like holding water in your hand. The more you clench your fist, the more slips through your fingers.
All that aside, the rate your countries debt is going, and the rate the dollar is losing its perception of value, it can't be too long till your currency collapses. Then your military will have to stop. If you cant pay your soldiers, and you cant afford fuel for your tanks, you lose all control of your military and your interests. Just as the USSR did.
"Paul simply heightens their chances of dying and they know it."
Yes, he increases their risk by removing them from dishonest unwinable conflicts.
"a man with no honor"
yes, you prefer someone who lies to the world on their reasons for killing civillians and soldiers.
I think you beat out Ron on that "biggest hypocrite" ribbon
Judge
he would destroy the military's capability to defend this nation and it's interest,
This is the real problem. We aren't defending our nation instead you have preemptive strikes and imperialism. Afghanistan never attacked us it was supposedly Al Qaida. The Taliban refused to turn over Osama without seeing some solid evidence. We refused to show anything and attacked. Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Libya ect.. never attacked us so it can't be said that we are defending our nation and its interests unless our interests are that of the banks and corporations.
Hmm, Im wondering what would really be lost if all three of those cities were, say, hit by meteors?
Very little. Most of the rot in the US emenates from NY and DC and as far as Jerusalem goes, its not our problem to make the world safe and fair for everyone else.
Progeressive "I loves me some expensive gubmint so long as I dont have to pay for it" repubs seem incapable of seeing their own hypocrisy.
I am still amazed how those brown guys in caves in Eastern Pakistan got NORAD to stand down for two hours during the attacks. Wow! And, yes let's destroy the evidence immediately afterward like with did Osama's frozen carcass on May 1st. Ha, ha, ha!
Unless you forgot to include a sarc-tag, please go eat a bag of dicks.
(MONOTONE HAL 9000 VOICE) "HELLO, MY NAME IS JUDGE. I AM AN ALGORITHM CREATED TO SPREAD STATUS QUO PROPONENTS AND MISINFORMATION ON THE 2012 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, RON PAUL. HAVE A nice DAY."
Stop being so coy...
Just come out and ask Wanklord for a date already...
It was PAK who arrested KSM you nucklehead. Rember him? The guy that confessed to evrrything. I am sure your momma tried, some people are just born your way.
Hope things get better
Damn, these Ron Paul threads bring out the moon bats, don't they?
Of course, all the moon bats are AGAINST having Paul for president. Those who are sane on ALL sides of the political "spectrum" want Paul to be president. They just have to accept that it is possible for him to win. Once they do that, and decline to throw their vote away on a standard two party candidate ticket, he will win in a landslide.
Sure... sane people believe that Iran should have nukes. Duh.
Sane people believe the Fed hasn't been audited. Duh.
Sane people believe the US is to blame for 9/11. Duh.
Sane people embrace every conspiracy theory. Duh.
Idiots abound. It is difficult to free people from the chains they revere.
Those who understand liberty, understand that you should organize the ethics, morality, and behavior of your own house before you try and organize the ethics, morality, and behavior of mine.
Nice cliche, but irrelevant to anything I mentioned or to Ron Paul - Congress' biggest hypocrite and one of the largest porkers in Congress.
But typical paulbot, don't discuss the actual facts, reason isn't y'alls or paul's strong point, simply yelling down the opposition is or distract and throw up mindless points.
It's the best y'all have to offer.
Color me shocked. Shocked I tell you.
Shouldn't you be at a monster truck event right now?
HAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHFHADAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHHA. That was PRICELESS!
Your fear can only be explained by someone who is not very self-suficient or is incapable on creating anything of real value to add to the economy. If this was not the case, you would welcome collapse as compensation would actually return to people worth a shit.
Please go away and find something productive to do as trolling is not.
<waves to RNR/LfP>
LOL. 'Typical Paulbots' are the ones who do debate, with factual background, and without calling names. There's nothing hypocritical about Dr. Paul. He's been saying and doing the same things consistently for 30 years. Your 'porker' comments come from your regurgitation of Faux News points, and painful ignorance of earmarks.
You can call me a Paulite, a Paulbot, and even a Paultard - just don't call me late for voting day!
"But typical paulbot, don't discuss the actual facts"
wait, are you telling us that saying "Duh" is your way to tell us that it is fact?
Christ -Glen beck moves to Dallas to promote the homo perry -who has tried unsuccessfully for years to imitate ron Paul (when he is not attending Bilderberger meetings and promoting the NAFTA super highway and the NWO) -and now his paid morons are infiltrating the internet. Is there anyway ZH can screen out and ban these spammers?
++ Well said. Fear monger, war mongers have had tall essence of 'dangerous liberty' erased from their DNA. This Judge fucknut is the reflection of a people laid bare of all respect and desire for true liberty.
Yup, moonbats all.
http://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2010/03/23/dr-alan-sabrosky-ex-director-of-studies-at-the-us-army-war-college-the-us-military-knows-mossad-and-traitorous-elements-in-us-government-did-911/
Didn't click the link. You'd have to be duh derp wut kind of stupid to believe the us military hasn't been barking at each other for the last 10 years. There's a tension among the troops that's you couldn't miss.
This is twice you have said that Ron Paul "BELIEVES IRAN SHOULD HAVE NUKES".
That is false. I know it is getting tossed around, but no one seems to have the quote and context. If you are the "Judge", show me the evidence or STFU. Hearsay not allowed in this court.
I guess y'all aren't smart enough to google... Duh.
http://conservativebyte.com/2011/08/ron-paul-why-stop-iran-from-getting-...
includes tape. You click on the arrow thingy to watch.
That's 2 phishing attempts in one thread.
And I gues your critical listening skills are so poor that you can't discern the difference between saying he understands WHY Iran would want a nuclear bomb, and saying he WANTS Iran to have nuclear weapons.
If you actually paid attention to what he said, then you know he was not advocating for Iran to do anyhthing one way or another, but essentially making the point that we should be minding our own business. You also know that the crowd wooped and whistled their approval, too. Meanwhile, the other candidates on stage with him, really did not know how to react to him...as is frequently the case. He simply makes too much sense and is too right in what he says. It goes against the grain of the main stream pasturized thought process, which you seem to be immersed in.
Judge, huh? In your dreams, I hope, 'cause we have too many half-wits on the bench already.
Did you even listen? Duh
I hope youre trolling, otherwise youre an embarrasment to southerners.
I'd like to see what you got on the reading comprehension section of the SAT. Someone above me explained it to you, but in case you still don't understand: He is not saying he wants Iran to have a nuke, he's saying he understands why they might want one (they're surrounded by countries that are armed wtih them, so they need one as a deterent.)
He also went on to make the point that we faced down the Soviets who had over 30,000 nukes w/o having to go to war with them, yet people in this country, like you, are pissing their pants about the idea that Iran might get a single one (even though an intelligence report leaked in 2007 estimated Iran ended their bomb program years earlier.)
Can we ignore these Perry the homo paid spammers? I'm serious. We will be hearing a lot from them. they have a lot of money. between Glenn Beck and these paid boiler rrooms set up in israel -we are about to be bombarded with a whole ton of bull by these criminals who will be promoting the NWO candidate -Rick perry
Judge- Why shouldnt Iran have nukes? Who have the attacked, ever? If anyone shouldnt have nukes it would be the US which has been attacking countries and sticking their nose in others business forever.
^^^^^^^^^ I rest my case as to the stupidity of ron paul supporters ^^^^^^^^^^
If you have to ask why Iran shouldn't have nukes and argue the US shouldn't, well, you are a perfect Paul supporter. I could explain it to you, but I can't comprehend it for you.
Yup, crazy people want nukes in the hands of those who would use them rather than in the hands of those who wouldn't.
Insanity.
North Korea has nukes. And they are lead by a far more insular, aggressive set of crazies than Iran. But they don't nuke the south, or Japan, or anyone else.
But you don't understand that because you are a crazy person who does nothing but spew conspiracy theories and consistantly fails to understand cause and effect.
Having nukes is the only way to be safe from the US war machine.
Ding ding ding!
Or to flat out extort money out of the USA. Could you imagine what the phone calls from Lahore to Hillary's desk sound like?
"Yes, uhh Mrs. Hillary! There are very bad scary men with masks outside our nuclear storage facility!, We will be needing more funds for more guys please mam! Here is my routing number, please do hurry Mrs. Hillary! they are very meacing!"
it is funny how our actions promote the very opposite of our words. We are very good at that.
To Paraphrase an Ahmadinnerjacket quote in an interview about nuclear energy (It's not really that important to me to really go searching for it): "If it's such a bad thing, why do you have it? And if it's a good thing, why don't you want us to have it?"
That sound fairly logical to me--not the ramblings of a crazy person.
this is a simple argument. you believe in forcing your opinion/rules on other people.
if you were Iranian, would you want your country to be able to defend itself? the problem with most arguments is that people fail to legitimately put themselves in the other person's context beforehand, and the argument invariably escalates.
getting all bent out of shape about Ron Paul and his supporters does not help your argument, neither do patronizing remarks. your lack of cooperative discussion is your undoing.
You must be a freshman at Troll U.
This is your first lab assignment in Trolling 101?
