The jasmine revolution spreads?

[Warenwolf]

While I see too "saving the civilians" as justification intended for the general public and not the real reason - I truly doubt that a variation of "golden standard" is something Libya was attacked for.

Sounds like the usual run of the mill conspiracy theory honestly.

Ahh, the priorities of libyan rebels.

I am just going to comment on the info about the formation of central bank and economy structures:

About the time they did! "Endless money forms the sinews of war" (Cicero) and all that. You don't fight a long war on empty stomach and guns without bullets.

[xalien]

Yeah, sure, everything that questions the official line is automatically pushed under the "conspiracy theories" category. But as soon as you start digging yourself instead of passively listening to officials is when you find out that most of their talks is a pile of crap.

Here's another I-don't-want-to-be-a-sheep-anymore case.

[Warenwolf]

No one should follow the regime's official line unquestionably. However the same scrutiny should be also applied to those that oppose the "official line".

Which I did with that russian (?) article you linked to. I checked who the man was and what he stood for. Clearing the Moscow of Azeri and Chechens was one of his campaign's main cause when campaigning for the position of mayor of Moscow and claimed that the azeri people were to blame for slowdowns in the traffic during rush hours. This makes me doubt his ability to understand the world around him.
He stands for religious based russian nationalism. Which basically makes me think he is taking side with gadaffi because gaddafi is perceived as being anti-american.

The article itself makes references to Zionist Mafia which makes me doubt its agenda. It doesn't offer any sources for its conclusions - I googled some of its statements which of course led nowhere.

Hence the conspiracy label from me...

I am not going to spend any more time on this. I do not think that "saving the children" was the cause for the intervention but I doubt that the real reason is some outlandish conspiracy theory. Again I will repeat myself:

No one should follow the regime's official line unquestionably. However the same scrutiny should be also applied to those that oppose the "official line".

[xalien]

No one should follow the regime's official line unquestionably. However the same scrutiny should be also applied to those that oppose the "official line"

I agree with that, hence my "start digging yourself". As it is, sure, we may question the background and agenda of the man who proposed the idea but it still doesn't necessary mean that he's wrong on this one. It may change as the new information gets discovered, but until then I see no other way but to follow the simple principle: if it looks like a dog, walks like a dog and barks like a dog then probably it is one. Sure, it could actually be a cat in disguise if we were to believe the "free and independent" media (which is mostly owned by various financial structures), but unless they can prove it by some dna test I'll stick to what simple logic and common sense tells me.

After all, there's not much room for maneuvering when trying to explain all the things that are happening when you consider one fact: that the right to print and distribute the world currency - the dollar, belongs to a private institution independent from anything (including the government).

[Warenwolf]

Well, I leave the debate about world domination through fiat currency vs gold standard* to those on this forum that are more knowledgeable than me (and belongs to some other thread). IMHO force projection is far more complicated affair...


That being said - Gaddafi has absolutely no way of influencing the world affairs. He had some political weight in impoverished Africa where his oil money gave him political clout. Entire idea of Gaddafi changing the world's economical system** and events in Libya being reason for this is a pipe dream.


*BTW - Alan Greenspan was early proponent for the gold standard. If you don't know who he is, google him.

**China deciding to slightly change their banking system has far more international impact than Gaddafi (yet again) preaching about some of his visions.

[Warenwolf]

Symptoms of Chinese regimes wariness regarding the revolutions in the middle east and north africa

[xalien]

BTW - Alan Greenspan was early proponent for the gold standard.

Of course he was, after he said it he probably regretted it in a years to come for letting this heresy to slip through. The whole system for creating the debts that could never be paid back required the dollar to be disconnected from anything of the real value to allow the printing machine go full power.

Anyway, I agree - no need to highjack the thread.

[Aye Capn]

Do you really think the Libyan adventure was well-planned enough to be part of a currency conspiracy?

You yourself said it: if it acts like a dog ... "Ooh, squirrel!" seems to be our foreign policy.

That doesn't mean we aren't obligated by several factors to fix Libya now that we've waded into it. Kaddafi played ball with us back on 9/11 precisely to stay our hand and escape our wrath. Should he remain in power after our unprovoked attack he will only make trouble for us -- we did betray him, after all. He's too dangerous to be left in power now that we've chosen to make an enemy of him.

There are or were civilians being killed in Iran and Syria, too, and those countries' leaders were our enemies to start with. If Obama is going to randomly jump into discretionary wars one might wish for a slightly more propitious landing of the darts on the dartboard.

[BeidAmmikon]

Open letter to Mssrs. Obama, Cameron, Sarkozy (source: Pravda)

Well said. It puts the warmongers to shame.

[Dragoongfa]

Open letter to Mssrs. Obama, Cameron, Sarkozy (source: Pravda)

Well said. It puts the warmongers to shame.

You don't use blind artillery fire and warplanes on your OWN civilian centers, period.

