tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5867260065662559631.post7100215467583664776..comments2024-03-01T18:36:20.048-08:00Comments on CanSpeccy: Why we're bombing LibyaCShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03399620869685840906noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5867260065662559631.post-52530526597241292432011-09-06T20:37:35.691-07:002011-09-06T20:37:35.691-07:00Yes, good article. A French initiative, but really...Yes, good article. A French initiative, but really gang rape, everyone expecting to get their reward -- Even Canada, which has been been stalwart in bombing Libya and is <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/09/01/pol-harper-libya-future.html" rel="nofollow">committed to the end</a>. <br /><br />And the payoff? Canadian oil firms operate throughout the world, including in Africa. Moreover, <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/g8-g20/africa/canada-a-quiet-powerhouse-in-africas-mining-sector/article1562696/" rel="nofollow">Canadian companies are the largest source of foreign investment in Africa’s mining sector.</a><br /><br />Altogether a lovely little war, which is perhaps why the public in most participating countries don't seem much agitated about it. I mean, what do folks want, cheap gas for the SUV or Libyan independence? Put that way, there's no contest, surely.CShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03399620869685840906noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5867260065662559631.post-73593413508925941172011-09-05T14:44:25.558-07:002011-09-05T14:44:25.558-07:00I found this very to the point:
Why Gaddafi got a...I found this very to the point:<br /><br />Why Gaddafi got a red card - By Pepe Escobar<br /><br />…<br />'Revolution' made in France<br /><br />Let's start with the basics. The Frogs did it. It's always worth repeating; this is a French war. The Americans don't even call it a war; it's a "kinetic action" or something. The "rebel" Transitional National Council" (TNC) is a French invention.<br />http://gebattmer.twoday.net/stories/38766280/<br />http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MI01Ak02.htmlTony Machhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14823430729798784689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5867260065662559631.post-29527539588226179022011-09-02T13:05:44.097-07:002011-09-02T13:05:44.097-07:00In addition to the points covered in this excellen...In addition to the points covered in this excellent analysis might be added the potential for oil states such as Libya and Iraq to raise themselves to the status of significant regional powers through the use of oil revenue.<br /><br />Libya has 49 billion barrels of proven reserves of high grade easily accessible oil -- about four trillion dollars worth, and Gadhafi was in the process of converting that resource to cash to be applied to education, irrigated agriculture, etc." Actions clearly intolerable to the global hegemon. <br /><br />To claim, as Elbaum does, that "The Harold Wilson-led Labour Party government in Britain backed US Vietnam policy despite its misgivings,” seems misleading. The Wilson Government gave little, if any real support to the US in Vietnam. But it was, naturally, muted in its condemnation of the war. Britain was, and remains, US-occupied territory, with over one hundred US military bases. There must have been a limit to how far Harold Wilson felt free to oppose the US under the leadership of the highly vindictive Lyndon Johnson, who responded to Canadian PM Lester Pearson's speech proposing a bombing pause and a negotiated peace in Vietnam by afterwards grabbing Pearson by the lapels and shouting, "You pissed on my rug."<br /><br />In any case, the left then did represent something left, unlike today's "left," which seem led exclusively by puppets, e.g., Canada's pathetic New Democratic Party, which mindlessly votes for every instance of Canada's imperialist-running-dog function in Libya and elsewhere and has absolutely nothing to say about globalization and the outsourcing and off-shoring of jobs. <br /><br />Harold Wilson's government, in contrast, was heavily committed to national economic policies designed to improve educational and employment opportunities for ordinary folks. For example, they imposed controls (i.e., a tax) on capital exports, promoted UK manufacturing employment through selective taxes on the service sector, and like Gadhafi, provided opportunities for the upward mobility of ordinary people by building many new universities and by opening up the top ranks of the public service to people from outside the private school/Oxbridge community. Today, such a socialist government in Europe would surely justify a large scale campaign of humanitarian bombing, with the Harold Wilson clone demonized as a nationalist new Hitler.CShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03399620869685840906noreply@blogger.com