January 26, 2016
Libya: The Imperial Violence Keeps Giving
Imperial violence is a gift that keeps giving. After the U.S. lied to the UN Security Council about alleged Ghaddafi threats against "protesters" in Benghazi the UNSC allowed for the use of force to protect them. Russia and China abstained instead of vetoing it.
Libya, Spring 2011
The U.S. and its NATO allies abused the UNSC resolution. They weaponized the "protesters", bombed the country to smithereens and killed the leading government figures including Muhammar Ghaddafi. Then U.S. Secretary of State, Clinton the monster, famously bragged (vid): "We came, we saw, he died."
The UNSC resolution is the reason why then Russian President Medvedev was not allowed to run for a second term. Now President Putin - then as Prime Minister only responsible for interior politics - said that as he read the UNSC resolution he found holes in its wording a whole army could march through. Medvedev had made a huge mistake by allowing it to pass. That he had to go is the only positive result of the NATO attack on Libya.
Now the U.S. wants to attack Libya again:
Gen. Joseph Dunford Jr., the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters on Friday that military officials were “looking to take decisive military action” against the Islamic State, or ISIS, in Libya, where Western officials estimate the terrorist group has roughly 3,000 fighters.
Administration officials say the campaign in Libya could begin in a matter of weeks. They anticipate it would be conducted with the help of a handful of European allies, including Britain, France and Italy.
This will go it always goes, bomb strikes, special forces on the ground, proxy fighters trained by U.S. forces or private companies who will then develop into their death squads and terrorize the population.
There is chaos in Libya as was foreseeable and predicted here when the war on Libya began. There are many armed groups and two parliaments and two rudimentary governments, on in the east and one in the west. The UN just tried to set up a third, unity government and failed:
Libya's internationally recognized parliament voted on Monday to reject a unity government proposed under a United Nations-backed plan to resolve the country's political crisis and armed conflict. ... Since 2014, Libya has had two competing parliaments and governments, one based in Tripoli and the other in the east. Both are backed by loose alliances of armed groups and former rebels who helped topple Muammar Gaddafi in 2011.
Many of the "rebels" who were paid by Qatar and others to overthrow the Libyan government are Islamists. Many went from Libya on to Syria to fight against the Syrian government and the U.S. helped to supply weapons from Libya to those foreign terrorists in Syria.
It is unlikely that the real U.S. interest now is to fight the few foreign Islamic State fighters in Libya. Most of the Islamic State followers in Libya are locals of some specific tribes who earlier were part of this or that local Islamist gang. They are not a threat and other local forces will hold them at bay.
The U.S. wants the whole country under its indirect control but has so far only half of it:
The armed forces allied to the eastern government are led by Gen. Khalifa Haftar, a former Gaddafi ally. He has also fought Islamist militants in the eastern city of Benghazi and has become one of Libya's most divisive figures, enjoying strong support in the east but despised by forces allied to the government in Tripoli.
Haftar was once with Ghaddafi but was shunned after he screwed up in a war with Chad. Around 1990 he tried to overthrow Ghaddafi but failed. He went to the U.S., became a U.S. citizen and worked for the CIA. In 2011 he was back in Libya again attempting to overthrow Ghaddafi.
In 2011 the U.S. failed to install its proxy ruler over Libya. It is now going back in a new attempt to gain full control over the country and its resources. Once established in Libya it can subjugate countries in northern Africa.
It is easy to see that this will develop into more war, more terror and more refugees who will flee their home. The imperial violence keeps giving.
Posted by b on January 26, 2016 at 11:34 AM | Permalink
Thank you for the write up. I do not know who is worse. The Islamists or a US backed militants. Is there a huge difference?
In my mind that is the biggest problem with US Foreign Policy. The government breaks apart a country with the help of its Wahhabist allies but can not gain control of that territory because their allies are really their enemies. There is no cohesion in US Foreign Policy. The DoD actively tries to slow down the programs of the CIA and State Dpt while the CIA/State Dpt arm/train militants that will fight US soldiers.
Are there any stories of US military personnel killing a CIA operative working with Islamist extremists. From what I read there does not seem to be a lot of data sharing between the two organizations. Shakes head.
