NATO has done the job, NATO can go ...

15
NATO has done the job, NATO can go ...


The cannonade died down on the streets of Libyan cities. People return to their homes if they have a place to go back. And they face paramount questions from the series “What was it?” And “How to live further?” Without any doubt, we can say that the majority of adequate Libyans passed the initial euphoria of life without Gaddafi, if they had such a feeling at all. And now it is absolutely not clear to many, but who will rake the economic ruins that remained after the NATO raids and rebel fireworks.

This question today concerns the world community. NATO has fulfilled its apocalypse rider function: the Libyan cities are destroyed, the infrastructure has been almost completely destroyed, the economy breathes its last. This is what happens: the NATO Moor did the job, and he can leave ... Then why was this whole operation started. Is the United States and its European comrades in arms Gaddafi needed? Could this colonel, who had sat up in his chair, really annoyed the "civilized" West. Judging by the latest revelations from the notorious WikiLeaks portal, during the 7-8 years, the relationship between the same Americans and Muammar Gaddafi was more than normal. The Pentagon’s military officials have noted that Gaddafi is on the right path and needs America’s help. Even the new Iron Lady Hillary Clinton herself allowed herself to figuratively raise her thumb, talking about the relationship between Tripoli and Washington. But if everyone was “deeply satisfied” with the policies of the Libyan leadership, then why did a black cat run between the “friends”?

Today, there are several opinions on this subject, many of which look somewhat fantastic.

First option

There are a number of political observers in the world who are confident that the start of the war in Libya is in no way connected with the claims of the United States. People who think this way confirm their words with quotations from the same telegrams from 2009 on the mutual friendship between the American and Libyan peoples that appeared on the Wikileaks website. It turns out that the Americans, so to say, ran to the Libyan court, when the fight had already begun. All this looks somewhat implausible. But still consider this situation. Surely the Americans really were not going to destabilize the situation in Libya, but some rebels with “Kalash” decided to do it. Seeing the rebels with "Kalash" and recalling that Gaddafi refused to buy weapons from France, Nicolas Sarkozy pulled his forces of war. And then for some reason the Danes and the Norwegians, whose role is generally not explainable in this conflict, were added. Well, and twisted, spun. And here, supposedly, the Americans had nothing to do but to intervene in the conflict until European “colleagues” staked out all Libyan oil for good. Perhaps this is true, but in such a situation somehow American intelligence turns out to be completely out of business, which, it turns out, was not even aware of anything at all.

The second option

The Americans knew everything, understood everything, but decided to play the role of an “innocent lamb” that peacefully tingled the weed before it was asked to take part in “killing the lamb.” Of course, the United States doesn’t pull the role of an innocent sheep, but since there are still rumors that they didn’t make this mess - the plan worked. What prompted the United States to "remove" Gaddafi from Libya. Perhaps the colonel felt some power over the Western world. After all, thanks to the same Wikilik, it is not a secret that not only some European leaders, in particular Nicolas Sarkozy, but also politicians on that side of the Atlantic, fed on the petroleum dollars of Muammar Gaddafi. Seeing that Gaddafi actually holds the levers of loyalty to himself and his policy in his hands, thanks to the large oil reserves, the United States decided to show who is the boss. And how the most democratic democrats are able to organize all kinds of orange, blue, pink and other revolutions, the world has long known. Enough to introduce a couple of his people in the right departments, and the wheel of the people's anger will spin.

Option Three

Europe and the United States today, more than ever, need a small (well, or not quite small) victorious war. According to all the laws of the genre, if everything is not calm at home, if there is a threat of a collapse of national markets and, as a result, discontent of the masses, you need to look for an external enemy. This recipe worked in ancient Rome and in medieval France and Britain. He works in our time. Please note that at the time of the height of the Libyan campaign, the world somehow began to forget about the dimensionless American debt, many states have again invested money in the US economy. But the war has come to an end and now only Libyan oil can reassure "peaceful" Americans, French and other fighters for democracy.

Three main options are considered, and there are others. Which of them looks more plausible to solve each individually. But the bottom line is that the once flourishing state of North Africa, with one of the highest standards of living in the region, lies in ruins. Hospitals are crowded, cemeteries, by the way, too. There are no social guarantees, there are no options for further development. By all legal standards - this is the real genocide. But does NATO care about it ... They now have enough other problems. We must look for a new enemy, new markets for weapons, start a new witch hunt.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

