Meanwhile Back in the Sandbox...

[GRG55]

We wouldn't want to think that the only acts of mass political stupidity currently underway in this world are restricted to the environs of Washington, D.C...

Blasts rock Tripoli, NATO targets Gaddafi compound

Sun Jul 24, 2011 2:28pm EDT

TRIPOLI (Reuters) - Explosions rocked central Tripoli for the second night in a row and Britain said weeks of NATO bombardment had inflicted extensive damage on Muammar Gaddafi's heavily-fortified compound.

Libya's leader is clinging to power despite a four-month-old NATO air campaign and a lengthening conflict with rebels seeking an end to his 41-year rule and who have seized large swathes of the North African country...

..."Gaddafi has for decades hidden from the Libyan people behind these walls. The vast Bab al-Aziziyah compound is not just his personal residence, but more importantly is also the main headquarters for his regime, with command and control facilities and an army barracks," Pope said Sunday...
[Four months of bombing and they just figured this out now? ]

As Western nations intensify diplomatic efforts to foster an exit from the conflict, a European diplomat said a U.N. envoy would seek to persuade warring parties in Libya to accept a plan that envisages a ceasefire and a power-sharing government, but with no role for Gaddafi...

...Hopes for a negotiated settlement are growing as Europe and the United States grapple with fiscal crises at home.

This week, France said for the first time Gaddafi could stay in Libya as long as he gives up power...

[...and agrees to buy some EFSF bonds...]

[don]

Re: Meanwhile Back in the Sandbox...

on a related note . . .

Chávez Returns, Saying Cancer Not Found

disappointing news for those seeking to co-op Venezuela's oil reserves

[GRG55]

Re: Meanwhile Back in the Sandbox...

Don't take your eye off Libya or Egypt...they are both going to factor into USA and global politics to a greater degree than most currently imagine...

In Libya we are almost certain to witness a splendid example of tribal retaliation. The General's tribe is a large and powerful one in that country and, given the reports that he was tortured before being killed, "revenging his honour" will doubtless be a bloody affair. Perhaps a civil war within a civil war.

The only logical explanation I can come up with for the USA's involvement in Libya is part of an "organized chaos" strategy for the entire Middle East...

Saturday 30 July 2011


Libyan rebel forces commander's body found in Benghazi

Libyan rebel forces chief commander, Abdul Fatah Younis' body was found on Thursday, dumped outside Benghazi, along with the bodies of two colonels who were his top aides, according to Ali Tarhouni, minister of the petrol and finance of the National Transitional Council.

12:14PM BST 30 Jul 2011


The assassination on Thursday of Gen Younes, who earlier this year defected from the Tripoli government to join the opposition fight to overthrow the regime of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, came as a damaging blow to the rebels' military efforts.


After 24 hours of confusion, rebel minister Ali Tarhouni has declared that Gen Younes was killed by members of the Obaida Ibn Jarrah Brigade, a militia allied to the rebels and named after one of the companions of the Prophet Mohammad, suggesting that Islamist elements were involved.


The assassination of Gen Younes, apparently by his own side, has hurt the opposition just as it was winning broader international recognition and launching an offensive against Gaddafi forces in the west of the country...

[GRG55]

Re: Meanwhile Back in the Sandbox...

Chaos. And it's not going to magically fix itself now that the USA has declared victory and withdraws troops.

Rudi Guiliani said yesterday during a CNN interview about the debt/deficit circus in D.C. that the rest of the world should grow up and get used to it because that's democracy in action. I'm not sure much of the rest of the world has that much respect remaining for "democracy"...

30 July 2011 Last updated at 11:18 ET

Iraq less safe than a year ago: US watchdog

A top US adviser on Iraq has accused the US military of glossing over an upsurge in violence, just months before its troops are due to be withdrawn.

Iraq is more dangerous now than a year ago, said a report issued by the US Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, Stuart W Bowen Junior.

He said the killing of US soldiers and senior Iraqi figures, had risen, along with attacks in Baghdad.

The report contradicts usually upbeat assessments from the US military...

...The report cited the deaths of 15 US soldiers in June - the bloodiest month for the American military in two years - but also said more Iraqi officials had been assassinated in the past few months than in any other recent period...

[jk]

Re: Meanwhile Back in the Sandbox...

looks like operation jeffersonian desert isn't exactly working out. otoh, we've really moved our focus to operation light brigade in afghanistan.

[LargoWinch]

Re: Meanwhile Back in the Sandbox...

The only logical explanation I can come up with for the USA's involvement in Libya is part of an "organized chaos" strategy for the entire Middle East...

In chaos lies opportunity; opportunity to secure Oil.

