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.
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.
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.
- Alexey Volodin
Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter