No worries. Just a few guys selling Chinese take out to the crowd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan
Printable View
No worries. Just a few guys selling Chinese take out to the crowd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan
Islam and democracy don't match.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Sawyer
Democracy will be used by muslim to put islam up front (Sharia etc) but not vice versa.
Airstrikes Hit Government Sites in Tripoli - WSJ.com
"TRIPOLI, Libya—Warplanes from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization struck the Libyan capital late Monday and early Tuesday, demolishing parts of at least two government buildings in an intensifying campaign to halt Col. Moammar Gadhafi's attacks on rebel-held civilian areas.
There were no reports of fatalities in those buildings but doctors said two blasts shattered windows in a hospital near one of the targets, injuring a 6-year-old boy.
The attacks came hours after NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen warned that time was running out for the Libyan leader, who he said "should realize sooner rather than later that there's no future for him or his regime."
NATO officials, who began the campaign in March, have in recent weeks stepped up the pace of airstrikes in Tripoli on what they describe as the regime's military command and communications centers.
Late Monday, two explosions shook the city as jets flew overhead. At least one strike hit a two-story building that had been partially damaged in an airstrike on April 30 and is located close to two tall communications towers.
Officials said the building had housed several government agencies and private social services organizations. Journalists taken by government escorts to the building early Tuesday saw that a wall had been sheared away, exposing a basement through the destroyed floor.
At least four explosions were heard after 2 a.m. Tuesday. Two airstrikes hit a four-story building that government escorts said had once been an intelligence headquarters but now belonged to the Agriculture Ministry.
Journalists were taken to the Center for Burns and Plastic Surgery, about 200 meters away, but not to the targeted building. Some of the hospital's windows had been shattered, and ceiling panels and light fixtures had crashed to the floor in some rooms. Mohammed Omar, a doctor there, said the boy who was reported injured had been evacuated from the pediatrics ward, along with three other children, to rooms elsewhere in the hospital. He would not allow journalists to see them.
On Monday, four NATO airstrikes hit government weapons depots near Zintan in western Libya, according to rebels in control of the town. And Libyan state television said NATO warships in the Mediterranean had fired missiles Monday at "military and civilian targets" in rebel-held Misrata and the adjacent town of Zlitan.
There was no immediate confirmation from NATO on any of the reported attacks."
The silence on any NATO attacks on the terrorist army is deafening.
The comment by NATO General indicates NATO's view on Regime Change.
Terrorist Army. A new term? First I heard it but could have missed before.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
I think it might be what Ghaddafi calls the opposition, so it wouldn't be surprising if NATO weren't to bomb them. Unless the reference is to friendly fire. There have been some bad ones- "Oh, sorry, you guys have tanks? Nobody told us!"Quote:
Originally Posted by Norton
Al Qaeda is the least of USA and its western alliances worries these days. As an organization AQ is virtually defunct. That fact is widely acknowledged even by USA. However the political ideology that AQ spawned, namely resistance through terrorist tactics against western military intervention and political dominance in the Middle East, has spread and morphed into several other decentralized resistance groups. Osama Bin Laden the man can be killed, Al Qaeda the terrorist organization may fade into obscurity, but the resistance ideals he founded have only grown and morphed into several more separate movements in various places around the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by ceburat
Its convenient for western governments to lump them all in together and call them all Al Qaeda as thats a brand name western citizens have come to know and fear/hate. But the truth is that Al Qaeda is all but extingt these days. The assassination of its founder and spiritual/tactical leader is really of very little consequence in the battle against a much broader range of offshoot organizations with similar political ideals.
The concept sold to the western public by Obama is that the head of the worlds greatest terrorist organization has been eliminated. When in reality, all he has achieved is to nip of the tip of the tail of the dragon that plagues them. Obama, through his SEAL assassins, eliminated only a symbolic leader. They murdered an icon and made him a martyr for all time. Like trying to kill a starfish by hacking it to pieces. Each piece grows into a new animal. Effectively, there is no Al Qaeda anymore. That concept exists only in the minds of fearful western citizens who require an enemy to focus on, and a leader of that enemy to demonize.
