Rage over Lybia

[dieseltaylor]

I think you are missing the point. Butler was talking about "small wars" for economic purposes being run for the benefit of an elite or by the pawns of the elite. I am not overly familiar with all of the US's interventions but I suspect they were internal actions.

That is different in a considerable degree to wars against aggression where not taking up arms may leave you without any friends.

There is also the matter of scale - a police action into Afghanistan to aprehend Al-Quaedi operatives is probably Ok if the Taliban was unable or unwilling to oblige. A long-term invasion is a different kettle of fish in that the mass of effort required and the profits made, and the men sent to dies are all out of propoortion for the logical original aim.

But ..

In 1997,

Robert Oakley [ex-US ambassador to Pakistan, now on Unocal's ad hoc advisory board] advised Miller to reach the Taliban by working through Pakistan's government [then led by

Benazir Bhutto

]. He also suggested that Unocal hire Thomas Gouttiere, an Afghan specialist at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, to develop a job training program in Kandahar that would teach Pashtuns the technical skills needed to build a pipeline. ... Unocal agreed to pay $900,000 via the University of Nebraska to set up a Unocal training facility on a fifty-six acre site in Kandahar, not far from bin Laden's compounds. ... Gouttiere traveled in and out of Afghanistan and met with Taliban leaders. ... In December 1997 Gouttiere worked with Miller to arrange for another Taliban delegation to visit the United States. ...

—

Steve Coll

,

Ghost Wars

[13]

Unocal seems to have had a deeper role. Intelligence "whistleblower" Julie Sirrs claimed that anti-Taliban leader Ahmad Shah Massoud told her he had "proof that Unocal had provided money that helped the Taliban take Kabul [in 1996]".[14] And French journalist Richard Labeviere said, referring to the later 1990s, "The CIA and Unocal's security forces ... provided military weapons and instructors to several Taleban militia ..."[15]

IN 1998 AMERICA WANTED NEW GOVERNMENT IN AFGHANISTAN TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF OIL PIPELINE

America has wanted a new government in Afghanistan since at least 1998, three years before the attacks on 11 September 2001. The official report from a meeting of the U.S. Government's foreign policy committee on 12 February 1998, available on the U.S. Government website, confirms that the need for a West-friendly government was recognised long before the War on Terror that followed September 11th:

"The U.S. Government's position is that we support multiple pipelines...

The Unocal pipeline is among those pipelines that would receive our

support under that policy. I would caution that while we do support the

project, the U.S. Government has not at this point recognized any

governing regime of the transit country, one of the transit countries,

Afghanistan, through which that pipeline would be routed. But we do

support the project."

[ U.S. House of Reps., "U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics", 12 Feb 1998 ]

"The only other possible route [for the desired oil pipeline] is across,

Afghanistan which has of course its own unique challenges."

[ "U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics", 12 Feb 1998 ]

"CentGas can not begin construction until an internationally recognized

Afghanistan Government is in place."

[ "U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics", 12 Feb 1998 ]

So perhaps the mission got smudged up with things beneficial to the "US" or at least US interests. Also do military chiefs like action , just a little bit? . Body armour ring any bells for profiteering?

Richmond, Virginia -- July 7, 2006

Something for George Allen to explain, after he's finished unwrapping himself from the flag:

Herold Noel had nowhere to call home after returning from military service in Iraq. He slept in his Jeep, taking care to find a parking space where he wouldn't get a ticket.

"Then the nightmares would start," says the 26-year-old former Army private first class, who drove a fuel truck in Iraq. "I saw a baby decapitated when it was run over by a truck - I relived that every night."

According to the Associated Press, there are more than 200,000 homeless veterans right now. About 40% are Vietnam veterans. A more distrubing fact is that 10% are veterans of the Gulf War or the current War in Iraq, and that number is growing every day. You can read more about that here. Of course the Republican Party, led by George W. Bush and George Felix Allen, has actually cut veterans' benefits.

Now contrast that with the growing number of war profiteers. Let's look at my favorite: David H. Brooks, CEO of DHB Industries. You remember David H. Brooks, don't you? He's the guy who gave his daughter a $10 million Bat Mitzva (13th birthday party).

Some might argue that Brooks is worth every penny if he is providing a product that is saving lives in Iraq. But the US Marines are concerned that DHB’s bulletproof vests may not be so bulletproof. In May of this year, the Marine Corps recalled 5,277 DHB Interceptor armored vests after questions were raised about the vests’ ability to stop 9-mm pistol rounds. By that time, of course, Brooks had pocketed $250 million-plus in war windfalls.