Speaking of judges, you just gave the ultimate confession that you have no legitimate argument
"Sure... sane people believe that Iran should have nukes. Duh."
A good chunk of your nation thinks Bachman, Palin, and other nutjobs should have the power to press the button.
Remember too that you're the only nation to have ever used nukes in aggression.
if the govt told you to go gather dog shit and eat a serving every evening for dinner, you unquestionably would....
what pray tell makes the US any more special than any other country that only the USA should own nuclear weapons? Because we're 'free'. How free are we? are we free to drink raw milk? are we free to carry guns? are we free to smoke weed? are we free to not pay taxes? can we own land without property taxes?
Please tell me who was the ONLY country to EVER use nuclear weapons TWICE on a CIVILIAN population.
North Korea? Nope
Iran? Nope
Pakistan? Nope
India? Nope
Russia? Nope
I'm not saying Iran are a bunch of nice guys, not by a long shot. But what the hell makes you think you're 'god' and can mandate to the rest of the world how to live their lives?
Spread freedom through terror seems to be the motto of the USA.
Democracy through dictatorship.
Since when are mindless, dumbfuck neocons allowed to post on this Board? lmao - keep it coming judge. Every intelligent , sensible person should have the opportunity to publicly riduicule retards like you. To your credit though -there are millions of mindless idiots out there just like you -they support Sarah palin, and Obama- they long for the days of George W. Bush, or Bill Clinton -they are the sheep -the mindless, moronic sheeple -children of the matrix - but at least to your credit, you at least turned on and tuned into ZH - maybe there is hope for you. I doubt it, but who knows.
Boy o Boy... RP not mincing words. The US has a lot of Soul searching to do. If it wants to be relevant in the new world, vote Ron Paul for presidency.
OK -
My non-protest protest song!
Not A Protest Song; A Love Song
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaJCNFdZSng
Revolution, Bitchez!
Counter-Revolution, Bitchez!
Ron Paul Revolution, Bitchez!
Ron Paul for president. The alternative is the two-headed one party full of fail.
ron paul already btched up during the hearing with bernake..
whats he gonna do bitch up some more?
idiot- go lick Rick Perry's ass.
"Already the US president has called for "regime change" in Syria, while adding new sanctions against the Syrian regime. Are US bombers far behind?"
*******************************************************************
fuck Syria! think of all those manufacturing jobs that will be saved when we start dropping bombs 24 hours a day, again!
You sound very un-American!
we should be supporting the military industrial complex!
because of wall street the poor ole' military has had to cut $500(ish) billion from their budget this year.. meanwhile wall street gets trillions more.
I am hopeful.. mostly because the masses of sheepish consumers here in America are completely in-capable of effecting any real change on their own.. that the military will wipe wall street out.. because after robbing the old people and the poor.. and privatizing all the public interests... the only person left for wall street to rob will be the military..
Oops! Blackwater (or whatever the name(s) are now) has already privatized the military..
Never mind the military is stupid like the sheep they pull from.
so much for elite west point commanders standing up from themselves.
wall street wins.. it is over! quit yer' bitchin!
Greedy idiots over lazy morons any day.
>think of all those manufacturing jobs that will be saved when we start dropping bombs 24 hours a day, again!
Broken window fallacy.
Economics 101 fail.
sarcsm 101 fail.
I got you, JW, you crazy crazy bastard.
While suturing a cut on the hand of a 75 year old rancher, whose hand was caught in the gate while working cattle, the doctor struck up a conversation with the old man. Eventually the topic got around to Obama and his role as our president.
The old rancher said, 'Well, you know, Obama is a 'post turtle'...
Not being familiar with the term, the doctor asked him, what a 'post turtle' is.
The old rancher said, 'When you're driving down a country road and you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a 'post turtle'.
The old rancher saw the puzzled look on the doctor's face, so he continued to explain.
"You know he didn't get up there by himself; he doesn't belong up there; he doesn't know what to do while he's up there; he's elevated beyond his ability to function; and you just wonder what kind of dumb ass put him up there to begin with."
we need another evangelical from texas!
someone that will cut social security!
someone that will stop paying all these government hand out types!
we need jesus in the white house again, the white one.. not the black half white one!
yeeeeeee! hawwwwwwww!
You have an odd, nonsensical way of thinking.
if you are not laughing then you are not allowing yourself too laugh!
my silver is still better than yours, too.. by the way.
AF,
Where have you been? Miss your rants and Texas logic!
The idiots don't know you are a GIANT Ron Paul Supporter and an atheist.
Haha great story, and very true.