Far from being a victory for the west, the assassination of Osama Bin Laden has achieved nothing to protect the west from terrorism. And indeed may well have only inspired more individuals to join one of the now many different wings of resistance to western interference in Middle East politics.
And now on to your comment;-- "we are at war with Al Qaeda".
What a lot of bullshit! Who declared that war? There was never any such declared war. It was all just a matter of political theatrics that some people such as you actually believed to be real. What about the "war on drugs" ? Does that make it legitimate to assassinate suspected drug dealers and deprive them of due judicial process? Of course there was never any "war on Al Qaeda". Bush declared a "war on terror" (ironic really), but nevertheless, it was nothing more than political rhetoric and there was, or is, no declared war on anybody by the USA at the moment. Just because some politician says we are at war with drug dealers or at war with terrorism or that we are at war against cigarette smoke doesnt really mean we are officially at war and therefore have the right to assassinate people without due judicial process.
Dont get too carried away with political theatrics and think its all real.
War is a serious subject and under the US constitution can not be declared by a president alone except under imminent threat to the country. Otherwise it must be approved by congress. No such declaration of war was ever passed by the US congress. All that happened was that Bush spruked off about his (figurative) "war on terror". It doesnt make it a real war and the real rules of war are certainly not applicable as you insist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PandaAl Qaeda is the least of USA and its western alliances worries these days. As an organization AQ is virtually defunct. That fact is widely acknowledged even by USA. However the political ideology that AQ spawned, namely resistance through terrorist tactics against western military intervention and political dominance in the Middle East, has spread and morphed into several other decentralized resistance groups. Osama Bin Laden the man can be killed, Al Qaeda the terrorist organization may fade into obscurity, but the resistance ideals he founded have only grown and morphed into several more separate movements in various places around the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by ceburat
Its convenient for western governments to lump them all in together and call them all Al Qaeda as thats a brand name western citizens have come to know and fear/hate. But the truth is that Al Qaeda is all but extingt these days. The assassination of its founder and spiritual/tactical leader is really of very little consequence in the battle against a much broader range of offshoot organizations with similar political ideals.
The concept sold to the western public by Obama is that the head of the worlds greatest terrorist organization has been eliminated. When in reality, all he has achieved is to nip of the tip of the tail of the dragon that plagues them. Obama, through his SEAL assassins, eliminated only a symbolic leader. They murdered an icon and made him a martyr for all time. Like trying to kill a starfish by hacking it to pieces. Each piece grows into a new animal. Effectively, there is no Al Qaeda anymore. That concept exists only in the minds of fearful western citizens who require an enemy to focus on, and a leader of that enemy to demonize.
Far from being a victory for the west, the assassination of Osama Bin Laden has achieved nothing to protect the west from terrorism. And indeed may well have only inspired more individuals to join one of the now many different wings of resistance to western interference in Middle East politics.
And now on to your comment;-- "we are at war with Al Qaeda".
What a lot of bullshit! Who declared that war? There was never any such declared war. It was all just a matter of political theatrics that some people such as you actually believed to be real. What about the "war on drugs" ? Does that make it legitimate to assassinate suspected drug dealers and deprive them of due judicial process? Of course there was never any "war on Al Qaeda". Bush declared a "war on terror" (ironic really), but nevertheless, it was nothing more than political rhetoric and there was, or is, no declared war on anybody by the USA at the moment. Just because some politician says we are at war with drug dealers or at war with terrorism or that we are at war against cigarette smoke doesnt really mean we are officially at war and therefore have the right to assassinate people without due judicial process.
Dont get too carried away with political theatrics and think its all real.
War is a serious subject and under the US constitution can not be declared by a president alone except under imminent threat to the country. Otherwise it must be approved by congress. No such declaration of war was ever passed by the US congress. All that happened was that Bush spruked off about his (figurative) "war on terror". It doesnt make it a real war and the real rules of war are certainly not applicable as you insist.
Typical anti-American B.S.
NATO Bombs Tripoli, Fight Stirs East Front
By AP / DIAA HADID and MICHELLE FAUL
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
(TRIPOLI, Libya) — NATO warplanes struck Tripoli early Tuesday in the heaviest bombing of the Libyan capital in weeks, hours after an uptick in fighting between rebels and Muammar Gaddafi's forces on a long deadlocked front line in the country's east.