15 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Ion coaelung
    0
    28 September 2011 10: 01
    As I understand it, followed by Iran, Pakistan ... Knock knock. Who's there?
    1. +1
      28 September 2011 11: 43
      Open-DEMOCRACY !!!!!
      1. kesa1177
        0
        18 October 2011 16: 55
        Where do you see democracy? Democracy is the will of the majority. The will of the minority is dictatorship. Now, the dictatorship of the FSB, i.e. pahanat. The main one is bloody (he is Vova RDX, he drowned, he is soaked in the toilet).
      2. LESHA pancake
        0
        18 October 2011 16: 58
        BUSH WITH OBAMA.
    2. kesa1177
      0
      18 October 2011 16: 55
      Where do you see democracy? Democracy is the will of the majority. The will of the minority is dictatorship. Now, the dictatorship of the FSB, i.e. pahanat. The main one is bloody (he is Vova RDX, he drowned, he is soaked in the toilet).
  2. Bob
    0
    28 September 2011 17: 16
    Then follow Syria-Israel, to completely turn the Middle East region, so that in the person of Israel and the shrines of Western and Eastern civilization to play the map of global war. Cleverly conceived, however ... What is the role of Russia in this performance?
    NATO invasion of Syria is a matter of time and very short time, because all the prerequisites have been created and the scenario has been worked out. And as a result - the inevitable destruction of the state, the destabilization of society and the advent of Islamist radicals, and then the Islamization of the region, the unification of forces against Israel. And on this basis, the world will be divided into opponents and defenders of the holy land - which is no reason to create a united coalition of states and let the krooshka infidel. The United States builds on this, trying to deal with enemies by pushing their foreheads, using their weapons against themselves.
    The aggressor had to be stopped in Yugoslavia, and we allowed Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya. Let’s surrender, it seems, to Syria, and then Iran, Central Asia, the Caucasus ... The aggressor’s appetite is no longer comic like Hitler’s time, which no one punished in time for the occupation of Czechoslovakia or Austria.
    Time to make a decision, courageous decision.
    There can only be one justification for today's position of Russia in the Middle East - delaying the time to prepare a rebuff to the aggressor (Stalin also did not believe in a quick German attack in 1941), but looking at the pace of modernization of the army, underfunding of the military-industrial complex, and general organization of the armed forces, this excuse seems ridiculous . The West will not allow the modernization of the Russian army in any way, neither in 2015 nor by 2020. This is a bluff, because there is no finance in the country for these purposes. The US-initiated economic crisis in the world is good evidence of this.
    It is necessary to build a real military economy, make people work for the defense industry for free in order to realize at least part of the set goals, and this will not be enough. We need huge investments in the technical re-equipment of the defense industry, we are not the United States, we do not print dollars, there is almost nothing gold in the gold reserves, we have no allies in the face of the West or China, they are our strategic opponents, and we are seriously losing to them. At any time they can turn our country into a rogue state, and bind our economy with sanctions by setting up against the rest of the "civilized" world - a product of the information war of the West.
    What is the way out? Having lost strategically (with the collapse of the USSR), we are trying to maneuver and maneuver in order to avoid an unfavorable situation (this can explain the forced liberalization, democratization of society and the economy with all the ensuing consequences). How long will these maneuvers last? This performance is close to a denouement - the 2012 elections will be decisive for the parties, the West has made it clear that it does not accept Putin as president of the Russian Federation.
    The enemy does not sleep and provokes us (through anti-missile defense elements in Romania and Turkey) and sooner or later we will be cornered, as in South Ossetia (Pindos here only probed us for what we can and cannot allow them). It seems that we are at the finish line and events will also follow with all swiftness.
    1. Shqvarqi
      +1
      28 September 2011 18: 03
      Hmm, curious of course, but as they say, "grandma said for two" :)
      I do not impose my opinions on anyone, but the facts so far say the opposite:

      1) Obama has indicated the withdrawal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan by 2015.
      It’s ugly, of course, to tease the anthill and then topple it, but the Americans themselves will eat it if their standard of living drops to our average level fellow Yes, and the next president after him lather neck.
      2) In 2012, according to the forecast of the "Majority" of economists, America will default.
      With which I agree, because nefig live on credit. No one will give loans.
      3) There are so many problems in Europe that they will have enough for 10 years. The only factor of stability for them is our Nord Stream pipeline and the South Stream in question.

      How these events affect us depends, oddly enough, on ourselves)).
      The number one problem after the departure of the amers will be Central Asia and the Caucasus. Where all these Wahhabis and the Taliban can come to life and not a little more blood will spoil us. Do not forget about the CSTO agreement.
      In general, "At an interesting time we live TovaGischi ...."
  3. 0
    28 September 2011 18: 09
    Learn, PEOPLE, as you need to competently, pity, warn, sympathetically riveting and, holding a cookie in your pocket, push us with your foreheads with one goal - to EMPT, for the sake of pindostana! Hammer, Bob! You don’t work out loot!
  4. Bob
    -3
    28 September 2011 19: 58
    1) Obama has indicated the withdrawal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan by 2015.
    2) In 2012, according to the forecast of the "Majority" of economists, America will default.
    3) There are so many problems in Europe that they are enough for 10 years.
    On the first point - the Moor has done his job, the Moor leaves. This fits into the scenario (plans) of Pindostana - to destabilize the region.
    On the second point, Russia has long been sitting on an oil needle, it once collapsed the economy of the USSR, now oil dependence is catastrophic, on the verge of losing sovereignty (this explains our concessions to the West in almost everything). If something happens to the global (dollar) economy, it will first of all concern us. The crisis of 2008 washed out huge capital from our country (it is also called speculative, but it is a huge amount of money), today everything is repeated, again a furious outflow of money to the West, in the dollar. In general, the crisis of 2008 for our economy has not yet ended; we had to overcome it in 2012, however, in view of the unfolding new wave, an inevitable recession will follow. Everything described is in the nature of a controlled process (chaos).
    According to the third point - Europe for Russia is a market for the sale of gas and oil. Destroying the stability of Europe, Pindos again damage the Russian economy. An alternative project to the Nord Stream is the Nabucco project for gas supplies to Europe from Azerbaijan and Tajikistan (the project is at the stage of elaboration and coordination and should be implemented in the coming years). The fact that the Eurozone is collapsing is largely a merit of the United States and it is their interest in global dominance. Russia's interest is to create a center of power capable of ensuring its security for other members of the Union.
    And for this, the country needs an authoritative leader, who is he? Guessing is not necessary. The choice is ours ?!
    On the issue, the statement that I work out someone else's money.
    I don’t work out money, I don’t do journalism, I don’t belong to the party. Born in the USSR and proud of it.
    1. +3
      28 September 2011 21: 12
      Regarding the collapse of the USSR economy because of the "oil needle", let me disagree with you

      The loss of the national economy from the first reform of Gorbachev, an anti-alcohol company, is estimated at 40 billion rubles. Those Rubles!
      The damage that the 1987 reform caused to our socialist economy is not calculable at all. Only 1/7 of the basic production assets were involved in the production of consumer goods. And the government started small-scale industrialization in order to ultimately modernize backward light industry. All this, however, ended in failure already at the first stage: billions of state investments in basic industries disappeared without a trace in the general bedlam - the light industry did not wait for new equipment, materials, technologies. Then they reduced the purchase of consumer goods and threw currency funds to purchase equipment abroad. The result, again, did not live up to expectations: Some of the equipment remained in warehouses and in the open air (due to the lack of production facilities), and what was finally managed to be installed failed every now and then. Entire production lines were idle due to improper operation, lack of spare parts, poor quality of raw materials. And also do not forget Afghanistan. The funds went not only to the army, but pay attention to the creation in Afghanistan of factories of factories, educational institutions of hospitals, etc.
  5. 0
    28 September 2011 20: 11
    French Ambassador to the UN Gerard Araud (Gerard Araud) said on the evening of September 27 that Iran could become the object of a military operation if Tehran does not stop developing its nuclear program, reports Agence France-Presse.
    1. Uncle Sam
      -2
      28 September 2011 21: 16
      In Iran, it’s time to put things in order.
      1. 0
        29 September 2011 18: 39
        Quote: Uncle Sam
        In Iran, it’s time to put things in order.

        Where to put things in order is in Washington!
  6. Bob
    -1
    28 September 2011 22: 08
    The reasons for the collapse of the USSR are the systemic crisis in the state in the economy of exorbitantly increased military forces (bought into the West’s duck about star wars and forced the development of their reciprocal weapons - Buran et al.), Social expenses (communism promised by 1980), received a lot of income from oil sales, however, by 1980 manifested itself in a sharp decrease in energy prices - below the profitability threshold of $ 20. per barrel. The weakness of the state’s elite in the face of the temptation of Western welfare, information propaganda of the West did their dirty work.
    Only with the advent of Putin did our economy grow unimaginably and largely due to the positive conjuncture of oil prices.
    The question is, what's next? Today, the West, like China, is volatile, and in order to ensure a competitive economy, it is necessary to control OPEC (Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iran, Iraq, etc.) - these are the Western powers that are now engaged in these countries under the guise of fighting for democratic values, Russia is not a member of OPEC, however, she is of course on the black list for perestroika. China, however, is not yet busy with the implementation of the colonial policy in relation to donor countries, the East is a delicate matter, they do not pursue momentary profit defending deeper goals. Today, the Russian economy is still alive only because Wall Street did not decide its fate.
  7. bagira
    +1
    29 September 2011 17: 12
    The reasons for the collapse of the USSR were not a crisis in the economy and an arms race, but a special operation successfully carried out by the CIA to introduce agents of influence into the Soviet political elite, eliminate Andropov and recruit Misha with Paradise. But they made a mistake with the fact that they did not get rich Misha, but gave him only the Nobel Prize as a reward. And Misha lives in Russia, where so many are ready to just spit in his face. In general, greed let down the bankers gentlemen. And now, a sweet couple, their former agents, realized that after the collapse of Russia, they would become useless to anyone and began to strengthen the defense. Misha is a living example for them. He was used and thrown away.
    1. Joker
      0
      29 September 2011 17: 14
      Interesting observation.
    2. Shqvarqi
      0
      29 September 2011 18: 04
      It would be nice if that were true)) ...

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"