Ron Paul is right...
and you thought assassin Barama was about Peace? Hah
NATO NWO strategy:
"remove dictators that don't submit to anglo-bankster cartel policy"
onward Syria, Yemen and Pakistan
onward Iran and all the other 'stans'
Somalia will be on that list shortly.
Ron Paul supporters are the antithesis of a degenerate electorate.
Luxury, horror lurk in Gadhafi family compound
VIDEO
Shweyga Mullah.
At first I thought she was wearing a hat and something over her face. Then the awful realization dawned that her entire scalp and face were covered in red wounds and scabs, a mosaic of injuries that rendered her face into a grotesque patchwork.
Even though the burns were inflicted three months ago, she was clearly still in considerable pain. But she told us her story calmly.
She'd been the nanny to Hannibal's little son and daughter.
The 30-year-old came to Libya from her native Ethiopia a year ago. At first things seemed OK, but then six months into her employment she said she was burned by Aline.
Three months later the same thing happened again, this time much more seriously.
In soft tones, she explained how Aline lost her temper when her daughter wouldn't stop crying and Mullah refused to beat the child.
"She took me to a bathroom. She tied my hands behind my back, and tied my feet. She taped my mouth, and she started pouring the boiling water on my head like this," she said, imitating the vessel of scalding hot water being poured over her head.
She peeled back the garment draped carefully over her body. Her chest, torso and legs are all mottled with scars -- some old, some still red, raw and weeping. As she spoke, clear liquid oozed from one nasty open wound on her head.
After one attack, "There were maggots coming out of my head, because she had hidden me, and no one had seen me," Mullah said.
Eventually, a guard found her and took her to a hospital, where she received some treatment.
But when Aline Gadhafi found out about the kind actions of her co-worker, he was threatened with imprisonment, if he dared to help her again.
"When she did all this to me, for three days, she wouldn't let me sleep," Mullah said. "I stood outside in the cold, with no food. She would say to staff, 'If anyone gives her food, I'll do the same to you.' I had no water -- nothing."...
FREE LYBIA
http://www.entendance.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=801&p=19008#p19008
Why do I get a tingling sensation when I read that account? Hmmmm . . . now I know. It reminds me of lamp shades . . . . and soap.
The horror. Oh, the horror.
Libya the place where our alleged "enemies" have become our alleged "allies", it's stunning how blatantly obvious the hypocrisy of the situation there is. one small example is Abdel Hakim Belhadj, the former commander of the US state dept and UN labeled terrorist organization LIFG, was in charge of the assault on Tripoli. the LIFG was stated to have direct links to and have received training and support from Al Qaeda. Syria, of course is next, you can already see the MSM spin toward another "humanitarian kinetic military intervention" going into overdrive. once Syria falls then NATO has there beachhead for the big prize, Iran, then maybe Pakistan and on to WW3...
we live in a world being run by psychopaths and sociopaths and they are determined to get a lot of people killed before the end
It should surprise no one that US efforts to "stabilize" the middle east are, in fact, destabilizing the region. It puts the bid back into the military complex and it sets the stage for high oil prices and a weaker dollar. It also allows for gigantic piles of money to disappear...supposedly spent on securing the nation. It has nothing to do with psychopaths enjoying killing people. Its about money.
It's all our government knows. We are ruled by intellectual midgets whose time has long past...but they hang on like the parasites they surely are. Their last act continues...that of looting the treasury of our dying nation.
And the sheep make not a peep...so why not?
WTF...the US has been all ABSENT from this conflict...yeah they have been in the background....but "bellweathers" (irony) like Norway, Denmark, Sweden (not even in NATO) have been doing some "heavy lifting"....so what is he saying good old Ron....?
No, credit to were it should go..."hat of" for France and the UK...Full stop...the rest is just BS.
absent? been in the background? not according to the Pentagon...
US Military Intervention in Libya Cost At Least $896 Million
@marcusfenix...
"...
By war-on-terror standards, the U.S. involvement in Libya was a real bargain, according to new figures released by the Department of Defense.
After months of helping rebels take down Muammar Gaddafi, the U.S. has wound up paying just under $900 million.
That’s how much the U.S. spends in just three days fighting the Afghanistan war. In fact it’s less than U.S. taxpayers spend for 17 days’ worth of air-conditioning for American troops in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The Obama administration has requested $107 billion pay for the Afghanistan campaign in the coming fiscal year. That comes out to about $293 million a day.
And the overall expense of fighting both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars has been estimated to be $1.3 trillion.
-Noel Brinkerhoff
..."
1. that's still 900 million to much, spent on furthering the globalist agenda which has nothing to do with the "safety and security of the homeland" of which Qaddafi presented no threat to. so that's a lot of money to spend on an illegal, immoral non- war, war.
