What does this question possibly indicate (This one's about Libya)?

First of all, I have a friend in the army. He told me he works in operations in a special force, but due to specific reasons, he can't tell me exactly what force and he does acknowledge it's hush-hush and it's suppose to be like this for a reason. That's all fine and dandy.

But second; months ago, he told me there are planned operations in Iran, and 4-star general Wesley Clark has even acknowledged there was a specific plan to invade 7 countries in 5 years (though this is definitely behind schedule). On this list were the countries Libya, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, and Iran (last, but not least, of course!).

Interestingly, my friend told me ground forces are expected to move in. He had 2 weeks notice only a few days ago about this particular operation and told me: "Guess who's going in first? My squad."

This is the strange part; he said that they weren't actually expected to invade Libya for 4 months, and this is way ahead of schedule if he was to head into Libya within short notice.

What does this say to you?

First, I think this has a lot to do with the current state of the USD. If the USD isn't doing particularly well, it means that we aren't fighting a viable war to ante the level of debt. We require certain level of debts in order to keep the dollar afloat - it's a fiat currency, and there are hundreds if not THOUSANDS of factors that we are unable to understand. It doesn't matter how much you try to correct eachother, people - the fact of the matter is, we're a military-industrial complex, not the other way around.

We require constant war in order to keep the dollar at fake value, and fuel our need of our oil. We invade countries primarily to offset the possibility of the dollar's value falling and also to ensure false "democracy;" if you're in the know-how of being somewhat woken up, you know Al-Qaeda (like the concept of fear and how it is used to express control of unthinking or mislead majorities) is actually just something well-thought up by the CIA. Al-Qaeda itself is disinformation that the mainstream media used efficiently and effectively and now the majority of people are actually disinformation agents by accident... on purpose. Isn't that weird?

Second; we are inverted totalitarianism. I mean - really - wake up. This is some really basic stuff. Bipartisan agreement happens, but not in the right way. Similarly, from a thread I posted earlier, the monetary policy and our fiscal promises are actually broken almost completely by design. It was suppose to be like this because history has shown, TIME AND TIME AGAIN - central banks just do not work. I really dare an opponent to tell me how a central bank has effectively worked without any abuse outright of the people within its own country, or people in several exterior countries. It just simply doesn't, because the monetary policies have already been predetermined to fail, and by the time this is realized, the banks themselves are too big to fail.

Third, economic stability and military presence go very hand-in-hand. If we are running things fine, and the country becomes an industrial workhorse, this means that we are establishing control in simplistic manner and we are fueling the dollar's level of debt. If the flow isn't working just right, then we have to go into more countries. Just watch Vietnam and the dismantling of the gold standard, then look back at what happens in the 90's.

Fourth: if we are advancing into a country much earlier than expected... what does that mean?

Easy: quantitative easing is becoming impossibly difficult for Bernanke and he's shooting up faster and harder than before.

In other words; the USD is going to collapse soon, whether it be this year should there be food shortage problems in our biggest exporting partner - debt collecting from our biggest exporting partner - the wrong war - or just simply the combination of problems.

Keep a close eye, because it will just take days for any of this to happen.

The situation in Libya is an extremely important thing to watch and comment on.

Originally posted by AgentOfTheSwollenEyeball

But second; months ago, he told me there are planned operations in Iran, and 4-star general Wesley Clark has even acknowledged there was a specific plan to invade 7 countries in 5 years (though this is definitely behind schedule). On this list were the countries Libya, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, and Iran (last, but not least, of course!).

Why Syria? Invading Syria doesn't make any sense? Not saying particularly that the others do...but I can see reasoning...but not Syria and there are all sorts of bordering countries that really aren't going to like that...the others up to Iran-ish, no real biggie, but Syria, that would be a major escalation...and for what?

Originally posted by AgentOfTheSwollenEyeball

But second; months ago, he told me there are planned operations in Iran, and 4-star general Wesley Clark has even acknowledged there was a specific plan to invade 7 countries in 5 years (though this is definitely behind schedule). On this list were the countries Libya, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, and Iran (last, but not least, of course!).

