Libya - the truth - Page 4

Ah, the internet, lovely lol

you really need to stop reading conspiracy theory sites constantly d_smart_s


try reading an actual, respectable book. it might help with your clarity of writing and logic skills.

On August 25 2011 00:58 lostaccount wrote: disagree palak, how can you say talking about evil imperialistic govt is derailing the thread. this is what is happening in libya atm. OP might came in here with wrong info, i haven't read or watch his post but his main point is that nato wasn't in libya to help the cizitens. They have ulterior motives, Baal is just pointing this out info out. Baal knows his shit is all i can say.

It's derailing b/c we have an "american empire" thread and have had talks about imperialistic countries multiple times, going over it again w/ no one providing any new sources or ideas is useless. They didn't have ulterior motives, at least not Obama since he said in his first speech that it was "But when our interests and values are at stake, we have a responsibility to act" aka oil and an excuse to remove someone we don't really like. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world/jan-june11/obamaspeech_03-28.html ..our motives were simple...human rights violations occurring, we didn't like qaddafi much, they have tons of oil that we want to make sure we have access to..

so you acknowledge that USA is there for oil? That means you acknowledge that Obama and all other pedos who took decisions should be put on trial for crimes against humanity? Palak, you sound like someone who is perfectly fine with the concept that if you need something you should kill innocent people and take what you need. It's like American Government has the right to do what they want cause we've adapted to all the wars and invasions and if USA has no oil Americans will die SO it's fine if we bomb innocent people in Libya. It's just the way the world is and we shouldn't bother. People that think that way are a shame for humanity. I would love to see some of you getting ass raped and living in fear if a bomb will fall on your head or if you are gonna be shot at while walking in the streets. You, Americans should be the ones to start the revolution against this imperialism. Just go and put an end to the FED and other bullshit and millions of people will be saved. But it's not as fun as X-box. America is still asleep... If your government doesn't care about human life in Libya, what makes you think they give a fuck about your life?

The mission is aid in removing qaddafi. The reason for acting to help the ppl in libya and not the ppl in sudan, ivory coast, rwanda, syria, etc is b/c libya has oil and was already in a revolution. Also ppl need to quit acting like this was America's idea in the first place. France was the main nation wanting to remove qaddafi ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France%E2%80%93Libya_relations ). America was the 24th country to recognize the libyan rebels as the legitimate gov't ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_..._of_the_National_Transitional_Council ) yet you arn't blaming france, germany, qatar, italy, spain, UAE, panama, latvia, bulgaria, etc for the backing of the rebels even though all those countries backed them before America did.

On August 25 2011 10:06 palak wrote: human rights violations occurring, we didn't like qaddafi much, they have tons of oil that we want to make sure we have access to..

I think u screwed up the order there though

^prob ya ... our spread sheet for what to do basically goes like this
Do they pose a threat to us or allies Y/N
Yes-Are human rights violations occurring Y/N No-leave them alone
Yes-is the country in a major revolt Y/N No-leave them alone
Yes-maybe intervene but at this pt but also.
do they have resources we want Y/N No-leave them alone
Yes-intervene and aid favorable side No-are they of strategic importance Y/N
Yes-possibly intervene No-Leave them alone

If oil was our main concern then we would have gone into Iran and Venezuela long ago. We did topple the Iranian gov't in the 50s due to solely (from what i know of) oil concerns. But then again we have gone into Korea and Vietnam for long periods of time for reasons other then oil. (although some sites claim vietnam was for oil, which isn't true at all.)


@d_smart, bulgaria supported and has troops in Afghanistan and had troops in Iraq as well as having supported the libyan rebels almost a full month before America did. If your going to say America is evil then by the same logic your gov't is evil too since they support the US in every invasion...how about you fix your own shitty fucking gov't first and then you can get on some high horse and bitch at Americans, until then, stfu.
+ Show Spoiler +

On August 25 2011 10:21 D_smart_S wrote: so you acknowledge that USA is there for oil? That means you acknowledge that Obama and all other pedos who took decisions should be put on trial for crimes against humanity?

Nope, that's not what would or should happen even if Obama and the "other Pedos" carved it themselves in stone as fact.

On August 25 2011 10:41 palak wrote: The mission is aid in removing qaddafi. The reason for acting to help the ppl in libya and not the ppl in sudan, ivory coast, rwanda, syria, etc is b/c libya has oil and was already in a revolution.

