.:BrIDo:. Posted August 21, 2011 Share Posted August 21, 2011 http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/middle-ea...rest?CMP=twt_gu Live feed here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrissiboi Posted August 21, 2011 Share Posted August 21, 2011 My only hope is that it all ends and we don't have another Iraq type situation, whoever takes control needs the respect of all the people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alibi Posted August 22, 2011 Share Posted August 22, 2011 Once the oil is secured, they'll be left to sort it out for themselves. "Any nation given the opportunity to regain its national sovereignty and which then rejects it is so far beneath contempt that it is hard to put words to it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colkitto Posted August 22, 2011 Share Posted August 22, 2011 Obama 'Tripoli slipping from the grasp of a tyrant' Seems awful friendly towards this "tyrant" Don't blame me I voted Yes!!!! - We tried to tell you !!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted August 22, 2011 Share Posted August 22, 2011 Once the oil is secured, they'll be left to sort it out for themselves. Blah blah blah pish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capitanus Posted August 22, 2011 Share Posted August 22, 2011 Nuke the ****ing lot of them. Horrible ****. *insert signature here* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrissiboi Posted August 22, 2011 Share Posted August 22, 2011 Blah blah blah pish So you believe their is no alterior motive in the Libya action by NATO, onwards to Zimbabwe or Syria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted August 22, 2011 Share Posted August 22, 2011 So you believe their is no alterior motive in the Libya action by NATO, onwards to Zimbabwe or Syria Libya's Oil has always been in the world's markets, the NTC will deal with their own in due time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest David Edwards Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 I'll be glad to see Gaddafi go, the notion of 'one more fascist biting the dust' is worthy of a cheer. To say that this was 'all about oil' ignores the facts. Under the previous Labour government, Britain did the deal with Gaddafi to secure the oil supplies. Should Gaddafi prevail in the current conflict, Britain can kiss them goodbye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alibi Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 I'll be glad to see Gaddafi go, the notion of 'one more fascist biting the dust' is worthy of a cheer. To say that this was 'all about oil' ignores the facts. Under the previous Labour government, Britain did the deal with Gaddafi to secure the oil supplies. Should Gaddafi prevail in the current conflict, Britain can kiss them goodbye. Labour wanted to trade Megrahi for oil, yet they complained when Megrahi got compassionate release. Sometimes I think it would have been better to have kept Megrahi locked up just for the fun of seeing what Labour would do to get their deal in the desert implemented. I don't think any agreement with Gaddafi was terribly reliable frankly. Getting rid of him more or less ensures that they can improve that situation. I have no time for Gaddafi and his like but had he been a reliable ally the UK government wouldn't have given a toss who he tortured or murdered - Tony Blair was happy to do deals with him and he was a murderous tyrant in those days too. The current situation is naked opportunism and wouldn't be considered in Zimbabwe or Syria or anywhere else that doesn't have large amounts of oil or other valuable resources. "Any nation given the opportunity to regain its national sovereignty and which then rejects it is so far beneath contempt that it is hard to put words to it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrissiboi Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Labour wanted to trade Megrahi for oil, yet they complained when Megrahi got compassionate release. Sometimes I think it would have been better to have kept Megrahi locked up just for the fun of seeing what Labour would do to get their deal in the desert implemented. I don't think any agreement with Gaddafi was terribly reliable frankly. Getting rid of him more or less ensures that they can improve that situation. I have no time for Gaddafi and his like but had he been a reliable ally the UK government wouldn't have given a toss who he tortured or murdered - Tony Blair was happy to do deals with him and he was a murderous tyrant in those days too. The current situation is naked opportunism and wouldn't be considered in Zimbabwe or Syria or anywhere else that doesn't have large amounts of oil or other valuable resources. And again Megrahi was released on compassionate grounds but what we did not know at the time was that that release was being spoon fed by Westminster who then played the outraged card to appease the Americans. Yet another dodgy conivence by Blair. It wasn't just those WMD's he failed to tell the whole story about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest David Edwards Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 I have no time for Gaddafi and his like but had he been a reliable ally the UK government wouldn't have given a toss who he tortured or murdered - Tony Blair was happy to do deals with him and he was a murderous tyrant in those days too. The current situation is naked opportunism and wouldn't be considered in Zimbabwe or Syria or anywhere else that doesn't have large amounts of oil or other valuable resources. Of course the Labour government was happy to deal with Gaddafi, that's exactly my point, they struck the bargains and secured the oil contracts. Loathe as I am to give any Tory at all any credit at all, in this one instance I'm inclined to respect Cameron for ignoring, indeed risking the oil deals in favour of preventing a potential massacre in Benghazi. The Russians and Chinese were/are waiting in line to win Gaddafi's favour should the rebels fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.:BrIDo:. Posted August 23, 2011 Author Share Posted August 23, 2011 Of course the Labour government was happy to deal with Gaddafi, that's exactly my point, they struck the bargains and secured the oil contracts. Loathe as I am to give any Tory at all any credit at all, in this one instance I'm inclined to respect Cameron for ignoring, indeed risking the oil deals in favour of preventing a potential massacre in Benghazi. The Russians and Chinese were/are waiting in line to win Gaddafi's favour should the rebels fail. Russians and Chinese have also both called for Gaddafi to step down. You think Cameron is doing this to protect the people of Libya? <_ okay then next stop syria> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest David Edwards Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Russians and Chinese have also both called for Gaddafi to step down. They've changed their minds then. I wouldn't bet against them changing again should Gaddafi stage a spectacular comeback. You think Cameron is doing this to protect the people of Libya? Okay then, next stop Syria? I do, mostly. Next stop Syria? To prevent a massacre as big as the one threatened at Benghazi, then yes, why not. The 'Arab Spring' should be supported as far as is practicable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 They've changed their minds then. I wouldn't bet against them changing again should Gaddafi stage a spectacular comeback. I do, mostly. Next stop Syria? To prevent a massacre as big as the one threatened at Benghazi, then yes, why not. The 'Arab Spring' should be supported as far as is practicable. Agree with that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrissiboi Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Agree with that It won't though as Syria have always been backed by Moscow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 It won't though as Syria have always been backed by Moscow. Things change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Just leave Syria out of it. I'm going on holiday there on Tuesday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest David Edwards Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Just leave Syria out of it. I'm going on holiday there on Tuesday. The very best of luck to you then. Take care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrissiboi Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 The very best of luck to you then. Take care. Surprised the FO is not giving it don't travel unless necessary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.