In, Libya’s Unintended Consequences, July 7, 2012, Ross Douthat writes about the massacres happening in Mali as “unintended consequences” as if they couldn’t have been guessed by the NATO planners. In the contrary and since the beginning, the intervention in Libya was hypocritical:
They knew that the Libyan armaments were going to fall in the hands of AQMI (Al Qaeda in Islamic Maghreb), they knew that this was going to destabilize all the African neighboring countries, but, for them, this is what they want: constructive chaos; isn’t it the US neocons’ policy in Eurasia and Africa? Confessional and religious wars, aren’t they their policies in the Middle East? In Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, who are the West’s objective allies? Those who are fighting the West’s enemy el Assad in Syria are: Islamic Turkey, theocratic Wahhabi Saudi Arabia and Qatar, who financed Al Qaeda, the Salafis, the Moslem Brothers and for sure Israel, also wanting to be recognized as a Jewish, then confessional state.
Is the US (head of NATO) then for freedoms or for creating confessional Islamic and Jewish States? Why all the countries, NATO intervened on, are on the fault line between Islamic countries and Eurasian industrial powers like China, Russia and Europe? Is it because the neocons want to destabilize all the possible rival possible powers to the US mastery of the planet? Is President Obama also a neocon or, if he is not, are they still governing the United States?
8600, SW, 87 Avenue, Miami, FL33173, USA
1(305) 271 5872
Actually in Paris: (331) 43 40 53 66