Let me clarify you something - the people in Libya were living a damn good life before NATO came bombing their houses. Quaddafi as crazy as he looks and acts, does a good job giving a good standard of living to the Libyan people. But suddenly, the big countries with their Agenda of invading and replacing governments with people of their own, came up with the plan to develop armies of rebels and then pretend to be only helping their efforts. Otherwise, it would look like USA are in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya fighting reckless wars. It would be too obvious, so they changed tactics to make it look like you are helping the people who rebel. No, you are helping the rebels that you put as rebels and now all Libyans suffer! They lived a good life, now their life sucks. How can you say you are there to help the people of Libya, just hear them - they are ALL 100% (not 99.9) against USA and NATO.

And yeah Bulgaria is helping the big powers kill people. We are a small, poor country and if we don't lick asses we will end up like North Korea. If we say "fuck USA, we will be peaceful" we will suddenly become an evil country preparing mass destruction weapons with our dirt reserves and gipsy scientists and will be attacked. We don't take desicions, we just follow orders.

well, D_smart, the thing is, you can't blame these things on the USA and be done with it.

All of our "western countries" are pretty much involved when u look at the big picture.

yes. Mostly GB and USA. But I can't think of a name to group them so I say USA as being most evident. USA is everywhere knowadays ya kno...

^not a single fact posted in that first paragraph is true. Ur a fuckin moron and i give up trying to actually show things to u w/ evidence since its obvious u r to fuckin dumb to understand anything. As for the 2nd paragraph,
"following orders for self preservation" is no excuse to commit what u believe to be morally incorrect actions or criminal acts.

Seriously how much retarded shit can somebody post b4 they r banned?

palak i swear man you are some US gov shill

So much impotent rage in this thread. Thank you baal and smart for giving us the groundbreaking revelation that powerful nations act in their best interests. Please report back if you find any other fascinating truths to reveal

wait what

did you just call obama a pedo lol

throughout the 2000s we destabilized unfavorable regimes in the soviet block etc. using NGOs look up the "color revolutions". tunisia etc.

obviously we (western empire) have some hand in destablizing the middle east as well more so than is apparent on the surface. We are also battling all over africa (africom) versus china to secure interests there (china offers better deals than chevron so the military needs to step in and do work).

obvious media battles vs china too pointing out all China's awful "human rights violations" when our closest ally Israel is obviously the worst offender in that regard.


all of this done under the guise of fighting terrorism of course (that the west propagated in the first place dividing up the middle east into oil regions in the early 1900s. Oil powers literally created the borders we see on the map today.)

On August 24 2011 22:43 Baal wrote: Show nested quote + On August 24 2011 22:02 palak wrote: ^that is just how the world works...more powerful ppl/countries/corporations take advantage of less powerful ppl/countries/corporations in order to get more money/resources I am pretty aware how the world works, more than anybody in this thread

i lol'ed

i love my signature

I find it quite naive that there are still people who think the USA is actually battling agaisnt China for anything ... resources/ any kind of influence - that battle has been lost long long time ago

@trax d_smart is not just insinuating that we helped instigate the revolutions or planted seeds of a revolution, which we may (probably direct or indirect) have done. I have no problems with someone saying that. What he is saying is that we filmed actors acting as rebels and showed that on tv instead of showing actual rebels, also that Gaddafi provided libyans w/ a good life. That is what I'm so pissed off about. Gaddafi/Qaddafi, however you want to spell it, was/is in fact a tyrant who horded wealth while allowing a large amount of his country to live in poverty. The actors part is just laughably false.

as for the rest of ur post i wrote out an explination then accidently erased it and am to lazy to rewrite it so i'll sum up and call it good. US involvement in colour revolutions has little tangible evidence from what I could find besides milosevic. There is little evidence we did that much in the middle east besides teaching ppl via universities and albert einstein institute about revolutions and how to use social media during them. Teaching ppl about revolutions or how to do them and actually inciting them are completely different. There is little/no tangible proof of the usa inciting anything in the middle east or colour, but we very well may have had some influence in that.

China stuff=derail..could care less about the africa thing, media part isn't really true imo (just depends on media sources which are all easily accessible).

Of course more countries drew territory lines w/ resources in mind, everyone knows the west deciding country boarders of it's colonies based off of resources, no one is disagreeing w/ that.