I really wish Sibel Edmonds would have gone to jail and discussed what she knows about foreign espionage and how it effects US policy.
Posted by: AnEducatedFool | Jan 26, 2016 12:02:50 PM | 1
I do not know who is worse. The Islamists or a US backed militants. Is there a huge difference?
Its the same thing, ISIS and "rebels" are both created by US and its alies, just through different channels (and sometimes through the same). Sometimes US even pretends it fights one or another Al Qaeda group, in reality they are US's bastard children, used as its proxy terrorists.
Posted by: Harry | Jan 26, 2016 12:28:57 PM | 2
You watched, he died, you came!
...now, what more do you want?
Posted by: Petri Krohn | Jan 26, 2016 12:29:38 PM | 3
In the specific case of Libya I am assuming that the US is not backing both claimants or at least is not backing one as strongly as the other.
I do not know how to adequately put into words my views on the US support of death squads and other fanatics through out the world. I once told a Colombian friend that the US Empire is like the Mongols and Assyrians but that is not adequate. The US is a hybrid empire but it rules through terror regardless of where it is in power.
Posted by: AnEducatedFool | Jan 26, 2016 1:39:50 PM | 4
AnEducatedFool | Jan 26, 2016 1:39:50 PM | 4
Think The Jesuits and the Hegelian Dialectic but in the modern Deep State and its not hard to connect the dots or keep your eye on the pea .
Posted by: katou | Jan 26, 2016 1:47:00 PM | 5
Remember the propaganda push to oust Gaddhafi: "imminent genocide, soldiers on Viagra, R2P....blah blah blah
After his death, nary a peep from the Globalist press about the ongoing anarchy Libya has been enveloped by since then. Amazing how EU/USSA concern for Libyans extended only as far as Gaddhafi was able to provide a decent standard of living for them. Once the aggressive war was on and Gaddhafi was dead, Libya dropped off the radar until the precious American ambassador was killed. What a sad crime was visited upon Libya.
Posted by: farflungstar | Jan 26, 2016 1:58:34 PM | 6
Murderous chaos was always the evil US plan. Thats if there wasn't a loyal powerful dictatorship in place ready to take power. And since there wasn't, feeding the violence and terrorism so the whole country would weaken each other, creating misery,degradation and violence, so it's easier to step in and take over later.
But if one group dominates against the evil empires dominationist wishes, that's when direct action will be taken.
With the UNSC abstention, abstention is the same as a green light when it comes to a Criminal war. I don't care what the law says, Russia and Chinese leaders are culpable for the Libyan crime spree too. Abstention is a green light for war.
The veto is the only method to deny war criminal action in the UNSC. Rejection of that veto, is effectively the same as a yes vote.
That was the despicable plan for Syria too.
Posted by: tom | Jan 26, 2016 2:25:24 PM | 7
The wielders of power must be shocked by the absent push back from the public when ideas like this are floated in the press. There is every indication that it is going to take something catastrophic to stop the aggression because excess alone is clearly not self limiting and lessons are not being learned (nor are they meant to be). The atmosphere in the US is quite eerie. I sense that a minority of people grasp how putrid our influence is. The majority sense that something is wrong but are either willfully deluded or have not been able to put the correct words or facts behind their perception to break through the facade. Either way, either group, people are not saying anything. I feel like I'm in one of those mobs of people that is witnessing a violent act on a city street, and nobody is saying anything or trying to stop it.
Posted by: IhaveLittleToAdd | Jan 26, 2016 2:39:53 PM | 8
Divide et impera
Posted by: Lozion | Jan 26, 2016 3:10:13 PM | 10
Excellent post and comments. We have come a long way since the 'outing' of a Federal agent was perceived as an horrendous crime. Thanks, b, for taking us back to the beginning of Libya's tragedy - we need to revisit a lot of our perceptions of previous not-too-far-back history if we are to appreciate skulduggery in all its monstrous manifestations.
