Printable View
One of the intentions was to ship entire warehouses of Gaddafi's huge arms stockpiles to 'friendly Islamists we know will turn them on us because that's the way it works' in Syria, to depose Assad.Quote:
Originally Posted by Humbert
Have you ever questioned the coincidence that NATO could identify not just Gadaffi's escape convoy but pinpoint his car, yet failed to notice several 1000-truck arms convoys heading for Benghazi and Egypt among other 'friendly' destinations?
I've never heard of the coincidence, perhaps you could elucidate.Quote:
Originally Posted by jabir
The Hillary Emails released in December 2015 prove beyond any doubt the motives behind the murder of Gaddafi and the destruction of Libya, read for yourself :
https://ellenbrown.com/2016/03/13/ex...llarys-emails/
One Email from Sidney Blumenthal reads :
Wonder what happened to all that gold and silver and to the between 100 and 150 billion dollars (depending who you believe) frozen in Libyan bank accounts ?Quote:
Qaddafi’s government holds 143 tons of gold, and a similar amount in silver . . . . This gold was accumulated prior to the current rebellion and wasintended to be used to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden Dinar. This plan was designed to provide the Francophone African Countries with an alternative to the French franc (CFA).In a “source comment,” the original declassified email adds:
According to knowledgeable individuals this quantity of gold and silver is valued at more than $7 billion. French intelligence officers discovered this plan shortly after the current rebellion began, and this was one of the factors that influenced President Nicolas Sarkozy’s decision to commit France to the attack on Libya. According to these individuals Sarkozy’s plans are driven by the following issues:
- A desire to gain a greater share of Libya oil production,
- Increase French influence in North Africa,
- Improve his internal political situation in France,
- Provide the French military with an opportunity to reassert its position in the world,
- Address the concern of his advisors over Qaddafi’s long term plans to supplant France as the dominant power in Francophone Africa
Does not appear to have gone to rebuilding the country or reinstating the fresh water supply the humanitarian bombs destroyed.
No need to tip-toe around. Make your point instead of going thru the ruse of posing questions.Quote:
Originally Posted by jabir
In your mind and in the minds of other tin foil hat nutters maybe.Quote:
Originally Posted by birding
Quote:
Originally Posted by birding
The way this has been edited implies that it was the a desire to get his hands on the gold that this was one of the factors "that influenced President Nicolas Sarkozy’s decision to commit France to the attack on Libya."
When in fact a key sentence has been removed:
Which the email went on to describe.Quote:
3. Qaddafi has nearly bottomless financial resources to continue indefinitely, according to the latest report we have received
https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/6528
You should ask yourself why the author felt compelled to remove this key piece of information from the email.
Ah, I know, to sucker in idiots like you.
^I knew they would be along sooner or later to work in the international banking conspiracy behind all of this.
Some of the posters on this thread make Trump look sane. Quite sad. Where are their caregivers? Are the needy just left to fend for themselves?
I feel like the Principal just stuck his head in the door with a stern look on his face.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton
^You weren't on the Detention list.
In Britain, they call it "care in the community" which is a euphemism for "lob the fuckers out on the streets to shout at shopping trolleys full of rubbish".Quote:
Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton
^I think in the US, they issue them a laptop, and send them on their merry way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracudaQuote:
Originally Posted by birding
The way this has been edited implies that it was the a desire to get his hands on the gold that this was one of the factors "that influenced President Nicolas Sarkozy’s decision to commit France to the attack on Libya."
When in fact a key sentence has been removed:
Which the email went on to describe.Quote:
3. Qaddafi has nearly bottomless financial resources to continue indefinitely, according to the latest report we have received
https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/6528
You should ask yourself why the author felt compelled to remove this key piece of information from the email.
Ah, I know, to sucker in idiots like you.
Why is that such a key piece of information ?
The document is clear on the reasons Gaddafi had to go, principally about him proposing an African gold based currency which would have sidelined the dollar.
France was more than willing to be involved for their own selfish reasons.
And it is clear that Hillary knew what was going on.
Only the gullible like yourself still insist that Libya was decimated for humanitarian reasons.
so now you are supporting dictators, and next you are all for Democracy and the freedom of people in certain region of the worldQuote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
how schizophrenic are you, Harry ? can't have it both ways,
Clearly the fact that he had the resources to keep killing his own people was the major factor in taking him out.Quote:
Originally Posted by birdingQuote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracudaQuote:
Originally Posted by birding
The way this has been edited implies that it was the a desire to get his hands on the gold that this was one of the factors "that influenced President Nicolas Sarkozy’s decision to commit France to the attack on Libya."
When in fact a key sentence has been removed:
Which the email went on to describe.Quote:
3. Qaddafi has nearly bottomless financial resources to continue indefinitely, according to the latest report we have received
https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/6528
You should ask yourself why the author felt compelled to remove this key piece of information from the email.
Ah, I know, to sucker in idiots like you.
Why is that such a key piece of information ?
The document is clear on the reasons Gaddafi had to go, principally about him proposing an African gold based currency which would have sidelined the dollar.
France was more than willing to be involved for their own selfish reasons.
And it is clear that Hillary knew what was going on.
Only the gullible like yourself still insist that Libya was decimated for humanitarian reasons.
The rest of it is from unidentified "knowledgeable individuals" which means jack shit.
What are you babbling on about Buttplug?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragonflyso now you are supporting dictators, and next you are all for Democracy and the freedom of people in certain region of the worldQuote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
how schizophrenic are you, Harry ? can't have it both ways,
I hope these euro Trump knobs keep banging away about Libya. The fact is most Americans were happy to see Gaddafi skewered. He was one of the world's biggest sponsors of terrorism. If anything. all this crap longway and birdbrain post show Hillary to be a strong and decisive leader. The only people who care about this dictator are spineless europacifists.
The UK and West warmed to Qadaffi for oil deals a couple of years before he died.Quote:
Originally Posted by Humbert
After the Libyan uprising - AND Qaddafi trying to establish an alternative to the US petrol-dollar - it was best to have him killed.
If you try to veer away from the US petrol dollar you will end up dead. The US empire depends the USD oil bourse.
^He's dead. Americans could care less. He was a criminal and a terrorist. Any attempts to stroke sympathy for him are a waste of time. Stick to Benghazi its an easier sell.:rofl:
That's a problem in today's world, Americans could care less. Last time they cared enough to button down their leaders was over Vietnam, but then went to sleep again giving them license to destroy people and countries and regions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Humbert
As for Gadaffi and Libya, giving you full benefit of looking several years ahead, would you still depose him because he was as you say a 'criminal and a terrorist'?
We are talking about issues regarding the election and Hillary Clinton's decisions regarding Libya. Americans are concerned about their own security. Eliminating Gaddafi is eliminating risk for Americans. Too bad he wasn't taken out before Lockerbie.
The US didnt even have the lead role in the attacks on Libya. It was Sarkozy and Cameron that kicked the whole thing off in the first place the US joined in after the fact. Maybe you should put the blame where it belongs on the doors of the UK and France.Quote:
Originally Posted by jabirThat's a problem in today's world, Americans could care less. Last time they cared enough to button down their leaders was over Vietnam, but then went to sleep again giving them license to destroy people and countries and regions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Humbert
As for Gadaffi and Libya, giving you full benefit of looking several years ahead, would you still depose him because he was as you say a 'criminal and a terrorist'?
I agree that Qaddafi was a bad cat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Humbert
Did elimination Gaddafi eliminate a risk for Americans?
IMO, no.
It has increased it.
Impossible to prove or disprove. It's about perception.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cold PizzaI agree that Qaddafi was a bad cat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Humbert
Did elimination Gaddafi eliminate a risk for Americans?
IMO, no.
It has increased it.
Actually, Nixon was perceptive enough to see that the anti-war movement was really an anti-draft movement. So he ended the draft and the bottom fell out of the anti-war movement. Done.Quote:
Originally Posted by jabir
Don't forget that there were massive demonstrations all over the US--all over the world, for that matter--before we invaded Iraq. Bush and Co. just ignored everone.