NATO struck at least four sites in Tripoli, setting off crackling explosions that thundered through the city overnight. One strike hit a building that local residents said was used by a military intelligence agency. Another targeted a government building that officials said was sometimes used by parliament members. (Did NATO fail to save African migrants off Libya?)
It was not immediately clear what the other two strikes hit, but one of them sent plumes of smoke over Tripoli. Libyan officials would not say what that strike hit but the smoke appeared to come from the sprawling compound housing members of Gaddafi's family.
Between explosions, an aircraft dropped burning flares. Some residents responded by raking the sky with gunfire and beeping their horns.
The Tripoli bombing came just hours after heavy fighting was reported Monday on the eastern front, south of Ajdabiya, a rebel-held town about 90 miles (150 kilometers) south of Benghazi, the rebel headquarters in the east.
Hundreds of rebels gathered at a checkpoint outside Ajdabiya on Monday afternoon, when an AP photographer counted about 100 pickup trucks coming back from the front, each carrying four or five fighters and some with mounted submachine guns.
The rebels, firing their weapons into the air as they shouted and danced, said they had been told that NATO was going to launch airstrikes on Gaddafi's forces and they had been ordered to withdraw temporarily from the front.
No overall casualty figures were available. Two ambulances came to the local hospital, and doctors said they carried the bodies of four rebels.
The cobbled-together rebel army — comprised of some deserters from Gaddafi's forces and many civilians — has been bogged down for weeks in the area around Ajdabiya, unable to move on to the oil town of Brega. The rebels say their weapons cannot reach more than about 12 miles (20 kilometers) while Gaddafi's forces can fire rockets and shells up to twice that distance. Brega has an oil terminal and Libya's second-largest hydrocarbon complex.
Rebel pleas for heavier arms from abroad have not met any response, although NATO is carrying out airstrikes on regime forces as many countries intensify their call for Gaddafi — Libya's autocratic ruler for 42 years — to leave power. (See pictures of the battle for Libya.)
The rebels now control most of eastern Libya, and Gaddafi most of the west, including the capital, Tripoli. Exceptions in the west include pockets of embattled rebel-held towns along the border with Tunisia, and Misrata on the coast.
Also Monday, Gaddafi's forces shelled a northern Misratah neighborhood where many families from the besieged city center have fled to, said Abdel Salam, who identified himself as a resident-turned-fighter. He said NATO airstrikes hit targets on the city's southern edges, one of the areas where government forces have been concentrated after rebels pushed them back.
The fighting was threatening the port area, the city's only lifeline, preventing some aid ships from docking, Abdel Salam said. A ship carrying medical supplies and baby food was able to dock in Misratah on Monday, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross.
It was the first ship to arrive since Wednesday, when Gaddafi's forces fired a barrage of rockets into the port as the International Organization of Migration was evacuating nearly 1,000 people, mainly African migrant workers.
On Saturday, a rocket attack set the city's main fuel depot ablaze, destroying the main supply for vehicles, ships and generators powering hospitals and other key sites in a city darkened by electricity cuts.
The ICRC said it would use the chartered ship as a floating platform as its team works to reduce the danger of unexploded weapons on the streets of Misratah, visit prisoners detained by the rebels and help reunite families that lost contact when the city center was bombed.
The ship brought in 8,000 jars of baby food as well as urgently needed surgical instruments and medical dressings.
The ship docked safely though Gaddafi's forces were seen dropping mines into the port on Saturday from a white helicopter painted with a red cross, according to rebel spokesman Abdel-Hafidh Ghoga and Misratah residents.
The ICRC said it was concerned by those allegations of "a serious misuse of the emblem" designated by the Geneva Conventions to be used solely by people providing medical or other humanitarian aid.
A civilian spokesman for the rebels in Misratah, lawyer Abdulbaset Abumzirig, said Sunday that 30 to 40 people are injured daily and 10 to 15 are being killed by the bombardment. The city has been under siege for two months, and local doctors say the total death toll is more than 1,000.
In Tripoli, government escorts did not allow reporters to come near the site of one building that was hit in the NATO air attack early Tuesday. Local residents said the several-story building, which had buckled from the bombing, was used by a military intelligence agency.
Reporters were shown damage done to a nearby hospital where some windows were smashed and some ceiling vents fell to the ground. A hospital physician, Dr. Mustafa Rahim, said one child was badly injured but would not allow reporters to see him, saying the four-year-old boy was in intensive care.
Another strike targeted a building that two employees said was used by parliament members and housed a library for research into Gaddafi's writings. It was the second time the building had been targeted in the past week, they said.
A hole was punched into what appeared to be its basement and thick blocks of concrete were reduced to dusty rubble.
The handsome pastel-colored building was built by Italians when they ruled Libya in the 1920s. The building, which once served as Italy's naval headquarters, was considered an iconic Tripoli site.
It was not immediately clear what the other strikes targeted. Reporters may not leave their Tripoli hotel without government escorts.
Meanwhile, the U.N. humanitarian chief, Valerie Amos, asked all sides in the fighting for a pause in hostilities to allow food, water, medical supplies and other aid to be delivered to needy populations.
She told the Security Council the pause would also allow humanitarian workers to evacuate people from other countries who still remain in Libya and would give civilians a respite.
Hundreds missing after overcrowded boat from Libya capsizes - CNN.com
Hundreds missing after overcrowded boat from Libya capsizes
By the CNN Wire Staff
May 10, 2011 -- Updated 1301 GMT (2101 HKT)
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2011/05/1196.jpg
West African refugees wait to be evacuated near the port of Misrata, Libya, on April 30, 2011.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
- Migration organization: Libyan soldiers and officials force migrants on boats
- Sixteen bodies have been pulled from the water near Tripoli; the number of dead is unclear
- UNHCR: Two vessels from Libya with 480 on board have disappeared since March
- Spokeswoman: 250 people died in an April shipwreck
Tripoli, Libya (CNN) -- Fifty-four Somalis trying to escape Libya are dead or presumed dead after an overcrowded boat with hundreds on board capsized off the coast of Tripoli, the Somali ambassador to Libya said Tuesday.
Abdelghani Mohamed Oweys said the boat that capsized Friday was carrying more than 600 asylum seekers of various Arab and African nationalities -- 240 of whom were Somali.
One survivor, Ibrahim Abdi, said there were 750 people on the ship that went down.
Refugees who arrived on separate boats Saturday in Lampedusa -- an island south of mainland Italy -- reported seeing hundreds of people thrown into the water from the capsized boat, said Laura Boldrini, spokeswoman for the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees in Italy.
Boldrini said 16 bodies had been pulled out of the water from the Tripoli harbor. The total number of casualties is unknown.
"From what refugees are telling us, the Libyan authorities are facilitating the departures of non-Libyan citizens from Libyan coasts," Boldrini said. "Refugees are not considered at all as humans. Trips are organized on unlikely vessels, and they leave Libya without considering the weather forecast."
The capsized boat marks the latest tragedy in the Mediterranean Sea involving refugees trying to flee the crisis in Libya.
Since the end of March, two vessels departing from Libya have disappeared -- one carrying 320 people and the other 160, Boldrini said. In addition, "We know of a shipwreck on April 4, where 250 people died," Boldrini said.
One Somali woman told the International Organization for Migration in Lampedusa that she and her 4-month-old baby were on the latest doomed boat. Having lost her baby, the woman swam to shore and boarded another boat heading to Italy, the IOM said in a statement.
Although migrants reported seeing people swimming to shore, it is not clear how many from the boat survived, the IOM said.
Oweys said passengers on the capsized boat had travelled back to Tripoli from the Shousha refugee camp near the Libya-Tunisia border to undertake the dangerous sea voyage.
Migrants said many who had been waiting on land changed their minds about making the sea journey to Italy after seeing the boat capsize, according to the IOM. But migrants claimed that Libyan soldiers and officials forced them onto a waiting boat by firing their guns indirectly.
"Although this is the first time that IOM has been told of migrants being forced by Libyan officials to get on a boat, many have told IOM that they did not have to pay for their passage to Lampedusa while others say they have paid a nominal fee," the IOM said. "However, they say that they been stripped by officials and soldiers of their savings and possessions, including mobile phones."