Posted by: juliania | Jan 26, 2016 3:10:44 PM | 11
It is the Imperial violence that keeps folks from clearly seeing the global plutocrats behind the curtain pulling the strings with private finance and ownership of everything. As long as they keep stirring the pot and maintaining society in fear mode they maintain control.
This process of control has been working for centuries now and likely will continue to do so unless China and its allies can take on private finance and eliminate it from our world.
To @8 IhaveLittleToAdd Your comment about folks standing around watching violence being perpetrated on others is old hat I have been watching it happen for 50+ years. Go listen to a song called "Outside of a small circle of friends" by Phil Ochs. He committed suicide after producing some very insightful songs about our species.
Posted by: psychohistorian | Jan 26, 2016 3:19:24 PM | 12
Pardon me for not being able to listen to the videos in the second link today, so I hope they are illustrative.
‘AVAAZ, Libya & Syria: The Art of War’
‘AFRICOM’s War on Libya’, Jan 22, 2016
And of course, Hillary's emails showing the French Financial Motivations, but not shining the light on herself, Sam Power, nor Susan (brrrr) Rice, of course. Interesting side note: Paul Kagame was apparently at Davos 2016.
Posted by: wendy davis | Jan 26, 2016 3:19:59 PM | 13
Libya. Hillary's War, least we forget. Hope we get some info from her emails.
And I see Trump has not made the required pilgrimage to the Western Wall for the photo op.
Posted by: shadyl | Jan 26, 2016 4:29:32 PM | 14
I've got a feeling that China saw this coming. They've completely re-invented their military with a strong emphasis on expeditionary and rapid response capabilities. The big question is will US-NATO sober up before it's too late?
My money is on "No".
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 26, 2016 4:37:32 PM | 15
Khalifa Haftar has set himself up as an opponent of Islamist forces. That's the same role that Bashar al-Assad has tried to characterize himself. I would've expected the people on this board to be rallying behind Haftar the way they rally behind Assad, as secular leaders claiming to find against Islamists.
And there have been many blog posts that have accused the US of not putting up a significant fight against Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. Nothing on the scale that Russia appears to be fighting, and the US is criticized for that. Why then should an announcement of new US action against an Islamic State be condemned now? Condemned for taking too little action and then condemned for starting to take action?
Posted by: Inkan1969 | Jan 26, 2016 4:56:06 PM | 16
Posted by: Inkan1969 | Jan 26, 2016 4:56:06 PM | 15
Aren't you mildly suspicious that US-NATO intends to apply a military solution to Libya's ISIS problem even though we know ...
- ISIS (& Al-CIA-da) is a US creation?
- US still hasn't finished eliminating ISIS from Iraq (implying that it doesn't know how to but nevertheless expects (??) to believe that it can do for Libya what it can't, and hasn't done for Iraq)?
- A legitimate representative of the Libyan people hasn't requested outside intervention (and if such an entity existed US-NATO is the LAST wankfest they'd seek help from)?
- There are other ways of helping a country solve internal strife than bombing the crap out of it. Asking them what help they need to do the job themselves being a sensible starting point (which ... ahem ... seems to be working in Syria).
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 26, 2016 5:41:24 PM | 17
Was just reading that Giraldi article from Dec 2011 this afternoon before I read this post. What a weird coincidence.
As for Haftar, I thought he was the designated strong man too until I read a recent NYT article that makes it seem more complicated than that.
"General Hifter has appeared at times to seek to rule Libya as a new strongman, though he has been unable to fully control even Benghazi, a few miles away from his headquarters.
His force includes regular army units, but he has increasingly relied on arming neighborhood militias outside his full control as his proxies. American military officials have previously expressed deep distrust of General Hifter and his allies."
It's worth reading the rest of that article. I'm not too familiar with the authors. But if it's true that Haftar/Hiftar is not trusted by US military and they're looking for and working with other groups (at least one of which isn't friends of Hiftar's) maybe he isn't the next Gaddafi.
Also, I'm not sure it's the US who wants to control Libya. The French seem to think North Africa is the thing that is going to save them.
Lastly, one of those redrawn Middle East maps that keeps turning up -- one that was also in the NYT, shows Libya sliced up in three pieces.