Brooks is one of seven war profiteers profiled by United for a Fair Economy in their report "Executive Excess 2005." You can read the entire report here.

Wow, a $10 million birthday party for a thirteen year-old girl, paid for with money earned passing off defective body armor to the U.S. Marines. Is this is George W. Bush and George Felix Allen's vision for America?

http://www.the-richmonder.com/2006/07/bush-and-allens-america-war-profiteers.html

[abneo3sierra]

I was also referring to small wars, except where WW2 was mentioned... It just seems wrong for anyone from Britain to complain much about small "imperialistic" wars..I have Chinese friends who remember somewhat angrily British involvement in the Opium Wars "The First Opium War (1839–42), also known as the First Anglo-Chinese War[nb 2] was the first of the two Opium Wars fought between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the Qing Dynasty of China, WITH THE AIM OF SECURING ECONOMIC BENEFITS FROM TRADE IN CHINA" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Opium_War, not to mention other escapades into Afghanistan, Persia, Palestine, Greece, after WW2, etc. I am not judging these actions, but to have anyone in Britain condemning the USA (or even Germany) for being an imperialistic power that wars for its own interest, is not quite right. Every country does this, and the US probably has done it less...if our Iraq invasion was along the same lines as former European colonialist empires, we would actually at least have taken their oil.

As for the body armor debacle, you are correct...but profiteers always exist also.

As for Bush cutting Veterans benefits, the information is not entirely accurate, and not as easy to quantify as one might assume. Plenty of "numbers" can be thrown out each way on whether he did or he did not, I do know, as a soldier, that active duty members were much better cared for under his administration, than we were before or after it. It is not an accident that the military usually by overwhelming majority is "conservative" politically, which does not always agree with "Republican" but much more so that "Democrat"

[dieseltaylor]

Are you trying to sideslip the point. Wars, or meddling in the internal politics of a country for the benefirt of business is wrong. I explained the difference between this and fighting expansionist powers.

Mentioning what the UK has done in the past does not in some sense exculpate the US or make it any more palatable,

Smedley Butler is right - whatever country you fight for. I just thought you might like to see his complaint so beautifully illustrated as to the war profiteer and the soldier.

Who can justify it, nobody so it gets buried in some hick nespaper whilst the nation watches"America has Talent"

I can understand the Tea Party members who know there is something stinking in the country. The trouble is they are not sure what and every point of power is occupied by someone with a vested interest in keeping the status quo.

The US was the poster girl for the benefits of democracy and now its beginning to look like its becoming Italy. Perhaps that is what happens to Republics modelled on Rome : (

[Vanir Ausf B]

The Romans had a good run. We could do worse.

[abneo3sierra]

Are you trying to sideslip the point. Wars, or meddling in the internal politics of a country for the benefirt of business is wrong. I explained the difference between this and fighting expansionist powers.

Mentioning what the UK has done in the past does not in some sense exculpate the US or make it any more palatable,

Smedley Butler is right - whatever country you fight for. I just thought you might like to see his complaint so beautifully illustrated as to the war profiteer and the soldier.

Who can justify it, nobody so it gets buried in some hick nespaper whilst the nation watches"America has Talent"

I can understand the Tea Party members who know there is something stinking in the country. The trouble is they are not sure what and every point of power is occupied by someone with a vested interest in keeping the status quo.

The US was the poster girl for the benefits of democracy and now its beginning to look like its becoming Italy. Perhaps that is what happens to Republics modelled on Rome : (

Diesel, I tried not to make it seem I was attacking your homeland, I do not mean that, at all. All that I meant, is that while EVERY country has done this, too many people, especially on these forums, continue to look at it as an American problem. Please understand that from an American viewpoint, it grows tiring to see, always on this forum, "Bad America did xxxx" while EVERY OTHER COUNTRY, at least those that have been in positions of power, have done the same or worse. America makes mistakes, and attempts, sometimes sluggishly, but always attempts, to deal with them. Don't write America off yet because of our mistakes, everyone else has had their chance also, and has done far worse. Note that even in your postings here, it is all about "evil America" doing this or that...I only used Britain as an example, because to be intellectually honest, one must see in history a much more aggressive,imperialistic choice of actions emanating from London, yet also has done some of the greatest things in history...it is quite likely that you may not have had the one, without the other...and the same holds true for the USA.

[dieseltaylor]

I grieve because I bought into the US as a great democracy idea.

SO I am doubly disappointed as there is nothing I can do as it seems to sink into an abyss of corruption and influence peddling. And perhaps most galling the home of management text-books seems incapable of planning and executing an invasion without dropping a bollock on the next phase. - when we win.