Since the crisis in Libya started, more than 10,371 migrants of various nationalities have arrived on Lampedusa or the neighboring island of Linosa from Libya, the IOM said. About 1,887 arrived on five boats this past weekend alone, it said.
About 29,000 migrants have arrived in Italy from north Africa since February 20, the European Union border agency Frontex told CNN Tuesday.
The majority in the past week have departed from Libya and are African, Frontex said. The agency has been interviewing them and moving them to detention centers, it added.
The IOM said it hopes to continue sea evacuations from the besieged Libyan port city of Misrata. The IOM said it has evacuated 6,263 people from Misrata to the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi, which is controlled by rebels.
But Oweys said he predicted more tragedies involving voyages out of Libya.
"This will happen again and again," Oweys said. "People are getting desperate."
Perhaps there has been a declaration of war. Whether one in a legal sense treats the campaign against AQ as a 'War' or as a massive act of law enforcement against a terrorist network is somewhat fuzzy. Under the US Constitution though, the US President has a broad mandate to declare war.Quote:
Originally Posted by Panda
President Bush has found the attacks to constitute an attack that
has placed the United States in a state of armed conflict. In his
November 13, 2001 order establishing military commission to try
terrorists, the President found that:
International terrorists, including members of al Qaida, have
carried out attacks on United States diplomatic and military
personnel and facilities abroad and on citizens and property
within the United States on a scale that has created a state of
armed conflict that requires the use of the United States Armed
Forces.
As a matter of domestic law, the President’s finding settles the
question whether the United States is at war.
http://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/yoonyucombatants.pdf
Some legal beagles argue though that a state of war can only exist between States- although this does leave a gaping question as to the status of Civil War? What is true though is that Pres Bush- and now Obama- exploited legal loopholes or grey areas. In a state of war the 'rules' of law apply, under the Geneva Convention etc. Captured enemy combatants are to be treated as POW's, for example. Whilst displaying armed aggression that is 'legal' under a state of war, the Bush admin set the legally dubious precedent that the enemy were not 'combatants' as legally defined under a state of war- thus we have extrajudicial rendition, Gitmo, torture, ghost prisons etc.
Legal scholars can, and will, argue this until they are blue in the face. Certainly, the asymmetric and brutal manner of 'warfare' waged by AQ was met with an asymmetric and equally brutal response from the US and Allies. There are several dubious legalities/ illegalities involved.
First of all, this is not the OBL hit thread, and second, Ghadaffi says he is at war with Al Qaeda too. So for much for "the enemy of my enemy. . ."Quote:
Originally Posted by ceburat
Current events do not support your thesis.Quote:
Originally Posted by HermantheGerman
Basically what everyone appears to have forgotten is the "free world" isn't free it's controlled by MONEY, grow up and live with that fact!
NATO uncertain whether Gaddafi alive or dead
NATO said overnight that it did not know if Muammar Gaddafi was alive or dead but insisted one of its heaviest nights of bombardments was not aimed at killing the Libyan despot.
"All NATO targets are military targets, which means that the targets we have been hitting, and it happened also last [Monday] night in Tripoli, are command and control bunkers," Brigadier General Claudio Gabellini was quoted as saying by AFP. "NATO is not targeting individuals."
Asked whether Mr Gaddafi was still alive, the Italian said, "We don't have any evidence. We don't know what Ghadafi is doing right now. To tell you the truth, we are not really interested in what he's doing. Our mandate is to protect civilians from attacks or from the threats of attacks, so we are not looking after individuals".
... The bombardment came hours after NATO leader Anders Fogh Rasmussen warned that time was running out for the Libyan leader, who he said "should realise sooner rather than later that there's no future for him or his regime".
NATO uncertain whether Gaddafi alive or dead | Herald Sun
The gloves are off. I'm not exactly sure what the legal status of Nato is in it's Libyan campaign right now- but as far as I'm concerned, if they haven't declared outright war on the Qadaffi regime, they are being hypocrite's. It's war, and the fact there are no regular Nato troops on the ground there does not change that. The only real question now is whether Q will escape with his life or not, and how long it will take before he's ousted.