Posted by: Joanne Leon | Jan 26, 2016 5:44:06 PM | 18
b, We came, we saw, he died.
Yeah, never forget Hillary as she laughs with joy. Earlier videos in YouTube shows Gaddafi with blood all over dragged from the truck with bloodthirsty mad dogs going for the final kill.
Yes, Hillary has blood all over her hands, now pointing her bloody finger at Sanders. Sanders was one of the 10 cosponsors Senate's resolution that called on Gaddafi to resigned or else. Apologists will defend Sanders with all kinds of excuses. He is still guilty. Amen
Honestly, Sanders any different from Hillary? Maybe lesser of evils...? Hey man, Sanders also responsible in Gaddafi murder, hundreds of thousands civilians murder. He too guilty with bloods on his hand.
Anyone voting for Sanders is equally complicity to the crimes against humanity, think about it will ya?
.....and the endless wars continue.
Posted by: Jack Smith | Jan 26, 2016 6:41:54 PM | 19
thanks b and others.. i 2nd @10 juliania's comments..
@15 Inkan1969.. the usa has disqualified itself in everything worthwhile on an international level.. and it wasn't just with what it committed to libya... everywhere the usa goes - there is chaos, death and destruction in its path.. at what point do you personally connect the dots??
Posted by: james | Jan 26, 2016 6:41:57 PM | 20
I like how the Western media, in the articles I have seen, always mention that Hafter was a former Gadaffi loyalist who defected... but they leave out the "25 years ago" and "living in the environs of Langley, VA ever since".
If the American people knew that he was just another puppet being strung along so that the US could wage war in another oil state, they might give this one a second look. But the media keeps all this info well behind their smoke and mirrors.
Posted by: guest77 | Jan 26, 2016 6:48:59 PM | 21
Khalifa Haftar has lived in Virginia (hint) since 1990 since he was rescued after a failed coup attempt ... he's Libya's Chalabbi or Allawi analog ... magical tame Libyan who not only loves America, speaks excellent English, he owes us, and his family still enjoys the comforts of American hospitality ... I think we have attempted to insert him into Libya to "save the day" more than once ... yuppers, his 2011 attempt failed and he returned to the USA ...
Anyone remember the names of new Syrian ex-pat, America-friendly savior in waiting ... I need to put his name in files ...
Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Jan 26, 2016 7:44:18 PM | 22
@ jack smith 18: I won't harsh NC's mellows again, but on this thread
I was distressed to see the veal pen approved answer from yves smith and too many others as well:
lindaj January 24, 2016 at 9:21 pm
Bernie sez: “Support International Conflicts – Don’t start them.”
Huh? Keep supplying arms to the Saudis to decimate Yemen? Keep supplying arms and $$ to Israel to demolish Palestine? Keep supplying Al Qaeda in Syria to get rid of Asad and in the process killing of Syrians or causing them to flood into Europe? Keep sending troops to Iraq?
Bernie has no problem with militarism and the above message embodies Imperialist America and this is why I will never vote for Bernie.
Jill Stein of the Green Party has principled positions on policies, both foreign and domestic. Or do Americans really not want peace and justice in this world?
If voting for someone like Stein is not viable, then we better quit pretending that voting will get us anywhere and think of something else.
Yves Smith January 25, 2016 at 12:21 am
"Did you manage to miss that Jews (with some billionaire exceptions) vote Democratic, turn out in high percentages, and many are politically active (as in donate)? Oh, and even though AIPAC is doomed demographically (younger Jews for the most part don’t identify with Israel), older ones generally do, and strongly so?
Bernie has enough of an uphill battle winning the nomination as it is. If I were him, I’d be as lukewarm as possible regarding the Middle East. His firm commitment to more social spending in the US means he will have to want to cut war spending and that means war involvement. I’d expect him to be crisper on this topic later.
Moreover, even if he were strongly anti-war, he can’t get there from here (as they say in Maine) if he were to go at it frontally. The entrenched interests are way too powerful. He’d be better off chipping away at it on a case by case basis, since the case for continued or increased involvement pretty much everywhere is weak."
yep, LOTE voting is soooo much easier now.