You have a source on Clark's statement? Please post a link to it? That would have been front page news worldwide if true. Where is it?

reply to post by Blaine91555


Here you go.....it's true.....

reply to post by KilgoreTrout


If this information is correct; anything to back it up OP? Syria like all countries has allies. With no real reason to attack Syria, though one would certainly be invented, their allies would rightly get angry and side against the UN, NATO, US, whatever. When that happens it can easily be a stepping stone to other engagements. The question that truly worries me is why. Other than weakening the, I will call them coalition (UN, NATO, US, whatever), military and improving the financial gains of the IMC. What is the end game? Is there an end game or just a bunch of pigs fighting over food? We have a good understanding of what is going on, the thing that will unlock it all is the why.

Well I suppose there it is.

reply to post by KilgoreTrout


Like most countries in the ME, Syria has oil:

dev.prenhall.com...

And, since they're friends with Iran, its just one more domino in the chain.

Not to mention the civil unrest there is similar to what is going on in Libya, and now there is precedent (in some eyes) to perform "humanitarian" operations in sovereign nations.

Originally posted by DrCarter
If this information is correct; anything to back it up OP? Syria like all countries has allies. With no real reason to attack Syria, though one would certainly be invented, their allies would rightly get angry and side against the UN, NATO, US, whatever. When that happens it can easily be a stepping stone to other engagements. The question that truly worries me is why. Other than weakening the, I will call them coalition (UN, NATO, US, whatever), military and improving the financial gains of the IMC. What is the end game? Is there an end game or just a bunch of pigs fighting over food? We have a good understanding of what is going on, the thing that will unlock it all is the why.

I don't see the resources being available for these engagements for starters...do you? Unless they bring in NATO forces, and then, that's a whole different ball game and require lots of other dominos to fall. Involvement in NATO is conditional on all sides, Romania will only get involved in some cases, France in others...it is not like they will automatically step up...unless a whole lot of other things kick off. Without Syria in the equation, they seem more like strategical engagements, Somalia and Sudan particularly, protecting supply chains and keeping sea trade 'safe' and moving through the Suez etc . Syria would mean something different altogether...in my opinion, not sure what though...just don't see the logistics of that either...

reply to post by DrCarter


Syria Unrest, protestors killed, March 23, 2011 BBC

Syria is a prime haven for violence against Israel, and a haven for terrorists. There is basically unrest in every Middle Eastern country right now. Those countries that have a pro-western government are getting our help (Bahrain), while those countries that are not pro-western are seeing no-fly zones that consist of palace bombings!

Rockets were fired at Israel the past few days, and today they had a busstop bombing. No doubt, we will soon be in Syria, and Iran is quickly getting backed into a corner.

All this wave of unrest started in Tunisia a month or two ago when someone burnt themselves to death. Maybe this pre-empted the planned civil unrest and brought the timetable forward. It could also be why the rebels and the UN in Libya have fallen into disarray as the plans did not get finished in time.

reply to post by getreadyalready


True, and notice how the MSM flashes these maps of all the countries with turmoil in bright colors? Except Israel. It's like they're trying not to draw too much attention to the things escalating there right now.

Originally posted by notsofunnyguy
reply to post by KilgoreTrout

 

Like most countries in the ME, Syria has oil:

dev.prenhall.com...

And, since they're friends with Iran, its just one more domino in the chain.

Not to mention the civil unrest there is similar to what is going on in Libya, and now there is precedent (in some eyes) to perform "humanitarian" operations in sovereign nations.

edit on 23-3-2011 by notsofunnyguy because: (no reason given)

Yeah...but there is needing oil and there is going for all out world domination...attacking Syria would be entirely without justification, unless I'm missing something pertinent...and it would mean very unpleasant things for everyone...

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout

I don't see the resources being available for these engagements for starters...do you? Unless they bring in NATO forces, and then, that's a whole different ball game and require lots of other dominos to fall. Involvement in NATO is conditional on all sides, Romania will only get involved in some cases, France in others...it is not like they will automatically step up...unless a whole lot of other things kick off. Without Syria in the equation, they seem more like strategical engagements, Somalia and Sudan particularly, protecting supply chains and keeping sea trade 'safe' and moving through the Suez etc . Syria would mean something different altogether...in my opinion, not sure what though...just don't see the logistics of that either...

