McClatchy News: Europe/US NEEDED TO CONTOL LIBYAN OIL/GAS and to keep RUSSIA OUT

[Distant Observer]

Maclatchy Company is as mainstream a news conglomerates as they come.
http://www.mcclatchy.com/2006/06/09/354/daily.html

Yet even they have to open a little peep-hole to the obvious: The Libyan intervention finds a likely explanation in Western Energy control objectives.

That may not be the entire rationale, but there is mounting evidence that there was coordination between the Arab Oil Monarchies and Western powers to do something subversive in Libya from the very onset of the troubles in that country. Without accepting the existence of hidden agendas the rapid coalescing of support for militant action in Libya and the lack of No Move Zones above other troubled regions -- Bahrain, Yemen, borders of Syria and Israel, etc -- was inexplicable.

McClachy's "Real News" finds evidence that, as far back as 3 years ago, control of Libyan energy reserves for Europe became a focus of US policy in the region and the Colonel was not cooperating.

Find link here (others require membership):

http://warisacrime.org/content/us-acting-keep-oil-out-russian-hands

[robinlynne]

1. I know there is a reason we went into Libya and not the other ocuntris in the same situation.

Was just waiting to see what the reason really is.....
why not Bahrain? The bloodshed is no different.

[Distant Observer]

17. Edit:: McClatchy News: Europe/US NEEDED TO CONTROL LIBYAN OIL/GAS and to keep RUSSIA OUT

Missed TYPO, CONTROL, NOT CONTOL (WHICH MAY MEAN SOMETHING IN SOME LANGUAGE, I GUESS)

[robinlynne]

19. Don't worry, we got it!

[Vanje]

2. Whatta surprise nt

[Blue Meany]

3. Might have beent because he was promoting a pan-African currency

that he wanted to sell his oil in, rather than the Euro or the dollar.

[Distant Observer]

5. Gaddafi was generally uncooperative and exessively pan-African

China used Libya as the lynch-pin of their Africa strategy when Gaddafi Chaired the African Union.

Also, the Easterners in Libya (Cyrenaican's) hated his pan-African approach and the open borders to immigrants and the Arab Monarchs hated his opposition to Monarchies.

But usually it is control of energy that causes war.

[indepat]

4. Yeah, who woulda' ever thunk it?

:patriot:

[Distant Observer]

6. Unfortunately, it is the "little people" who are manipulate, used, and die in these conflicts

[Distant Observer]

11. Changing Presidents does not change fundamental US Interests, Policies

or MO -- as much as we or he would like to.

[xchrom]

7. recommend

[WatsonT]

8. But of course anyone who pointed this out prior to the attacks was pro-gaddafi.

[Distant Observer]

9. You mean you are NOT A PAID PR CONSULTANT??!!

[WatsonT]

10. Nope. I want to be, but so far no one will send me a check

I'm not picky where it comes from. I'll even switch my stated view to get some of that sweet sweet oil money.

Any takers?

[Distant Observer]

20. Well the HOUSE OF SAUD has a $37 Bill budget to manage Arab Spring. Imaging the PR slice ot that

and I am sure some goes to supporting their "Get Gaddafi" project.

[WatsonT]

21. Thanks

I'll look in to that.

[malaise]

14. Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

:D

[PurityOfEssence]

12. But...but...the saintly rebels...!

With age, I listen more and more to my instincts, yet also always try to be mindful that I may be seeing things incorrectly.

My first reaction to the illegal little adventure was purely from the revulsion to violating national sovereignty, but the harsh stench of badly-mounted showmanship really took over from that point. It didn't feel authentic in the least. Upon reading about the French being threatened with nationalization back in ott-nine, it seemed incontestable that something like this was afoot.

We've been cynically played, and both the method and the justifications have been slipshod.

Meanwhile, we wander on with an addle-headed attrition grind that will kill and ruin many, many people, and our national character is dragged ever lower in the muck of Reaganism. I feel for the rebels who want out from under a dictatorship, but I don't feel anything but disgust for the MANY Islamists among them who are playing a deceitful game or for the opportunists. This is an epic blunder played for swoons of emotionalism. Perhaps we get away with it, and the war exhausts itself after not too long a while, leaving us with access to the oil, but our national character will be just that much more befouled.

This wasn't done by the reactionaries; this was done by our own Democrats. We are at fault, and this is deeply shameful.

[malaise]

13. China and Russia

This was public knowledge long before we heard words like humanitarian.

Even Western propaganda is bankrupt. It's pathetic - imperialism on steroids.

[Swede]

15. Link?

[Distant Observer]

16. Unfortunately, its a video report, not transcribed. See link below

http://warisacrime.org/content/us-acting-keep-oil-out-russian-hands

[leeroysphitz]

18. When was the oil industry elected to officially and exclusively determining U.S. policy ?

It's like the only thing the federal government concerns it's self with 2 things. Paying out benefits to retirees who payed into that system over their working lives and invading foreign nations at the behest of corporate interests. They say that we can't afford both anymore and guess which function they are looking to cut?

[pampango]

22. Nice of Russia (and China) not to veto a plan to keep Russia (and China?) out. Why

did the same two countries effectively veto any UN involvement in Syria? Did they finally figure out that the West was trying to keep them out of Syria's oil and gas?

[Distant Observer]

23. Did you read the intial NFZ resolution. It was very mild, but became the "camel's nose" for war