Posted by: wendy davis | Jan 26, 2016 9:40:47 PM | 23
Anonymous (from Vineyard of Saker)
Some light in the darkness :
Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s book about the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution and after, “Two Hundred Years Together” (2003) . It documents the disproportionate role ethnic Jews played in the Russian Revolution and subsequent genocide of many millions of Russians under Lenin and Stalin.
This work by a Nobel Prize winning author, a best seller in Russia has not been translated into English. “The ‘Jew Bolsheviks’ had captured and occupied the Soviet State; they were in the top ranks of the Red Army. Soviet power had been converted into Jewish power, and the Jews pursued Jewish, not Russian goals.” (p. 201)
Solzhenitsyn states that “Lenin had three reasons for elevating young secular, revolutionary-minded Jews to the State’s elite, in effect replacing the Tsarist bureaucracy. First, because of the deadly hate the young Jews had for Russian traditions, religious rites, historical models, hate for everything Russian and Russia itself. Second, their willingness to cross the last taboo borders in morality. And third, their readiness to physically liquidate the enemy.”
Stalin put Jews in charge of some of his nastiest work, and then catered to popular sentiment by liquidating them. “Such was the case in the murderous collectivization program in 1928-1933 to which the names of prominent ‘Jew Bolsheviks’ were attached. Stalin was well aware of the hate city Jews had for everything related to the Russian and Ukrainian peasantry. They spread terror, killing the peasants and destroying the villages, eventually causing the famine that took the lives of at least six million Ukrainians. The Jewish commissars in charge of the anti-kulak program, which was tantamount to genocide, were literally the masters over life and death.”
“Thus, while many Jews such as my grandparents were innocent victims of
Nazi terror, Bolshevik Jews were perpetrators of terror. This acknowledgement would interfere with the “guilt trip” (charge of anti-Semitism) used to advance the Zionist agenda (and keep Jews in line.) How dare Zionists accuse political opponents of “hate”? It is a
disingenuous and juvenile psychological trick to paralyze opposition. Zionists who assign a ridiculous collective responsibility to others would have a lot to answer for themselves.”
Now guess,this is the most banned book today
Posted by: sevenleagueboots | Jan 26, 2016 9:57:42 PM | 24
@23 Disingenuous and juvenile indeed. The guilt trip used to great effect, getting so much mileage from using defence as attack. It's wearing pretty thin though these days. Modern day Zionist brutality has outed their inherent penchant for cruelty. Being labelled antisemitic is pretty much akin to the boy crying wolf - so overused and abused its lost any bite.
Am wondering if Bernie will cut out the billion dollar middle eastern cyst they like to treat so well when it comes time to heal the poor and school the masses. It should be the first cancer dealt with.
Posted by: MadMax2 | Jan 26, 2016 10:59:45 PM | 25
Re: Posted by: guest77 | Jan 26, 2016 6:48:59 PM | 20
You are dreaming of you think the American public have ever heard of this Langley stooge set up to take over Libya.
I am very well informed on such matters and have only today heard of this fellow for the first time today!
The guy would be known to approximately 0% of Americans (ie - less than 1.6 million).
Posted by: Julian | Jan 26, 2016 11:00:01 PM | 26
wendy davis @22
Sounds like a rehash of Obamabots.
The anointed candidate . . . keeper of all that is good and holy. Trust in His inherent goodness.
Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jan 26, 2016 11:20:06 PM | 27
Lbya 2011 was a huge crazyness, last one of long disaster row: Iraq, Afghanistan, ukr syria... Opponente To a new Willy attack are a lot more in Italy now than there
Posted by: Y | Jan 27, 2016 1:07:54 AM | 28
Posted by: Inkan1969 | Jan 26, 2016 4:56:06 PM | 15
betraying Gaddafi and Libya hasnt made him popular.