I would agree with you if it wasn't for Iraq. We where the focus of anger for the world, with the exception of our closest allies. Even a few of our good friends where not ready to fully commit to that either. However it went down just like TPTB wanted. Money was made and lives lost over a lie backed with little world support. As far as resources, believe that we have tons of resources, apparently no cash though. Yet somehow here we are in in another conflict while borrowing money to keep the government going.

Originally posted by AgentOfTheSwollenEyeball
First of all, I have a friend in the army. He told me he works in operations in a special force, but due to specific reasons, he can't tell me exactly what force and he does acknowledge it's hush-hush and it's suppose to be like this for a reason. That's all fine and dandy.

But second; months ago, he told me there are planned operations in Iran, and 4-star general Wesley Clark has even acknowledged there was a specific plan to invade 7 countries in 5 years (though this is definitely behind schedule). On this list were the countries Libya, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, and Iran (last, but not least, of course!).

Interestingly, my friend told me ground forces are expected to move in. He had 2 weeks notice only a few days ago about this particular operation and told me: "Guess who's going in first? My squad."

This is the strange part; he said that they weren't actually expected to invade Libya for 4 months, and this is way ahead of schedule if he was to head into Libya within short notice.

What does this say to you?

First, I think this has a lot to do with the current state of the USD. If the USD isn't doing particularly well, it means that we aren't fighting a viable war to ante the level of debt. We require certain level of debts in order to keep the dollar afloat - it's a fiat currency, and there are hundreds if not THOUSANDS of factors that we are unable to understand. It doesn't matter how much you try to correct eachother, people - the fact of the matter is, we're a military-industrial complex, not the other way around.

We require constant war in order to keep the dollar at fake value, and fuel our need of our oil. We invade countries primarily to offset the possibility of the dollar's value falling and also to ensure false "democracy;" if you're in the know-how of being somewhat woken up, you know Al-Qaeda (like the concept of fear and how it is used to express control of unthinking or mislead majorities) is actually just something well-thought up by the CIA. Al-Qaeda itself is disinformation that the mainstream media used efficiently and effectively and now the majority of people are actually disinformation agents by accident... on purpose. Isn't that weird?

Second; we are inverted totalitarianism. I mean - really - wake up. This is some really basic stuff. Bipartisan agreement happens, but not in the right way. Similarly, from a thread I posted earlier, the monetary policy and our fiscal promises are actually broken almost completely by design. It was suppose to be like this because history has shown, TIME AND TIME AGAIN - central banks just do not work. I really dare an opponent to tell me how a central bank has effectively worked without any abuse outright of the people within its own country, or people in several exterior countries. It just simply doesn't, because the monetary policies have already been predetermined to fail, and by the time this is realized, the banks themselves are too big to fail.

Third, economic stability and military presence go very hand-in-hand. If we are running things fine, and the country becomes an industrial workhorse, this means that we are establishing control in simplistic manner and we are fueling the dollar's level of debt. If the flow isn't working just right, then we have to go into more countries. Just watch Vietnam and the dismantling of the gold standard, then look back at what happens in the 90's.

Fourth: if we are advancing into a country much earlier than expected... what does that mean?

Easy: quantitative easing is becoming impossibly difficult for Bernanke and he's shooting up faster and harder than before.

In other words; the USD is going to collapse soon, whether it be this year should there be food shortage problems in our biggest exporting partner - debt collecting from our biggest exporting partner - the wrong war - or just simply the combination of problems.

Keep a close eye, because it will just take days for any of this to happen.

The situation in Libya is an extremely important thing to watch and comment on.

So you have a friend in the special forces that can't tell you what unit he is in but he can tell you all of their plans?? Yeah, I believe that for sure.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by DrCarter

 

Syria Unrest, protestors killed, March 23, 2011 BBC

Syria is a prime haven for violence against Israel, and a haven for terrorists. There is basically unrest in every Middle Eastern country right now. Those countries that have a pro-western government are getting our help (Bahrain), while those countries that are not pro-western are seeing no-fly zones that consist of palace bombings!

Rockets were fired at Israel the past few days, and today they had a busstop bombing. No doubt, we will soon be in Syria, and Iran is quickly getting backed into a corner.

