Posted on 07/26/2011 7:49:34 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
Edited on 07/26/2011 8:40:50 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
With their Libya bombing campaign dragging on unresolved, France and Britain have been forced to accept ruler Muammar al-Gaddafi may stay there if he quits power, despite calls for international justice.
Britain denied the joint position was a climb-down after it had repeatedly called for him to quit the country, while France last week was the first to openly suggest he could stay under a negotiated settlement.
(Excerpt) Read more at channelnewsasia.com ...
You have provided no premise, and one example, which affects one aspect of Gaddaffi’s operations.
But there isn’t that much oil, as we have already established. Libya is not a big producer.
This is the first time in this discussion you have mentioned gold. Gaddaffi must have an awful lot of it for the West to risk (and spend) this much to try and grab it. You're right about the bank accounts being small potatoes. Libya's UK bank accounts have now been unfrozen and turned over to the Libyan rebels. They came to approx 140 million dollars.
Are you an idiot or a liar?
Libyan crisis sends oil prices surging Feb 23, 2011Gilles Carbonnier, professor at the Geneva-based Graduate Institute, tells swissinfo.ch that Libya’s oil production remains crucial for the industrialised world even if the Organisation of Petrol Exporting Countries (Opec) is increasing its output.
So, we’re back to that moronic drivel in post #31 are we? LOL
Also, why is it so neccesary to include personal insult in every response? I understand that denigrating someone's intelligence makes you look smart in comparison, but it does get old quickly. It's now giving the impression that you really don't know what you are talking about.
I was under the impression that Gadhaffi, although in truth the absolute ruler of Libya, in fact has no official position i.e. he is not Head of State. Does this put another angle on your freezing assets theory?
The bedou are themselves muslims, so in opposing the muslim brotherhood, are they the "wrong" type of muslims?
How is Libya a gateway to the south and Nigeria? I can buy it as a route for invasion further west, but south of Libya is 1000+ miles of Sahara.
Assuming you buy into the "Obama is a secret Muslim advancing the cause of islam worldwide" theory, who wants to seize Gaddhaffis wealth, why would the British and the French get involved? What have they to gain from a militant Islamic state on their southern flank? If Obama gets his hands on the money, then theres nothing left for the UK and La belle Francais, is there? Besides, I seem to recall that it was the British who touted the idea of a no fly zone in the first place, to be shot down pretty quickly by Hillary Clinton. It was only later that Obama decided to back the plan. Does that mean that there is dispute between the whitehouse and the State department?
I'm not trying to be funny here, just trying to understand.
You really must be a low-grade moron not to understand the reason for that. You need to get back on your medications.
The links (plural) that I provided both show that Libya IS a big producer.
Civil war in Libya sent the markets jittery and pushed the prices up. The west cannot afford to allow disruption on that scale. Its all there!
In other words NATO intervened for ... wait for it ... OIL!
Too bad Libya's production has been cut by half due to NATO's intervention and it has lasted months not days.
Not quite. There is a distinction. Not for oil per se, but to guarantee a cheap supply of oil from everywhere else. And there is another reason too. If this libyan civil war gets really violent or settles into a long drawn out affair, then there is a chance that civilian morale will crack, in which case we have a huge refugee problem. Refugees cant head south, because its desert. Only so many can head east into Egypt or west into Tunisia, becuase they have their own political uprisings atm, therefore they might take to boats across the Med. Not a comforting thought for Europeans.
Too bad Libya's production has been cut by half due to NATO's intervention and it has lasted months not days.
Which in and of itself is an argument against this being a mere grab for oil. They must have known that Libya's production of oil would plummet once fighting started and even more once it intensified. So why intensify it? If they are grabbing oil, they would want to guarantee supply. How can they do that if port facilities and pipelines are damaged in the fighting, as they inevitably will be?
I have a suspicion, but I wouldn't want to put words into your mouth, so why don't you enlighten me?
You need to get back on your medications.
As I have already apologised fulsomely for that crack, its pretty crass to bring it back up again.
One link was provided after my assertion, which was only referencing one anyway. According to the US energy information, Libya produces (or produced) about 2.2% of the world's oil. Not a huge amount. The UK produces 1.7%.
Ther history of Africa, its traditional invasion routes on the ground, shows the way to understanding what is happening in relation to Libya. We have no business there.
Its no accident that Obama is following a policy that will open these routes to The Muslim Brotherhood, In East Africa and in the sub Sahara.
And the fact that we are involved in Libya is a travesty.
Of course Gadhaffi is the head of the State of Libya. He was treated as such by every government in the world.And as far as I can see he has not been removed or replaced.Nor will he be. Hillery is not a part of this Obama grift, other than she will participate in the personal aspect of the distribution of Libyan lucre.Thats how they got her to keep her mouth shut.
Hmmm. How much money are we talking about here?
Oh, wonderful! I'm talking to Bill frickin' Clinton here.
"It depends on what the meaning of 'oil' is."
Putting the word 'fulsomely' in there pretty much makes that statement a lie. Apparently that blunt clue wasn't enough to enlighten the space between your ears either.
I'm not so sure about that. I think she has done a lot behind the scenes to advance the same agenda of helping the Muslim Brotherhood. I think that's why Huma is her right-hand woman.
No, not much. Just enough to destabilize world prices. Enough to go to war for. At some point you might want to start making some sense in your posts.
Now who’s conflating? The point I was trying to make is that Nato is not intervening to grab Libya’s oil per se, it is intervening to try to guarantee that the supply of all oil will proceed normally, by not being too expensive to buy.
Excellent! Destabilisation. I'm glad you've come round to agreeing with the argument outlined in post #31. I'm glad we agree.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.