The rest, regardless of countless children and mothers killed or maimed, matters little to the Western Oligarchs operating under the code name "NATO".

Bill Hicks understood that almost 20 years ago without these internets.

[don]

Re: Meanwhile Back in the Sandbox...

As has been said before, De-stabilization Unlimited is the name of the game. Russia and China are both penciled in the agenda.

[shiny!]

Re: Meanwhile Back in the Sandbox...

As has been said before, De-stabilization Unlimited is the name of the game. Russia and China are both penciled in the agenda.

Don- or anybody who believes in the "destabilization-for-oil" theory- I'm not saying you're wrong, but I just don't see what destabilization accomplishes as a policy and in fact. Everybody says we're destabilizing regimes for their oil, but is the USA really getting a lot of oil out of all this? After years of US presence in Iraq, Iraq signed big oil contracts with China a few years ago.

Can someone please enlighten me on how exactly the US is benefiting from fighting in the Middle East? The only advantages I can see is it's enriching the pockets of the war industry and keeping thousands of young men busy over there instead of having them unemployed on the streets here at home. Is this what it's all about?

[jk]

Re: Meanwhile Back in the Sandbox...

Don- or anybody who believes in the "destabilization-for-oil" theory- I'm not saying you're wrong, but I just don't see what destabilization accomplishes as a policy and in fact. Everybody says we're destabilizing regimes for their oil, but is the USA really getting a lot of oil out of all this? After years of US presence in Iraq, Iraq signed big oil contracts with China a few years ago.

Can someone please enlighten me on how exactly the US is benefiting from fighting in the Middle East? The only advantages I can see is it's enriching the pockets of the war industry and keeping thousands of young men busy over there instead of having them unemployed on the streets here at home. Is this what it's all about?

when we first went into iraq, i read the theory that we were pressuring the saudis by having troops on their northern border. remember, they were dragging their feet in cooperating in the post-9/11 investigations. since then, i think a large part is maintaining a counterbalance to iran in the region, again to the benefit of, and to influence, the saudis. i'm not sure if calculations about pakistan come into it, as well.

[aaron]

Re: Meanwhile Back in the Sandbox...

Can someone please enlighten me on how exactly the US is benefiting from fighting in the Middle East? The only advantages I can see is it's enriching the pockets of the war industry and keeping thousands of young men busy over there instead of having them unemployed on the streets here at home. Is this what it's all about?

The U.S. dollar is benefiting from the fighting, no? China backs the Yuan up with 500 million slave workers, but their model for growth is unstable. Europe backs their money with a union that was supposed to make it hard to print too much. They also like to pretend they have guns too, but it is a much smaller portion of their money's backing. Russia backs their money up with their "abiotic" oil. The U.S. backs up the dollar with military might. The U.S. brings order to the world and allows the other major players to continue to exploit their own advantages.

When things are too stable, then people get uppidity. They think they can do without this "protection". It is important to remind countries and leaders how the world really works. This includes taking out Saddam who was a direct challenge to this order. It also includes demonstrating to the world what happens if the "order" is disturbed. People start killing each other without the World Police intervening.

The U.S. has staked its oil claim in the middle east. It is tolerated by the other major players because they are still allowed to buy and exploit those oil patches. They just have to use dollars. As the stuff gets scarce, I expect the tax they pay to use dollars increase. This tax is in the form of dollar depreciation. Eventually, it will not be worth it.

I believe we are on the wrong path. But that means little to those in charge. The dollar is backed by military might. Until that is changed, anything that demands military intervention and "peace keeping" is a demand for dollars. An unstable environment also encourages people to save money for a rainy day. When nations and large companies must protect themselves, they also hold onto money. This adds to the dollar strength, since that is what people and governments save in.

[lektrode]

Re: Meanwhile Back in the Sandbox...

Don't take your eye off Libya or Egypt...they are both going to factor into USA and global politics to a greater degree than most currently imagine...
....

The only logical explanation I can come up with for the USA's involvement in Libya is part of an "organized chaos" strategy for the entire Middle East..

that and to get the tail waggin the dog: make the admin look prezidential...

could ya just imagine HOW BIG THE HEADLINES WOULD BE if gee dubya had launched a 3rd front?

the silence from the chattering class on this topic is DEAFENING

[lektrode]

Re: Meanwhile Back in the Sandbox...

....

Can someone please enlighten me on how exactly the US is benefiting from fighting in the Middle East? The only advantages I can see is it's enriching the pockets of the war industry and keeping thousands of young men busy over there instead of having them unemployed on the streets here at home. Is this what it's all about?

+1
as usual ms shiny, you come up with excellent/enlightening observations

[don]

Re: Meanwhile Back in the Sandbox...

Don- or anybody who believes in the "destabilization-for-oil" theory- I'm not saying you're wrong, but I just don't see what destabilization accomplishes as a policy and in fact. Everybody says we're destabilizing regimes for their oil, but is the USA really getting a lot of oil out of all this? After years of US presence in Iraq, Iraq signed big oil contracts with China a few years ago.

Can someone please enlighten me on how exactly the US is benefiting from fighting in the Middle East? The only advantages I can see is it's enriching the pockets of the war industry and keeping thousands of young men busy over there instead of having them unemployed on the streets here at home. Is this what it's all about?

Destabilization is a means, not an end. Absolute control of global energy supports the reserve currency of the dollar. Of course every situation has its own particularities. The Chinese were making serious inroads into contractually locking up Libyan oil. Khaddafi was making noise to bail out on the dollar and possibly fund an African currency alternative. As far fetched as the latter may seem, any political economic unity of north and black African energy states is an anathema to the US. The US African theater command was created to facilitate these moves. Hiring America's unemployed? Half of US in-the-field hands are mercenaries and contractors. The US military expenditures play a domestic economy role but hiring the unemployed isn't one of them.

And let me add I'm not wringing my hands over this behavior. What's to be expected by the world's sole great power in an age of peak cheap energy and fiat currencies.

[shiny!]

Re: Meanwhile Back in the Sandbox...

The U.S. dollar is benefiting from the fighting, no? China backs the Yuan up with 500 million slave workers, but their model for growth is unstable. Europe backs their money with a union that was supposed to make it hard to print too much. They also like to pretend they have guns too, but it is a much smaller portion of their money's backing. Russia backs their money up with their "abiotic" oil. The U.S. backs up the dollar with military might. The U.S. brings order to the world and allows the other major players to continue to exploit their own advantages.

When things are too stable, then people get uppidity. They think they can do without this "protection". It is important to remind countries and leaders how the world really works. This includes taking out Saddam who was a direct challenge to this order. It also includes demonstrating to the world what happens if the "order" is disturbed. People start killing each other without the World Police intervening.

The U.S. has staked its oil claim in the middle east. It is tolerated by the other major players because they are still allowed to buy and exploit those oil patches. They just have to use dollars. As the stuff gets scarce, I expect the tax they pay to use dollars increase. This tax is in the form of dollar depreciation. Eventually, it will not be worth it.

I believe we are on the wrong path. But that means little to those in charge. The dollar is backed by military might. Until that is changed, anything that demands military intervention and "peace keeping" is a demand for dollars. An unstable environment also encourages people to save money for a rainy day. When nations and large companies must protect themselves, they also hold onto money. This adds to the dollar strength, since that is what people and governments save in.

Perhaps the dollar used to benefit by our occupations in the Middle East, but not anymore. Our HUGE military expenditures have racked up so much debt and must be paid for by so much printing... the resulting dilution of the dollar is causing other countries to look for a replacement currency. How is this benefitting the dollar?

What is oil going to cost us once the dollar is no longer the world's reserve currency? I don't think the old assumptions like, "we are over there for the oil" can be taken at face value anymore.

We are about to get some form of default whether by repudiation of debts or by inflation, a loss of our reserve currency status, destruction of the middle-class, and prolonged depression- not a benefit to the dollar. Somebody has to be benefitting from this destruction (and I know it isn't me or the people I know). I have to wonder if these ultimate outcomes are the real intentions behind our occupation of the Middle East?

[GRG55]

Re: Meanwhile Back in the Sandbox...

In 1969, when the good Colonel seized power in Libya, oil production was well over 3 million barrels per day. Within 4 years Libyan crude production was down by 50%...and it has never really recovered.

So why is it that after all this time...after Gaddafi comes in from the cold and is embraced [literally and figuratively] by western leaders, after diplomatic relations are well on the way to being normalized, after investment starts flowing into the country to develop long neglected reserves and oil infrastructure...why is it that NATO is employed to drop smart bombs on Libyan civilians? Is it really to secure oil supply to support US Dollar hegemony?

Come now...how much money has the USA pumped annually into Egypt? How much oil does the USA get from Egypt? How much money has the USA pumped annually into Pakistan? How much oil does the USA get from Pakistan? How much money has the USA pumped annually into Afghanistan? How much oil does the USA get from Afghanistan? How much money had the USA pumped annually into Bahrain? How much oil does the USA get from Bahrain? How much money has the USA pumped into Iraq over the decades? And how much oil does the USA get from Iraq now?

If all this killing is about supporting US Dollar hegemony through control of oil supply...well it doesn't seem to be working too well now does it? And although I may have my doubts about the intelligence of Bush and Barack, Hillary ["I consider Hosni a family friend"] is too smart to fall for that shzt.