2. Iraq and Afghanistan are 24/7 365 wars, how much would/will the pentagon spend if this situation "requires" further NATO involvement namely in the area of "peacekeeping" ground forces in order to secure "stability" you can already see the MSM propaganda machine gearing up for exactly that. to believe that US forces would not be involved directly or otherwise is just wishful thinking.
3. the US flew over 1,000 of the little over 7,000 total strike missions thus far, that's hardly background involvement and does not include the ship launched cruise missiles that came from US navy cruisers at the outset of the action of which there were hundreds of launches.
4. this war was certainly not a "bargain" for the Libyan civilians caught in the middle of it, as we are now seeing the result of the NATO campaign in terms of destroyed infrastructure and sever lack of resources where people are struggling to find even the most basic of necessities.
sorry but no matter how one tries to spin this Washington is up to their eyeballs in this hypocritical "humanitarian action" that more than likely killed more people then if the western globalists had just stayed out of it. but then you can't do that when it was planned, manufactured and executed by those very same western powers that be in the first place...
Considering that the U.S. was supposed to be engaged for "days, not weeks" leads me to think that this wasn't a war at bargain price. After the 90 days expired (War Powers Act) the MSM just forgot about Libya.
Whats another $900 million between elitest friends anyways.
Depends on what your definition of "absent" is:)
OK...absent to a strong of a word...agree to that...but background...definitely
http://www.acus.org/natosource/national-composition-nato-strike-sorties-...
What is "is"?
Best sequence of comments.
One US citizen tries to propagate the idea that a NATO operation is not under US command, making the US all absent from this conflict.
Another US citizen tries to use facts (most comical part actually as shown later)
The first US citizen reacts as a true and reliable propagandist: when fed with facts, the facts are not used to readjust to reality but as material to spin over and over again. The line is common and overused by now: the US involvement could have been much worse. So far, it is only peanuts.
Most comical part is that US citizens at times ignore their own nature. US citizens are propagandists at heart and feeding them with facts and spending time to back them up is only a waste of time.
But even US citizens fall into the trap of their own nature. Useless to feed a propagandist with facts.
And US citizens are propagandists.
Such is their eternal US citizens nature.
Libyan exports of LSC represented ~10% of the LSC on the market....Follow the oil...
Go Ron Paul.
Silly old Uncle Ron talking sense again. When will that silly old man learn that Americans don't want to hear the truth?
My idea about that is it's okay to rap about the Fed, and Gold, and blah, blah; because nobodies going to do anything about it; it just provides steam blowing off point for the "wing nuts", from their point of view. But if you start trying to get the public interested in what the military-industrial complex is up to; you're probably going to have a tragic accident in your private airplane.
"...Americans don't want to hear the truth?"
This is what is most frustrating for me. The eyes glaze over, the mind closes..
The chant begins, "he's crazy. He can't win. He's crazy."
We are not the independent minded free people we once thought we were, but I can't believe we can't see through this obvious hypocrisy. Using 'al-quaida' (whatever) as allies in one country while we beat, torture and bomb them everywhere else.
WTF is wrong with us?
The Tipping Point Is Coming.
Keep spreading the word. That's all you can do. Talk to, educate, and inform your friends and family (and total strangers!). You don't need everyone in the country to "get it"--just enough to tip the balance.
Damn comment system. Always with the duplicate posts. I suck.
Patience grasshopper.... a hung tab after posting should be killed... can't poke at it..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=aJURNC0e6Ek
the truth about libya...
kappo marx discusses libya...
http://www.realzionistnews.com/?p=652
Kappo? Was that Gummo's adopted child?
its a nickname uncle miltie has picked up since he clowns around in traffic in his monk's uniform etc...
Thanks for clarifying that...
Faber on Bloomberg radio now (320pm)
Assure the pipelines... and the job is done for big oil and the Western consumer...
http://israelinsider.net/profiles/blogs/with-a-jewish-grandma-and-a
gaddafi may end up in the only place that will and must allow him to be, that is israhole , after all he himself, is jewish and has the right of return, by jewish state law....
The attack on Libya was the US/NATO strategy to keep China out of the North African/Mid East oil fields. The Chinese had already major investments in Libyian oil which are now dead. This geo-political move is extremely dangerous and as Japan in WW11 so could it be China in WW111.
There is an element of rationality in the above...
Sudanese oil interests in chinese hands is an example of the quid pro quo that occurs... The "flash point" will be Venezuala or Iran though...
http://rt.com/news/economy-oil-gold-libya/
It could be that and also Libya was refusing to take the dollar in exchange for oil. Seems like any country that refuses the dollar becomes public enemy #1.