'Why then should an announcement of new US action against an Islamic State be condemned now? Condemned for taking too little action and then condemned for starting to take action?'
when has US taken any real action against ISIS? they didnt in syria: ISIS is a tool set up by USrael to serve their geopolitical interests, as has been alqaeda, taliban and Saddam? when their use is over then US may take real action
we can see youre no friend of syria or libya
Posted by: brian | Jan 27, 2016 3:04:48 AM | 29
Does anyone know the story behind that picture? Who made the banner, who are those people, where was this picture taken, who took it, who first published it? I recall the pro-"revolutionary" "left" sharing it a lot when nato started bombing (which was then still a bit too overtly iimperialist for the cruisr missile left to accept, although they've since turned aroundon that wrt syria), I've always found it suspicious.
Posted by: yabasta | Jan 27, 2016 6:47:59 AM | 30
@15 'Why then should an announcement of new US action against an Islamic State be condemned now?'
He's talking about Libya, equating the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate's upcoming double tap of Libya, destroying whatever is left from his first criminal aggression with Russia's - certainly not the US' - efforts against the criminal KSA/Turkish/CIA terrorists in Syria. He is a troll. Probably a pal of wow's.
This is a continuation of death, devastation, and destruction, the only arrow left in the US' 'foreign policy' quiver. The msm is a rocksolid component of that policy.
Posted by: jfl | Jan 27, 2016 6:57:07 AM | 31
Kurds won't attend Syria talks, Saudi-backed opponents to take lead: Fabius
A senior French diplomat said that while the PYD and its allies would need to be part of a final political solution in Syria, including them now risked "exploding" the Saudi opposition platform.
"We have a coherent Riyadh platform. It considers that the PYD is not part of the opposition against the regime...," the diplomat said.
"The opposition has defined negotiating parameters and the first one is that Assad must go. From what I've seen that's not the position of the PYD."
These talks were doomed to fail before they even began (no surprise when you look at the preconditions). Just got to keep moving that frontline closer to the Turkish border and eventually there won't be an opposition (of the wahabi nature) to negotiate with.
Posted by: never mind | Jan 27, 2016 6:58:41 AM | 32
everything but the last comment about Libya subjugating other North African countries is good. But, Libya is no threat to Algeria, nor to Egypt. They can't therefore get to Morocco. So, is Libya a threat to Tunisia? Maybe, probably not. Are they a threat in Mali and in areas to the South in the Saheel? Maybe.
Posted by: scottindallas | Jan 27, 2016 7:58:17 AM | 33
'Khalifa Haftar has set himself up as an opponent of Islamist forces. That's the same role that Bashar al-Assad has tried to characterize himself. I would've expected the people on this board to be rallying behind Haftar the way they rally behind Assad, as secular leaders claiming to find against Islamists.;'
he set himself up as an opponent of Gaddafi...dont equate this Haftar with president Assad
Posted by: brian | Jan 27, 2016 7:58:22 AM | 34
Libyan people can manage WHAT alone?
'The U.S. and its NATO allies abused the UNSC resolution;
UNSC resolution 1973 said Libyas govt had caused 'heavy civilian casualties'......when at that time no count of casualties was available...the first count by HRW from Misrata had few women killed, suggesting he dead males were militants not civilians
'Misurata’s population is roughly 400,000. In nearly two months of war, only 257 people — including combatants — have died there. Of the 949 wounded, only 22 — less than 3 percent — are women. If Khadafy were indiscriminately targeting civilians, women would comprise about half the casualties.
UNSC 1973 was itself a fraud set up to allow NATO forces in
Posted by: brian | Jan 27, 2016 8:03:08 AM | 35
I think there will be a Syrian 'opposition', a Libyan 'opposition', 'oppositions' in all the 'stans and knocking on Russian and Chinese doors ... until the bluff, the financial house of cards that is the US 'economy', is finally called.
Posted by: jfl | Jan 27, 2016 8:11:03 AM | 36
There was a news wire report(Rtrs) a few days ago on the German defence minister 'mulling' an intervention to restore law and order in Libya . DW had nothing to report,-still..
I suppose if Italy was onboard as an ally ,all would remain under control and to plan.
It still seems drastic-Perhaps they should try a wall first. The Germans don't stuff those up as quickly.
Plans within plans, Proxies within proxies.
