Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Libya Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: This Could End Very Badly
SYSOP    11/15/2014 5:59:12 AM
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12   NEXT
keffler25       11/15/2014 4:42:00 PM
France was after the oil and Obama wanted to help a fellow socialist nation tweak Burlusconi and Italy. 
 
From incompetents (Sarkozy and Obama) comes the current incompetence.
 
It will take 30 years to clean up the mess.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Johnny    Socialists@keffler   11/15/2014 8:06:09 PM
Calling Sarkozy and Obama socialists justs shows you don't know what a socialist is.
 
Quote    Reply

kerravon       11/16/2014 12:37:59 AM
"France was after the oil"

Saying that France was after oil is as offensive as saying that Bush was after Iraqi oil. In either case, do you have quotes from either the government or the war-supporters that they were supporting the war so they could steal oil? And in either case, where is the evidence of oil being stolen?
 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       11/16/2014 1:24:36 AM
There is not enough oil in Libya to be worth the expenditure of capitol.  Same for Syria, which is probably why both countries have been allowed to deteriorate into the messes they are.  No one has an economic reason to help them out.
 
Quote    Reply

keffler25       11/16/2014 2:03:18 AM
France was after the oil and Obama wanted to help a fellow socialist nation tweak Burlusconi and Italy.
 
Sarkozy was a French capitalist (Hungarian father and Greek-Jewish-"French" Catholic mother. About as 'French' as I am.).
 
His 'faction' ( I use the German political meaning of the word, because France is a factionalized political system typical of many European bureaucratic states where you have the constantly shifting center coalitions of two, three or more factions trying to hold a political alliance together in the face of the crazy lunatic fringes at the extremes of the European political spectrum--> that is the fascists and the communists.) was the Union For A Popular Movement, an amalgamation of several center right regional parties that was turned into a 'national' coalition by that utter BASTARD, Jacques Chirac, to oppose the Socialist faction which had done the same to oppose the Gaulists in the 1980s. 
 
But what that MEANS is that you have a 'center right politician' in FRENCH terms; i.e. someone who would make a British Fabian socialist blanch in disgust at his extreme views.       
 
Sarkozy believed in French state capitalism, and 'soft' (disguised) imperialism. That is Gaulist, but it is NOT democratic nor is it anything but anathema to an American.  
 
And that brings me to Obama and why the French thought they could get him to help them when they were after Libya's oil.
 
One of the things that people forget, is just like France once RULED most of West Africa directly and still consider West Africa their special preserve (Hence why France is fighting in Mali, in Senegal, Nigeria, and interfering in the Ivory Coast and even stuck its unwanted nose into Liberia where it has no business being.) so Italy RULED Libya.  
The Italians despite Qaddafi's crazy shenanigans with other western states kept good or at least 'correct' relations with that madman, and were the European go-to force of stability in the tribalized and satrap lunatic run country. In exchange for Italian under the table help after the Russians were chased out, Qaddafi cut Italy special oil deals.
 
 
 
Now I could tell you that America's hands are fairly clean, but those cruise missiles that blew the holes in the Libyan IAD for the Armee de l'Aire and the intelligence, and AMMUNITION that European Nato did not have, had to come from somewhere.      
 
The US military wanted nothing to do with that farce. But we have a socialist president who is Saul Alinsky trained and beholden to certain authors of 'color revolutions' around the globe for his own elevation. He, that president, ordered cooperation with the French in this 'masquerade' of a color revolution. And the US military minimally obeyed...
 
If you KNOW the American military and FRANCE, that is like the president ordering that military to cooperate with the Russians in the matter of the Ukraine.   
 
He tried that stunt again in Syria, but this time, the US military told him HELL NO. Enough was enough.  
 

 
Quote    Reply

keffler25       11/16/2014 2:08:46 AM
Read the above last post I made about that subject and make up your own mind. I did not reach my conclusions lightly.   
"France was after the oil"



Saying that France was after oil is as offensive as saying that Bush was after Iraqi oil. In either case, do you have quotes from either the government or the war-supporters that they were supporting the war so they could steal oil? And in either case, where is the evidence of oil being stolen?

 
Quote    Reply

kerravon       11/16/2014 4:27:19 AM
keffler25, I read your post, and not one single thing in it was anything remotely proving that France was involved because it wanted to steal oil. You didn't quote the French president or parliament saying "let's do it for the oil". You didn't provide any survey of the war-supporting French saying "let's do it for the oil". You didn't provide any survey of the other pro-war people from other countries. All you have is a gigantic conspiracy theory where the leader of France is some sort of Alien Space Bat who is in no way representative of his people, and is "doing it for the oil", despite absolutely everyone else doing it for non-oil reasons.

The same nonsense was told about the US going into Iraq, with zero evidence of that being the motive, and zero evidence of a single drop of oil being stolen. Zero evidence of France stealing a single drop of oil either. Why are you so inclined to believe conspiracy theories with zero evidence and zero logic instead of just listening to what both politicians and war-supporters explicitly say what their motives are?
 
Quote    Reply

kerravon       11/16/2014 4:33:29 AM
Basically you can choose to believe either a complicated conspiracy or a simple truth. I don't know why some people are so keen to believe conspiracies. I suppose it makes the world more interesting, or makes them feel smarter than all the "sheeple", thanks to the fact that they shelled out $7 on a book containing a cute conspiracy.
 
Quote    Reply

kerravon       11/16/2014 4:49:16 AM
Credit where due ...

http://www.cracked.com/article/157_5-myths-that-people-dont-realize-are-admitted-hoaxes_p2/

This sort of thing has the same attraction as any good conspiracy theory: the "I am special because I have secret knowledge the common sheeple never will!" principle.

How better to impress your dull traditional friends than revealing to them the suppressed truth that will totally blow their closed suburban minds? And you only had to spend six bucks in an airport bookstore to get it!

And, like any conspiracy theory, it's difficult or impossible to disprove.
 
Quote    Reply

kerravon       11/16/2014 5:00:06 AM
And as explained here:

http://www.mutazilah.org/enlight.htm

Even if you could scan Bush/Sarkozy's brains to prove that their "real reasons" were bad/stupid/whatever, it doesn't matter a damn. What matters is whether the action was good as explained by good people doing it for good reasons.
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics