Article

2011-03-29 Africa North

US To Purchase Oil From Libyan Rebels, Thereby Funding "Flickers" Of Al Qaeda

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by tipper 2011-03-29 18:01|| || Front Page|| [1 views ] Top

#1 So it is a war for oil. And the profits will fund our mortal enemies.

Remind me just who the fuck is the genius behind our foreign policy?

Posted by DarthVader 2011-03-29 18:16|| 2011-03-29 18:16|| Front Page Top

#2 Ya gotta understand. Obama asked Bush, "Why haven't you captured Osama?" Then Obama promised during his election campaign to capture Osama. Couldn't do it after being Prez Obama. So now he is arming Osama's Al Qaueda, hoping they will help him capture somebody, maybe even Qaddaffy.

Now is that messed up or what!?

Posted by Unuper Gonque1986 2011-03-29 18:51|| 2011-03-29 18:51|| Front Page Top

#3 Oh, one more thing. Obama by supporting these rebels is creating another group of taliban, like the CIA did in supporting the resistance to the Soviet Union in Afghanistan years ago.

Posted by Unuper Gonque1986 2011-03-29 18:56|| 2011-03-29 18:56|| Front Page Top

#4 Correction: The CIA supported the Mujahideen. It was Pakistan's ISI that created and nurtured the Taliban.

Posted by OldSpook 2011-03-29 19:55|| 2011-03-29 19:55|| Front Page Top

#5 Correction: The CIA supported the Mujahideen. It was Pakistan's ISI that created and nurtured the Taliban.

Without our billions of dollars of military aid for the mujahideen, the Soviets would have crushed the Afghan rebels, meaning no mujahideen victory and no Taliban (whose luminaries were drawn from various mujahideen factions). Would we be better off today if we had stood by and let the Soviets wipe out the Islamists in Afghanistan, thereby turning Afghanistan into yet another Islam-suppressing Central Asian republic? I happen to think so. We might even be better off if we had let the Soviets overrun Pakistan jointly with India.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2011-03-29 20:38|| 2011-03-29 20:38|| Front Page Top

#6 We might still have the Soviet Union in that case.

Not really an option

Posted by European Conservative 2011-03-29 20:43|| 2011-03-29 20:43|| Front Page Top

#7 Not out sourcing (drilling) to foreigners is another campaign promise Big zero has broken. We now see that Islamists get the dough, Americans get the shaft.

Posted by Phuting and Company7064 2011-03-29 22:03|| 2011-03-29 22:03|| Front Page Top

#8 We might still have the Soviet Union in that case.

Not really an option

The Soviet Union collapsed because it spent between 15 to 17 per cent of national output on defense, not because the Soviets got tired of fighting in Afghanistan and left. Having them ensnared in a poor and populous country like Pakistan would have made their problems worse. It was bad enough having to subsidize Cuba's 10m people, but to subsidize 85m Pakistani religious nuts would have been catastrophic.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2011-03-29 22:28|| 2011-03-29 22:28|| Front Page Top

23:59 Bill Griling5080
23:19 USN,Ret
23:10 Fi
23:01 Water Modem
23:00 Water Modem
22:42 Pappy
22:34 Phuting and Company7064
22:28 Zhang Fei
22:18 Bright Pebbles
22:03 Phuting and Company7064
21:28 Barbara Skolaut
21:26 European Conservative
21:14 Menhadden Whaish8836
21:09 Pappy
21:06 Pappy
20:59 phil_b
20:53 European Conservative
20:47 DJ Curtis C
20:43 European Conservative
20:41 European Conservative
20:38 Zhang Fei
19:55 OldSpook
19:52 Frank G
19:44 Barbara Skolaut