Posted by: Todd Millions | Jan 27, 2016 9:37:39 AM | 37
Israel's defence minister has accused Turkey of buying oil from the so-called Islamic State (IS) group, thereby funding the militants' activities.
Speaking in Athens, Moshe Yaalon said IS had "enjoyed Turkish money for oil for a very, very long period of time".
Turkey denies allowing IS smuggling and the US recently rejected Russian claims that Turkish government officials were in league with the militants
US state department officials last month rejected Russian allegations of Turkish government involvement but a state department spokesman said IS oil was being smuggled into Turkey via middlemen.
Posted by: okie farmer | Jan 27, 2016 11:23:34 AM | 39
The western Media;Hahahahah.Based in Tel Aviv.Or is it Jerusalem?
I can't for the life of me,figure out what happened in Oregon,and who shot first?The papers aren't divulging yet.
The liberal venom for ranchers,the guys who put the Big Mac in McDonalds,and work their lives by supplying US with food,is palpable.
The area is a the high desert,I went through there 5 years ago,theres almost nothing there.
They back the cops there.but hate em in St.Louis.F*cking losers,illiberals.
Posted by: dahoit | Jan 27, 2016 11:25:13 AM | 40
@ okie farmer | 38
Its a weird move by Israelis, considering they are also buying oil from ISIS, through Turkey.
Posted by: Harry | Jan 27, 2016 11:34:01 AM | 41
Harry, I agree. I almost said, 'how crazy is this?'
Posted by: okie farmer | Jan 27, 2016 12:06:44 PM | 42
@40/41.. maybe some theorists can get some weird theory going that 2 parts of israel gov't are at odds with one another... seems to go over for some when discussing usa intentions..
Posted by: james | Jan 27, 2016 12:19:28 PM | 44
The Israeli oilmen among others are buying the 'Kurd's' oil through Turkey with some small fraction of that oil being from IS controlled fields in Syria. Turkey's oil business is in private hands so easy profits are driving this trade there and in the Kurd's region of Iraq.
Posted by: Wayoutwest | Jan 27, 2016 12:27:53 PM | 46
This is really in line with what Hillary will want to do. If you take the long view, such disruptions will make it easier for the Clinton foundation to get more support ($) from the elite and the Clintons can reach new heights. She is just thinking about her grandchild. Ha!
Posted by: Curtis | Jan 27, 2016 1:52:13 PM | 48
Thanks b, more grist for the mill. I keep waiting for the demise of the most evil Empire in the history of the world, predicted so often, by so many. It ain't happening any day soon.
The consortium of oligarchs running the worlds governments will see it survives, to the everlasting sorrow of the world's workers. When they enlist the oligarchs in Russia and China, by finding a way to divide the world's wealth, it's over. So vote for who you want, and have fun while you can.
Posted by: ben | Jan 27, 2016 2:06:14 PM | 49
Posted by: yabasta | Jan 27, 2016 6:47:59 AM | 30
The banner reads: "NO foreign intervention
Libyan people can manage it ALONE".
Searching the Internet ...
No U.S. intervention in Libya | SocialistWorker.org – March 2011 |
In Benghazi, journalist Jihan Hafiz reported [plus video report] widespread opposition to U.S. intervention. "The entire Libyan population is insisting against U.S. intervention or any involvement of foreign powers within Libya," one Libyan pro-democracy protester told Hafiz. According to Hafiz:
Rebels in Benghazi are also rejecting calls from U.S. Senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman to send the liberated territory weapons to fight Qaddafi's forces. They insist they defeated the security forces of Muammar al-Qaddafi in Benghazi without the use of weapons and without the support of a foreign government. Their victory in the bloody battle for Benghazi has engendered a strong sense of unity and nationhood in a country known for tribal divisions.
Posted by: Oui | Jan 27, 2016 2:12:48 PM | 50
The Left And Libya: NATO, Rebels & ‘Revolutionary’ Apologists
Upon hearing of Muammar Qaddafi’s execution, U.S. President Barack Obama, who had shared a photo-op with him as recently as 2009, proclaimed: “working in Libya with friends and allies, we’ve demonstrated what collective action can achieve in the 21st century.” Obama was particularly pleased that, “Without putting a single US service member on the ground, we achieved our objectives,” and alluded to future targets:
“In a line aimed at the region’s other despots, the president said, ‘Today’s events prove once more that the rule of an iron fist inevitably comes to an end.’