And management 101 warring security services.

Financial sabotage in the world's smartest capitalist society

A polarised society

What is going on? Theres plenty of analysis available. But apparently nobody can do anything without getting tied up in legal shenanigans. A country brought to its knees by law!?

ANd how corrupt is the system?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-kreig/new-facts-call-into-quest_b_659333.html

Ok sso I idealiased what the US was like when I holidayed there in the 1960's and civil rights were going forward. ANd the gallant US was saving us from the Commies etc.

However I bet on virtually every parameter the US in the mid-sixties was a happier better place. And more innocent of artifices manipulating the population to buy this and want that, Progress - normally progress is thought to be good but I think perhaps progress is not necessarily good at all.

I know there are some very good people in the US and it may yet recover its reputation but whilst power is becoming more and more concentrateed into the hands of fewer and fewer people I doubt it.

MM: How does the U.S. wealth profile compare to other countries?

Wolff: We are much more unequal than any other advanced industrial country.

Perhaps our closest rival in terms of inequality is Great Britain. But where the top percent in this country own 38 percent of all wealth, in Great Britain it is more like 22 or 23 percent.

What is remarkable is that this was not always the case. Up until the early 1970s, the U.S. actually had lower wealth inequality than Great Britain, and even than a country like Sweden. But things have really turned around over the last 25 or 30 years. In fact, a lot of countries have experienced lessening wealth inequality over time. The U.S. is atypical in that inequality has risen so sharply over the last 25 or 30 years.

from here in 2003

http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2003/03may/may03interviewswolff.html

but some neat graphics here

http://www.businessinsider.com/15-charts-about-wealth-and-inequality-in-america-2010-4#

It is depressing.

[abneo3sierra]

I agree, that "after we win" in Iraq has been much mishandled, only now probably finally sorting itself out. It seems from a military viewpoint far easier to break things, than to fix them. There are so many issues that I also have with American society, but, I do know, people TRY to fix them, and sooner or later, will succeed. Probably one of the biggest issues is political correctness and the ignorance it spawns, where people cannot really say anything true for fear of "hurt feelings" or "offending" someone. That mindset is predominately nurtured by the left side of the aisle, and that is probably at its root level, the heart of why I dislike them. Something is wrong in society when nothing is viewed as "bad" anymore, when sports programs do not keep score for fear of hurting the feelings of participants, when there is no incentive to succeed, because you will suffer with more taxes, or more trouble, and every incentive to fail, because someone else will pick you up. The competitiveness that is the opposite of this, is a good thing, it drives people to succeed, on a national level, it drives nations to do great things, even if, along the way, they "hurt someones feelings" etc. People can achieve whatever they work hard to do in America...few societies in history have really achieved that. Those who do not achieve here, generally are not trying very hard. Life is competition, we have evolved through the eons, to reward the strong, and reward the intelligent, and at the same time the other side of that coin, in all of nature, is that those who do not "make the grade" will not survive. This is as it should be, and humans have been given the added benefit of a "soul" even though this may be denied by some, but it is the only thing that takes us from the evolution of "survival of the fittest" to at least TRY to make it better for the unfit, to TRY to 'carry the weight' for those who refuse to carry their own...but it is not a failure of society, if our record in that area is less than perfect.

[Michael Emrys]

I grieve because I bought into the US as a great democracy idea.

SO I am doubly disappointed as there is nothing I can do as it seems to sink into an abyss of corruption and influence peddling. And perhaps most galling the home of management text-books seems incapable of planning and executing an invasion without dropping a bollock on the next phase. - when we win.

And management 101 warring security services.

Financial sabotage in the world's smartest capitalist society

A polarised society

What is going on? Theres plenty of analysis available. But apparently nobody can do anything without getting tied up in legal shenanigans. A country brought to its knees by law!?

ANd how corrupt is the system?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-kreig/new-facts-call-into-quest_b_659333.html

Ok sso I idealiased what the US was like when I holidayed there in the 1960's and civil rights were going forward. ANd the gallant US was saving us from the Commies etc.

However I bet on virtually every parameter the US in the mid-sixties was a happier better place. And more innocent of artifices manipulating the population to buy this and want that, Progress - normally progress is thought to be good but I think perhaps progress is not necessarily good at all.

I know there are some very good people in the US and it may yet recover its reputation but whilst power is becoming more and more concentrateed into the hands of fewer and fewer people I doubt it....It is depressing.