'Also COULD HAVE UNITED a huge african islamic block. The fact that much of West Africa, North Africa and East Africa is Islamic if they all accepted a gold dinar then they would all be only accepting gold as payment, and that would have a detrimental effect on Europe and America. If all of Islamic Southeast Asia went on a gold dinar standard that would also be a problem for Western economic systems." Comment from Anwar
Putative US gold reserves represent 1 year of oil imports.... Assuming that at gun point the US forces Canada and Mexico to take Bennie-Bux, you get ~18 months of imports... Yay, we are saved!
The U. S. Military is the strong arm of the New World Order. What Paul implied but did not say was that Al Qaeda under NATO command is an integral part of the invading force into sovereign Libya. Yes, that's the same Al Qaeda that supposedly blew up three buildings in downtown NYC ten years ago.
The U. S. Military is the strong arm of the New World Order.
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
No. The US military is the strong arm of the US world order.
Well... I'll be junked into oblivion but Ron Paul, if elected, will be a redux of the "Hope and Change" paradigm failure....
Unless you also think that Congress and the Senate and the Judiciary are suddenly going to change their stripes...
Face it boys and girls, the country is all but beyond fixing...and there are too many powerful people that don't want it fixed. At least while they can line their pockets some more.
FWIW, RP is the only Republican in the running that has a clue... It won't be enough though.
too defeatist. your mistake here is thinking that any such "fixed" country can exist. there is no need to fix the economy/country/politics, whatever, because no such "solution" exists, or ever has existed. this is a basic fallacy many operate from. the object is to target the bad and begin cleansing it away - instead of piling it on. the emphasis must not be on searching out "the answer" to our problems, but simply searching out and eliminating as many of the obvious ills. with each ill eliminated progress builds. this effort is well within our grasp even as higgledy-piggledy as we are. "hope and change" is fine as long as it's real. RP may or may not offer this tact.
No argument from me on your thesis...
But there is wide gap on what are percieved to be "ills" (even within the Parties) and very little concensus on addressing those agreed upon "ills" (across the parties)...
BTW, I ain't defeatist, just pragmatic.
can't imagine with the profound resource problems that are unique to modern history that any classic political move is going to change our conflict / energy strategies, our coming ecnomic hardship, and our eventual loss of freedoms without some dramatic popular event outside the normal political process
Well, you're not getting junked into oblivion FM.. Wonder if it could be that what you say is not incorrect? Who here thinks voting for RP is a la-la-land vote for happy, snugly days? Not I. However, I do believe at some point a line has to be drawn, even in front of inevitable collapse. A vote for Ron Paul, Lyndon LaRouche, you/me or an Abstain vote is a vote to end this two party farce.
I am waiting for RP to make a significant statement on US Energy policy and future directions. From my own perspective, that will be the tell about whether he will be honest with the American people. BTW, if he comes out and says the "free market" will figure it out, he'll be exposed as another two-bit politician.
IMO, time is a great arbiter. 30 years he's stayed on message, that in itself is unique. You and I both know there is no free market, so yes, that would be a tell, as would oil/foreign policy.
There is a huge amount of power in the executive office. Basically, he can stop the executive and all of its branches from doing those things which have built up over the past many decades from tiny, temporary operations to bloated bureaucracies.
With the stroke of a pen, he could end the war on drugs.
With the stroke of a pen, he could release all non violent drug offenders from prison.
With the stroke of a pen, he could bring home troops from around the world.
With the stroke of a pen, he could end all illegal CIA activities.
With the stroke of a pen, he could end the Fed's monopoly on currency production (EO 11110 redux).
With the stroke of a pen, he could destroy the regulatory morass that has formed around American business.
With the stroke of a pen, he can order courts and police forces throughout the land to cease enforcing non-constitutional laws.
You don't see this power, because it has ALWAYS been used the OPPOSITE way, and it is near its limit. It can't be pushed much further without disbanding Congress and the Supreme Court. But the accumulated travesties of the last hundred years that were sourced in that office can all be undone in a day. All it takes is a few strokes of a pen.
Yep, to a point...
You don't think 67% of Congress and the Senate can be bought off and Mister Paul presented with veto proof legislation?
Or that the SCOTUS will not "create" some precedent to limit Executive authority?
I am hearing a pretty clear echo of the lefts "Hope and Change" propaganda....
lol, god forbid! Pardon the generalization, but RP supporters are probably more 'awake' than 90% of the population. They would likely become his most fierce enemy if he were to betray his ideals once in the executive office.....promise. ;)
Legislation is worth nothing so long as the executive refuses to enforce it. You think they are going to legislate back all the executive orders that he would cancel with a veto-proof majority? It would take DECADES.