“Asked if that sends a message to Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, who has mounted a brutal crackdown on protesters, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney simply restated existing policy that Assad ‘has lost his legitimacy to rule.’”
—New York Post, 21 October 2011
U.S. Vice President Joe Biden compared the outcome in Libya to earlier, less successful adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan:
“In this case, America spent $2 billion total and didn’t lose a single life.
This is more of the prescription for how to deal with the world as we go
forward than it has been in the past.”
Israeli journalist Orly Azoulay praised Obama’s “new war doctrine,” pointing to the integration of “massive air power” and “local rebel forces”:
“General Gaddafi’s death is yet another victory for the new war doctrine adopted by United States President Barack Obama: No ground forces in enemy countries, but rather, utilizing massive air power—including drones—in order to pulverize enemy strongholds. In Libya’s case at least, this doctrine also included cooperation with local rebel forces.”
—Ynetnews.com, 21 October 2011
Posted by: Oui | Jan 27, 2016 2:13:33 PM | 51
Turkish prosecutors seek life sentences for two senior Cumhuriyet opposition journalists
Turkish prosecutors have demanded life sentences for two top journalists from the opposition Cumhuriyet newspaper on charges of revealing state secrets, a report says.
The state secrets in question refer to an investigative report by Cumhuriyet that President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's government tried to ship arms to Islamists in Syria.
Prosecutors asked the Istanbul court to sentence editor-in-chief Can Dundar and Ankara bureau chief Erdem Gul each to one aggravated life sentence, one ordinary life sentence and 30 years in jail, local media reported quoting the indictment.
The Cumhuriyet report said both Mr Erdogan and his hugely powerful but low-profile ally, the head of the National Intelligence Organisation Hakan Fidan, are named as plaintiffs in the indictment.
Mr Dundar and Mr Gul were both placed under arrest in late November over the report earlier in the year that claimed to show proof a consignment of weapons seized at the border in January 2014 was bound for Islamist rebels in Syria.
Posted by: Oui | Jan 27, 2016 2:22:28 PM | 52
@ Susan Sunflower # 22
Do you mean Mahdi al-Harati? He did both Libya and Syria
Posted by: Yul | Jan 27, 2016 2:38:01 PM | 53
I'm surprised the Italians are tagging along on this misadventure in Libya. The Islamic State already warned them to keep their Roman noses out of their business or they would see payback on the streets of Rome.
Posted by: Wayoutwest | Jan 27, 2016 2:58:20 PM | 54
When they enlist the oligarchs in Russia and China, by finding a way to divide the world's wealth, it's over. So vote for who you want, and have fun while you can.
Posted by: ben | Jan 27, 2016 2:06:14 PM | 49
It's certainly a possibility worth keeping in mind, but Russia and China seem to believe that Western plots and interventions, over more than a century, were dual-use strategies designed for looting and stunting their growth. Most, if not all, non-Western countries have similar regrets and attitudes to-ward the AmeriKKKan-led West. China has shown that any country freed from Western interference can flourish and thrive. More importantly, it has indicated a willingness to help ANY country which so desires to follow in its footsteps and live the dream. It's a clear and seductive message and there are many signs that China's increasing cavalcade of friends agree with China that it's a dream worth fighting for.
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 27, 2016 3:10:49 PM | 55
I'm surprised the Italians are tagging along on this misadventure in Libya
Italy's an occupied country. they do as they're told.
Posted by: john | Jan 27, 2016 4:19:34 PM | 57
@Julian: Read it again (or maybe just read it). It clearly says "If the American people knew...they might".
Posted by: guest77 | Jan 27, 2016 6:25:25 PM | 58
Solzhenitsyn's Nobel Prize? Wow, I guess we can assume then that he is an honest a writer as Obama is a peacemaker.
Posted by: guest77 | Jan 27, 2016 6:45:18 PM | 59