Thanks man that certainly takes care of the reason. If it weren't so screwed up I would probably cry instead.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
Syria Unrest, protestors killed, March 23, 2011 BBC

Syria is a prime haven for violence against Israel, and a haven for terrorists. There is basically unrest in every Middle Eastern country right now. Those countries that have a pro-western government are getting our help (Bahrain), while those countries that are not pro-western are seeing no-fly zones that consist of palace bombings!

Rockets were fired at Israel the past few days, and today they had a busstop bombing. No doubt, we will soon be in Syria, and Iran is quickly getting backed into a corner.

Syria is a very peaceful country usually. They have their radicals like any other country, but to call it a haven for terrorists is a bit of stretch, and under current laws, which country isn't harbouring 'terrorists', the UK evidently has thousands of them. They should be perfectly capable of dealing with their own issues internally.

I don't know what is going on with our armed forces, but my brother is stationed in Germany in the Army. He is supposed to go to Afghanistan in three months. Last week he was unexpectedly given orders to deploy to an unknown destination for "training purposes". Nobody knows where he was sent or when he might return to his wife and daughter that live in Germany with him. Even they weren't told where he was going.

This may or may not be anything, but it seemed strange to me. Does anyone here that has been in the armed forces know if this is normal procedure or not??

reply to post by AgentOfTheSwollenEyeball

If the USD isn't doing particularly well, it means that we aren't fighting a viable war to ante the level of debt.

If there were the days of WW2 I would agree with you. However, we aren't living those days, which further suggests, that due to the fact we dont experience the levels of losses, wars in general do not facilitate the debt.

We require certain level of debts in order to keep the dollar afloat - it's a fiat currency

Not entirely accurate. Yes we do utilize a fiat currency, but it isn't the debt that keeps the dollar afloat, thats an oxymoron equation. Its the printing press pushing more dollars into the system, which in turn, inflates the dollar, and reduces the dollars purchasing power. With the removal of the Gold standard, we lost the tangible asset backing the dollar. And the Bretton woods system debacle didn't help either.

Not to mention, the ability of the Federal Reserve, more specifically, Ben Bernanke, to manipulate the market, depreciate or appreciate the dollar, to obtain his means. Keeping in mind, there is no oversight, and no regulation on the FED, and it is well known knowledge, that there is law, the prohibits any act of audit against them. The Federal Reserve is the chief culprit behind the economic crisis.

Since the Fed’s creation in 1913 the dollar has lost more than 96% of its value.

Third, economic stability and military presence go very hand-in-hand.

I tend to disagree, in the sense that if the interventionists would remove themselves from the day to day lives of its citizenry, not to mention the Free market, and allow the Free Market, and the ability of the people to make the choices for themselves, the system would ultimately right itself. Case in point, the end of the Great Depression. Many would think WW2 is what brought us out of the depression, but thats not true, it was a catalyst.
After the failings of the FDR, both " New Deals" were a failure at best. Not to mention Unconstitutional.

In other words; the USD is going to collapse soon, whether it be this year should there be food shortage problems in our biggest exporting partner - debt collecting from our biggest exporting partner - the wrong war - or just simply the combination of problems.

That much I agree on. Though I think it will be more along the lines of our Political idiots, who continue to do more of the same, print more, inflate more, increase the debt and invade more. Regardless, I think you hit some very good points, hopefully your readers will learn something, or at the very least...take the time to do their own research.

reply to post by kennylee


Sometimes. Depends on how secret the post-training mission is.

And usually the actual mission does follow the training period.

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout

Originally posted by notsofunnyguy
reply to post by KilgoreTrout

 

Like most countries in the ME, Syria has oil:

dev.prenhall.com...

And, since they're friends with Iran, its just one more domino in the chain.

Not to mention the civil unrest there is similar to what is going on in Libya, and now there is precedent (in some eyes) to perform "humanitarian" operations in sovereign nations.

edit on 23-3-2011 by notsofunnyguy because: (no reason given)

Yeah...but there is needing oil and there is going for all out world domination...attacking Syria would be entirely without justification, unless I'm missing something pertinent...and it would mean very unpleasant things for everyone...

World domination...you might have just answered your own question.

And what's going on now will be very unpleasant for everyone, regardless of how much more it escalates. And it WILL escalate.

reply to post by KilgoreTrout


Sure, so does the USA obviously. I am just giving you the tag line for the actions, not my personal opinion. In my opinion the term "terrorist" is overused and misapplied liberally.