[Warenwolf]

Does the West cherry picks the conflicts it gets outraged over? Sure, it does.
Shooting of protesters in Iraq, Bahrain and Yemen is being ignored while we are supposed to be outraged over the bombing of civilians in Libya.

That being said the article is just the usual outrage over West from the people who wish that they were in position to be in the position to do the same.

"v Pravde net izvestiy, v Izvestiyakh net pravdy" is still true today.

[Dragoongfa]

Does the West cherry picks the conflicts it gets outraged over? Sure, it does.
Shooting of protesters in Iraq, Bahrain and Yemen is being ignored while we are supposed to be outraged over the bombing of civilians in Libya.

Don't forget Syria.

[ObadiahtheSlim]

I think the difference is that Libya actually broke down into a full scale civil war before the rest of the world started to intervene. Still it bothers me a bit that the ones most critical of Bush's foray into Iraq were a little to eager to hop into Libya. Particularly after Libya gave up their nuclear program and started playing ball with the West. Sorta sends a bad message to N. Korea wanna be's like Iran.

[Warenwolf]

How so ObadiahtheSlim?

Cameron was not critical of Bush's foray into Iraq . While Sarkozy opposed the invasion of Iraq, there are indications that he did so because of the public opinion in france at the time (only speculations from my side - no hard evidence).
His foreign minister was proponent of the invasion.

Or did you had someone else in mind?

Particularly after Libya gave up their nuclear program and started playing ball with the West. Sorta sends a bad message to N. Korea wanna be's like Iran.

Honestly, IMHO, I think that the military operation in the Libya has very much to do with the fear of the mainly french and somewhat british politicians that their countries will be sidelined totally in the middle east and NA.
Also remember that those two countries sided with rebels well before the tide turned against rebels. Once it looked like the rebels were going to be defeated, the french and british spearheaded the efforts to establish the no-fly zone (which has now expanded into air-support mission for the rebels)

In other words I don't think the reasons are 100% altruistic but I don't think that the Libyan operation is a result from a 100% rational, well thought out strategy either.

[BeidAmmikon]

Another gem of policy come reality show - Which path to Persia?
The document is signed by six authors - five of whom are affiliated with the Saban Institute, therefore the policies they recommend are totally understandable. All things considered, you may read for yourself about the ways to "regime change" in any country the US (in a matter of speaking) see fit.

[Warenwolf]

This years may very well be known as the year of the revolutions (just as 1848 was/is) by the history:

"A young girl who shouted "freedom" was among dozens of people arrested as police in Azerbaijan snuffed out protests against the rule of president Ilham Aliyev."

[imperium3]

Bahrain and Yemen seem to be largely disappearing off the news, particularly Bahrain is only really popping up in Iranian news despite the fact that the violence is still ongoing. I suspect vested interests in our media (even al-Jazeera which if Wikileaks is accurate, has a lot of links with Qatar). However we now are seeing a lot of Syria, because our glorious government doesn't like them very much.

@Warenwolf
Trouble is that IIRC none of the revolutions in 1848 actually succeeded... and it looks like the same is happening here. Tunisia and Egypt succeeded in toppling the figureheads but a lot of the old regime remains, particularly in Tunisia, and if not stopped will retain control. Algeria and Morrocco have vanished from the news but seem to have died down. Libya as we know is a mess, the only results I can see are either a Western ground invasion or partition of the country (as Gadaffi cannot be beaten on the ground by these rebels). Meanwhile with the possible exception of Yemen the Arab peninsula is firmly under the boot of their rulers, supported by our own taxes. And in Syria, Assad has huge popularity outside of the rioting cities, so unless he does something daft or the US interferes, he's not going anywhere...

[Warenwolf]

@Imperium3

Of course.
But remember that revolutions in 1848 had lasting effect on the psyche on those that held the power and the people. The initial result was zero change. But the later reformist learned from the revolutions and slowly changed the European political landscape. Generation later the Europe was a very different place.

I had earlier in this thread predicted decade or two of instability before the fundamental changes occur in Egypt. I don't believe that an instant political change in any country will instantly and magically improve the people's lot (see the de-colonization process).

Saudi-Arabia is terra incognita though. Even Iran is more democratic than Saudi-Arabia and yet its population seem content. Of course, once the oil stops dripping we will see how long that lasts...

[ObadiahtheSlim]

Indeed. The dictators mostly stay in power through patronage. They only can afford such patronage because of their oil money. When the oil stops flowing, there will be hell to pay.

[Aye Capn]

While Sarkozy opposed the invasion of Iraq, there are indications that he did so because of the public opinion ...

France was neck-deep in the Oil for Food Scandal at the time, but of course that was more Chirac than Sarkozy. It wouldn't surprise me if the rot ran deep enough to have affected someone who was close to Sarkozy, although no evidence exists that Sarkozy himself was tainted in any way by the scandal.
Still, that a lot of important people in France had a lot to lose is a pretty good reason not to upset the apple cart. Even if Sarkozy wasn't personally involved with anyone caught up in OFF he wouldn't want to make powerful enemies unnecessarily by goring their ox without a compelling reason.