Tmosley-
Dr Paul hasn't come out and explicitly said he would do all of those things (well, not recently, but he's definitely said he would do all of them over the last 30 years) but a careful parsing of his previous comments leads me to conclude that he would order the (In)Justice dept to stop all drug interdiction, solicit reviews of all current non-violent drug prisoners and sign pardons for them, immediately begin withdrawal of troops worldwide and shuttering US bases, stop all covert CIA activity, insist congress overturn legal tender laws (and order no prosecution of scofflaws in the interim) and order an immediate moratorium on unconstitutional activity by the DoEnergy, DoEd, EPA, DHS, OSHA, FBI, etc. and finally suspend enforcement of the Patriot(sic) Act and TSA. He could say all affected employees would be furloughed, with pay, for six months while they sought out legit employment. All of these would fall under his power constitutionally without using Executive Orders.
The best part is that I truly believe, based on 30 years of consistent statements regarding government power, that all of these things would be on his agenda.
Nice enumeration.
..and a good reminder. Thx, Tm.
I agree Ron Paul can undo all of the folly from Bush and Obama.
i just got through building my new computer with 16 gb ram and amd 6 core chip.....asus board. faster than greased lightning.........loaded up with kubuntu 11.04 and now have to download some attack tools and start breaking into some of the these wifi networks around me broadcasting signals into my house without permission.........oh noooooooooooooo
You can't do that without a permit! Shame on you!
Libya will prove hard to control:
Al Qaeda Commander, released from Gitmo, now a leader in the invasion of Tripoli http://coto2.wordpress.com/2011/08/29/al-qaeda-commander-released-from-gitmo-now-leads-nato-invasion-of-tripoli/
Le plus ca change, la plus la meme chose....
Hopefully they "Manchurian Candidated" him. Otherwise, we're about to see some more blowback.
Libya will prove hard to control:
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Probably not.
The piece of information is not that one.
It is the following:
US has introduced Al Qaeda as dangerous mad dogs on the world scale. They are a tangible geopolitical threat.
The reality shows otherwise: without extensive western military help, this commander could not even take down a weakling like Libya.
Al Qaeda is a midget on the world scene. It is a midget in the arabic world. They need a source of exterior power to make any point. They can not exist and make a statement by themselves in the vast majority of the world.
In this US driven world, the justification of violence due to an external threat is getting thinner by the hour. The US needs to stage its own opposition on the world geopolitical theater. Just like the internal opposition is just staged and controlled opposition in the US political philosophy, the external opposition is now only staged and controlled.
US world order.
front runner, bitchez
Before you decide who is right and who is wrong on the Libya issue, you should watch this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q11R56Y0Dx4&feature=youtu.bePMIdiot, you have my respect and admiration for posting the TRUTH! I love the ending:) For all those who want the truth please take the time to watch this video. I will do my part to make it viral.
I am Tuco Benedicto Pacifico Juan Maria Ramirez and I say "Death to the New World Order"!
Great video, but as it says in the comments section, we need evidence to support it. I'd like to post it to my facebook and send it out on Twitter, but i wont without documentation to support it........looked a tit once too many times to do that again. Well, actually looked a tit once; which is enough ;-)
We need NATO to intervene on wall street, Big Giant Squid hunters with master of the universe detectors
RON PAUL 2012...who else running for POTUS has this type of integrity?
The Marines are packing their gear, just another duty station.
I don´t buy the argument that the reason for attacking Gaddafi was to protect civilians. My impression is that there are several other reasons, such as:
1. Send a message to other rulers all round the world that unless you do what we say we might attack you and see to that you lose your money, get killed or imprisoned for life.
2. Send the message that Gaddafi´s views on a certain Middle Eastern conflict is not acceptable, especially not combined with the financial assets Libya controlled.
I suspect that NATO allied oil producers in the Middle East should have bought media companies and political influence in the West during the cold war. If Saudi princes had moved to Europe and North America and had been granted citizenships it would have been hard to confiscate such assets. During the cold war there was still another enemy which parts of the society focused on. Therefore, sheiks and princes could might have got away with attempts to buy real political power in the West. I´m not sure that would work today. I suspect their assets would be confiscated one way or the other if they made an attempt today.
My impression is also that Gaddafi thought that Britain wished to be friends the Gaddafi regime when they released one of the Lockerbie bombers, an alleged cancer-sufferer. I think that he swallowed the bait and relaxed. My impression is that Middle Eastern dictators have more talent as regards controlling their own organization compared to their talent as regards controlling the population. As regards buying political power in the West they don´t seem to have understood anything. I sometimes get the impression that they actually believe that the transformation of politics and religion in the West during the 19th and 20th century actually is the result of grass-roots democracy and not the result of who is best at controlling the grass-roots and the politicians they elect. Russian oligarchs seem to have a much better understanding of politics. They move abroad, buy media and donate big money to political parties.