It is hateful for me to say it, but I agree with you. I lived through the '60s as an adult and it was a hopeful, exhilarating time in spite of the conflicts and stupidities. One felt that in spite of everything we were at least on the right road and that it was reasonable to hope that everything would work out in the near future.

Then the '70s hit and little by little I could feel the country turn away from what I considered the right road, could feel it in my bones. It was as if people had gotten weary and bored with trying to do the right thing, with believing that the right thing even existed.

As for progress...well it depends on what direction you are progressing, doesn't it? It doesn't make much sense to keep progressing toward a washed out bridge, but it seems that this train doesn't have any brakes. If we've run out of places where we could switch tracks, then I fear the whole kit and kaboodle is going into the gorge.

Michael

[Stalins Organ]

I think saying the 60's was better in the USA than now is like saying 10 years ago was better in Egypt - in both cases "better" pretty much just means the public was ignorant of the corruption, venality, back room deals, duplicity, tec of the powers that be.

[Vanir Ausf B]

What is going on? Theres plenty of analysis available. But apparently nobody can do anything without getting tied up in legal shenanigans. A country brought to its knees by law!?

Sounds like we need a dictator (imperator?)

Ok sso I idealiased what the US was like when I holidayed there in the 1960's and civil rights were going forward

OMFGBBQ you're as old as Emry's.

[dieseltaylor]

OMFGBBQ you're as old as Emry's

I thiought you could tell wisdom comes with age. : )

I lived in Toronto and went to High school so going on holiday to the US was no big deal.

It is an interesting point that ignorance was bliss in the 60's but I think it had perhaps a lot to do with the US at that stage had a lot of people had shared experiences. The biggy being the WW's Korea, and the Depression. They also only a few TV networks to watch. So there was a cohesion. And also external threat from the Communists.

What has happened since then.

interventions of dubious national interest

more blatant consumerism

disparity of wealth increased

multiple channels of "information"

more calculated and scientific manipulation of people

justice is not seen to be done -Simpson

complexity of life has increased

and arguably more information of wrongdoing is reaching [some of] the people OR there is more criminality in society

As to whether you need an Imperator. I hope that is not the answer but without constitutional reform the vicious war between Republicans and Democrats will likely only get worse. And let us not get to political by looking at Wisconsin but try to think of a means for the US to improve the current situation.

I think it is has to be constitutional reform or a a leader of such stature that he can command change through the Senate/Representatives. Of the two the last looks most likely of two unlikely events.

All the evidence shows money talks, and that first past the post leads to polarisation.

Anything else electoral that people think sucks?

I realise there are plenty of contentious points such as whether limited choice of national TV channels are good for society cohesion.

I personally think the complexity of modern life is actually perhaps one of the big problems as people have only a limited capacity or desire for problems and dealing with their own is enough. What is happening elsehwere in their name or corruption in the local community they allow to pass by.

So is ife more complicated can be the easy starting point : )

[Lt Belenko]

Thanks for all the feedback' date=' guys. I knew the world wasn't as apathetic as it seemed. [/quote']

[political sarcasm] Anybody following the NCAA brackets from Brasil?[/political sarcasm]

[Michael Emrys]

I think it is has to be constitutional reform...

This is an idea I've been kicking around for the last 30 years. Ideally, we would have a constitutional convention that would recognize and fix all the problems with the existing one and we would all then march forward into a brighter future. Ideally.

The sad, sad problem is that "ideally" ain't gonna happen. The entrenched powers that are already screwing things up would be sure to screw up any constitutional convention that made it out of the starting gate. The corrupt who have to do their dirty work in the shadows at present would then have the sanction of law. True reformers would have shot their bolt and been reduced to impotence and driven underground or even locked up.

Lest I be scorned as a mere prophet of gloom and doom I add that I believe that there actually are avenues by which true reform could be brought about, but they all require a deeply committed and well-informed electorate. At the moment, and for the immediately foreseeable future, that simply does not exist.

Michael

[Boche]

French Armee de l'air planes begin patrolling Lybian airspace and have began engaging Gadafis Forces.

International contributions (as of post):

-NATO :

3 AWACS planes

-US:

USS Enterprise group

-France:

20 Mirage and Rafael planes

AA destroyer Forbin

Charles de Gaulle Carrier to be sent.

1 Sub + 4 to 5 Support vessels

-Spain:

4 F/A 18 planes

1 Sea Vigilance plane (Probably P3 Orion)

1 Boeing 707

1 F100 Frigate

1 S70 Class submarine

(Possible sending of "Principe de Asturias" Carrier)

-Belgium:

6 F16 figthers

1 Minehunter "Narcis"

-Canada:

8 CF-18 planes

-UK:

Typhoon and Tornado aircraft.