Whilst the newly married duke, a serving RAF officer, is off again on is holidays.
You don't think serving members of the RAF are entitled to leave? Anyway he's an air-sea rescue pilot......no need for him in Libya...:) Harry went to Afghanistan--bet that really pissed you off too. Pissed off if they do, pissed off if they don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
Quote:
Originally Posted by komanYou don't think serving members of the RAF are entitled to leave? Anyway he's an air-sea rescue pilot......no need for him in Libya...:) Harry went to Afghanistan--bet that really pissed you off too. Pissed off if they do, pissed off if they don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
Yes, harry went to the front, sat in a bunker shooting a machine gun at ghosts. As a serving member of his mothers army he takes the shilling he takes the shit.
William had a month off to "prepare" for his "arranged" wedding.
An air sea rescue might have come in handy for the reported drowned civilians heading for Italy.
How much "leave" does your average Joe get in the forces?
I think you meant to say he's full of shit? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
It is his mummies army! :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
Doubt it very much too many "gollies" old boy! :england:Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
Lots! :england:Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
the west will have a shock when all those countries become radical Muslim onesQuote:
Originally Posted by Norton
what will the west do then? same as in Algeria?
Edit.Quote:
Originally Posted by DrAndy
I don't think that will come as much of a surprise...situation now "between a rock and a hard place".Quote:
Originally Posted by DrAndy
Next step plan "M" or is it "N" not sure?
Depends on where you are, your rank and a few other variables. I used to get about 8 weeks when I was in....plus special compassionate leave if a close relative died.....plus extra leave for serving in shit holes, ...things like that. Why do you ask, and how do you know what Harry did in Afghanistan....did MOD send you a classified report?Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOhQuote:
Originally Posted by komanYou don't think serving members of the RAF are entitled to leave? Anyway he's an air-sea rescue pilot......no need for him in Libya...:) Harry went to Afghanistan--bet that really pissed you off too. Pissed off if they do, pissed off if they don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
Yes, harry went to the front, sat in a bunker shooting a machine gun at ghosts. As a serving member of his mothers army he takes the shilling he takes the shit.
William had a month off to "prepare" for his "arranged" wedding.
An air sea rescue might have come in handy for the reported drowned civilians heading for Italy.
How much "leave" does your average Joe get in the forces?
Have I missed any news lately? Or have you heard of any democratic laws /constitutions being written in these "current event states"?Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
Feel free to show me wrong.
Churches are burning in Egypt. And I will bet you the christian population will shrink, the more democratic Egypt gets. Just like the democratic State of Iraq. :rolleyes:
Or are you referring to Tunis:
Quote:
Islamist party wants to establish Sharia law in Tunisia
(AFP) – Mar 10, 2011
TUNIS — An Islamist party in Tunisia said Thursday it wants to install "by political means" a regime based on the strict Sharia form of Islamic law in the north African country.
"We are working to install a regime founded on Sharia," said Ridha Belhaj, a spokesman for the party Hizb At-Tahrir.
"Thanks to your democratic laws we will invade you; thanks to our religious laws we will dominate you."
^ Hizb ut-Tahrir (Arabic: حِزْبُ التَحْرِير Ḥizb at-Taḥrīr; English: Party of Liberation) is an international pan-Islamic political organisation whose goal is for all Muslim countries to unify as an Islamic state or caliphate ruled by Islamic law and with a caliph head of state elected by Muslims
... Hizb ut-Tahrir has spread to more than 40 countries, and by one estimate has about one million members
Hizb ut-Tahrir - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It is tiny, and it's goal is the same as Al Qaeda- a Caliphate. We have similar Messianic sects in the west, but I don't see any widespread panic about them. The Jehovah's Witnesses want something similar, and there are plenty more than one million of them.
there is a very good reason why western governments do support those small dictators in those regions, it's because there are no alternatives or the alternatives are much worse
however, those western governments have fucked up. With all the money they are pouring bribing those dictators, they could do the necessary reforms to crush the nasty alternatives, instead of crushing all the opposition, by investing in infrastructure and education. Unfortunately, such policies by certain governments are considered Socialists and therefore the bribes are paid to consolidate power. Complete waste of opportunities.