However, the fact that wealthy Arabs don´t understand Western politics does not mean the people in their countries do not prefer democracy. People generally prefer democracy (or a so-called managed democracy) since you don´t have to be as afraid as in a dictatorship for being abducted in the middle of the night by the secret police and killed in a torture chamber. People in Europe and North America feel the same. Moreover, those who control most of the politics in Europe and North America don´t feel that there is a need for a dictatorship. In the 1920s and 30s many mainstream politicians supported the anti-democrat count Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi (see Praktischer Idealismus). But after the war there was no need for replacing democracy with some kind of explicit dictatorship. That is probably the reason why explicit anti-democratic tendencies among mainstream parties have become so rare during the post-war era. Democracy has also become more consistent in some respects during the post-war era. During the interwar period mainstream parties thought they could combine democracy for a minority in their own country with dictatorship for the majority in the colonial empires. In some respects people like Coudenhove-Kalergi were actually “consistent” since they thought that the dictatorship should be extended to the minority in the colonial powers. I hope that they will never think that dictatorship will be “necessary” again.
Oh my, what could this be?
US Ambassador to Syria attacked!
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/08/29/robert_ford_attacked_...
There's your detonation fuse, Syria in 3 2 1...
If I was looking to steal a shit load of land with oil under it I might remove the quasi stability (however nasty) that now exist on said land and set up obvious un-stable regimes.
I think about how this "Arab Spring" thing is moving forward, (ain't it grand that we are seeing the over throw of Mubarak, Q'Daffy, and soon Assad!!! snicker sucker) and seeing the Muslim Bro take up the reins of power.
What, you think this is organic? or orchestrated? I think the perfect muslim "post turtle" would be the perfect tool to allow and promote this GREAT RESURGANCE of Mohammad and when in the fulness of time, after all hell breaks loose in the slums of Europe and across the ME oil region (fuck you westerners, no black soup for you) the super powers must come together or not, maybe every man for themselves, a free for all will break out to topple the next version of the Nazi regime. Of couse this happens at the expense of IsRILE (as the preachers would say).
Lots of shit gets broken, 10-15% of Planet Retard is cleansed of it's pesky amoeba's and the bankers are back at full strength refinancing the Marshall Plan 2.0. Bada Boom Bada Bing.
Just sayin
Now you can go back to your regularly scheduled distraction RP fest(ering)
Al-Qaeda Army Seizes Control of Tripoli - http://bit.ly/nT17D1
Uh huh, like I said, too well coordinated AND with the CIA on the ground we never saw this coming? Riiight, and a moose needs a hat rack.
Libya was always about oil for a collapsing Europe. And RP is right, we don't know who the rebels are, they are most likely MB mixed with Al-Qaeda. What Carter did for Iran, Obama is doing the same to the entire ME. Oh joy.
Libya was always about oil for a collapsing Europe. And RP is right, we don't know who the rebels are, they are most likely MB mixed with Al-Qaeda. What Carter did for Iran, Obama is doing the same to the entire ME. Oh joy.
We should not forget that there were no massacres taking place in Libya before the NATO attack.
Ron is wrong here. Army forces (especially hired guns from Nigeria) did fire at protesters. And some journalists too.
Let's Get Syria, Syria
Jordan on My Mind
In relation to what the Hitler smiley face said, an earmark is not a request for funding. It is an allocation of funding that is already authorized. If such authorized funding is not earmarked, it is STILL spent, but at the discretion of the executive agency involved rather than the Congress. Hence Ron Paul votes for earmarks because, if the money is going to be spent, it's best that it's allocated by Congress - but you'll find that he always votes NO on the actual appropriations bill containing the earmarks.
Ron Paul does not violate his principles. Period.
Welcome to http://www.replicabagsell.com .Our company was founded in 2004 and was committed to internet marketing businesses in 2006. Replica Handbags are always in a great demand and sells well. Recently, we launched some new and updated them on our website. Here you can find some scarce Cheap Christian Louboutin shoes, which were difficult to find from other websites. sac à main are also always in hotsale.
We have gotten many great comments from our customers and earn a good NFL jerseys reputation in foreign makerts, more than 90% customers are satisfied with our products and service, till now our online members NFL jerseys are beyond 80,000. As of right now, we currently serve customers from over Christian Louboutin 18 countries, and we are still growing. We really hope to expand our business through cooperation with individuals and companies from around the world.