-Denmark:

6 F16 figthers

-Greece:

4 F16 fighters

2 Super Puma Eurocopters

1 Embraer R-99

-Norway:

6 F16 Fighters

Committed/deciding to participate but no info:

Italy: ??? planes

Qatar

UAE

Jordan

Saudi Arabia

Netherlands

Sweden

[Boche]

Armee de l'air planes detroy 4 tanks in the outskirts of Bengazi

[Elmar Bijlsma]

I'm shocked that they not only managed to got the resolution passe at the UNSC but got stuck in so quickly after that, and with such a broad interpretation. And the French leading the way!

It is all pretty unusual but nice to see.

[Clevinger]

Some precisions about the French deployment, from several sources

French Carrier Strike Group, starting deployment on Sunday.

- Charles de Gaulle (Aircraft Carrier) with :

- 4th Flotille (2 Hawkeyes)

- 12th Flotille (Rafale F2 Squadron)

- 17th Flotille (Super Etendard Squadron)

- 35th Flotille + Air Force (6 CSAR Helicopters : 2 Dauphins, 1 Alouette III, 1 Puma, 2 Caracals)

- Dupleix (ASW Frigate)

- Aconit (Frigate)

- La Meuse (Tanker)

Already near the coast of Libya :

- Forbin (AA Frigate)

Air Force Strike Force :

2 Mirage 2000D from 3.3 Ardennes

8 Rafale from 1.7 Provence

2 Mirage 2000-5 from 1.2 Cigognes

KC-135 from GRV 2.93 Bretagne

C-160 Transall from squadrons 1.61 Touraine et 1.64 Béarn.

[Boche]

110 Tomahawk misiles launched from US and UK ships and subs destroy more than 20 Anti Air positions and other defence instalations.

[Other Means]

I'm shocked that they not only managed to got the resolution passe at the UNSC but got stuck in so quickly after that, and with such a broad interpretation. And the French leading the way!

It is all pretty unusual but nice to see.

Apparently Sarkozy blocked the NATO operation then launched unilaterally to grab the limelight while the Paris summit is on

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/20/world/africa/20libya.html?_r=1&hp

That news [of French air strikes] came even before the Paris summit meeting adjourned, with President Nicolas Sarkozy announcing that French warplanes had begun reconnaissance missions around Benghazi, and the French military saying that a Rafale jet fighter had destroyed a government tank near there.

Even though the leaders at the Paris summit meeting were united in supporting military action, there were signs of disagreement over how it would proceed.

Two senior Western diplomats said the Paris meeting, which was organized by Mr Sarkozy, may actually have delayed allied operations to stop Colonel Gaddafi's troops as they were approaching Benghazi. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment on the matter.

The initial French air sorties, which were not coordinated with other countries, angered some of the countries gathered at the summit meeting, according to a senior Nato-country diplomat. Information about the movement of Gaddafi troops toward Benghazi had been clear on Friday, but France blocked any Nato agreement on airstrikes until the Paris meeting, the diplomat said, suggesting that overflights could have begun Friday night before Mr Gaddafi's troops reached the city.

[Lt Belenko]

Great! At $US 569,000 a shot there goes the national debt.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Don't worry. China will lend us the money to pay for it.

[Boche]

As expected, and predicted by members of this forum, after initial attacks by "coalition" aircraft and cruise misiles, Gadafis forces stormes the city of Bengazi. The objective is mostly to use the city as a "human shield" for its forces, aswell as looking for the coalition to cause collateral damage.

Interesting video:

A rebel plane (MIG-23) is shot down by friendly fire over the skies of Bengazi

by the way we have an official operation name:

Operation Odissey Down

[Michael Emrys]

by the way we have an official operation name:

Operation Odissey Down

Sorry, but that should be Operation Odyssey Dawn

Michael

[Boche]

Sorry, but that should be Operation Odyssey Dawn

Michael

Misspelling pardon my keyboard!

[Stalins Organ]

As expected, and predicted by members of this forum, after initial attacks by "coalition" aircraft and cruise misiles, Gadafis forces stormes the city of Bengazi. The objective is mostly to use the city as a "human shield" for its forces, aswell as looking for the coalition to cause collateral damage.

He was going there anyway, so ascribing continued movement as something that has resulted from the UN resolution and attacks seems a bit odd.

Reports today say he has failed to make significant inroads into the city - eg BBc

Interesting video:

A rebel plane (MIG-23) is shot down by friendly fire over the skies of Bengazi

Still of it are all over the news - who identified it as rebel?