Libya’s air strike attacks, a repeat of history

It hurts and disappoints me a lot that the media covering the current turmoil in Libya provides a very biased angle skewed towards the Western democracies. But hey, isn’t that quite obvious already right?

So here’s the low down on what has happened and is happening and could happen.

What Has Happened?

Rebels in Libya began taking control over cities in an attempt to overthrow Muammar Gadaffi. Based on historical precedence, what could have happened is that these rebels have been receiving money and support from Western powers (United States). It’s a very simple strategy that the United States has used over the years –  incite violence from within the country, overthrow the government, step in to provide democratic solutions, set up US Bases and steal the oil.

Why do I say this?

Look at all the Middle East countries, you’ll find a US Base in each and every single one of them except for those which are anti-US. It’s a simple two-prong approach that the US has in dealing with the Middle East.

1) Steal Oil
2) Protect Israel

The US successfully did this to Afghanistan and Iraq. It’s doing the same to Libya. The US has probably refused to continue paying extra oil taxes to Libya and offered Gadaffi a deal to allow their contractors to come in and manage the oil (ie: steal). Gadaffi refused and hence, US informs that Libya will pay the price and that leads us to what is happening now.

What is happening now?

The US and it’s allied forces have been attacking Libya with air strikes. This happens just 2 days after United Nations Resolution Council approves and mandates a no-fly zone over Libya.

Think about it, how can several countries agree on a plan to air strike a country with such precision in 2 days. Such concerted attacks requires time and negotiations to plan. It is clearly obvious that these Western forces have planned for this attack much earlier and instigated the UN Security Council to mandate it so that it is ‘LEGAL’.

This is of course the lesson learnt from the attack on Iraq.

Why are only a few countries taking part in the assault then?

These are the countries who already have tenders to the oil there. They have vested interest in the oil and have agreed on sharing the oil.

It’s simple.

China, India and Russia have condemned the attacks but refused to assist because they want to protect their own resources. IF they enter into a war protecting Libya, the other countries might wage attacks on them and if they lose, they’ll also lose out on their resources which they have been stocking up on.

The world is running short on resources and the only few countries that have abundance of it are the Middle Eastern countries, who, unfortunately, seem to be very volatile to corruption by the US. Hence, Western nations take advantage of such greed for corruption by the royal and government elite and steals the oil for their own reserves.

What will happen next?

The rebels will win this war because military capability by Libyan forces is beyond the concerted efforts. The rebels leader will be installed as the new government and will receive corruption money from these countries involved in the attacks. These countries will then set up bases in Libya to manage, steal the oil.

The only way Libya will win is if there is support from other countries, military support, which is far fetched.

After Libya, next is Iran.

6 thoughts on “Libya’s air strike attacks, a repeat of history

  1. Pingback: India, World, allied powers, allied soldiers, chief executive officer, fictional representation, google, lyndon larouche, world war 3, youtube

  2. My goodness me, your level of misinformation is just egregious!!

    Sweeping statements like US bases in “each and every one of them( Middle East countries)” are plain and utter nonsense. Which bases are you referring to? I know of only a few, the most contentious being only those in Saudi.

    Steal oil, protect Isreal??!! Which oil fields in Afghanistan are you refering to when you use it as an example? In what way does Afghanistan threaten Israel? Wait, let me guess. The Afghans have a secret nuclear arsenal on loan to them by aliens from the Proxima Centauri star system??!!

    China and India have been very muted in their comments on the air strikes. The only countries that have been vociferous about criticism have been Russia and South Africa ( as head of the African Union).

    Saying that the rebels are receiving money from the Western countries does a great disservice to people who are risking their lives for freedom. Sure, not all of them have noble intentions, but painting the rebels with a single tar brush is just extremist and downright wicked! All this to advance your militant Islamic credentials????

    The Idea Cauldron

    Like

  3. Read carefully, I dispute ONLY your example of Afghanistan figuring in the stealing oil / Protecting Israel angle, not Libya. Please show me documentary proof that Afghanistan was invaded because of oil and protecting the interests of Israel. Don’t be selectively dyslexic.

    To me, the reason for attacking Libya is obvious. Afghanistan? Most commentators would say that the reason for attacking it isn’t oil, let alone protecting Israel. It has more to do with denying global terrorism a deep hinterland and let’s face it, a modicum of revenge for 9/11 as well. But I’d like to see you present your arguments to the blogosphere that the reason is oil and Isreal.

    Like

  4. I quote your words “The rebels leader will be installed as the new government and will receive corruption money from these countries involved in the attacks”. And again , “Western nations take advantage of such greed for corruption by the royal and government elite and steals the oil for their own reserves.”

    Do you really think that the rebel cause is so tainted that its leaders are basically not freedom fighters but corrupt lackeys of Big Corporations? You tarred the entire cause with a single brush! Even some of the Arab countries have already issued statements in support of the rebel cause. Are you now going to argue that they too have all been bought off?

    I detest Western hegemony like everyone else, but to resort to unsubstantiated conspiracy theories and taking cheap shots says a lot more about you than about your message!

    Like

  5. Like you, I think the West has lost it’s moral high ground and we should make them account for their wrongs ( my article at idea cauldron.wordpress, ” I’ll trade your donkey for this armoured vehicle”). However, resorting to populist conspiracy theories just muddies the real picture for others, don’t you think.

    Like

Share your thoughts on this post!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s