*promote

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Wednesday, August 28th, 2013 4:25pm PDT - promote requested by original submitter blankfist.

jesus does he have GW voice or what

He spoke out about it in late 2006, didn't he?

I vaguely remember reading about similar plans in Le Monde Diplomatique back in '02 or '03. Peter Scholl-Latour, I think, has been referring to similar plans at least since '02 as well, and was ridiculed for it. Until General Clark confirmed it in an interview in '07.

*promote

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Wednesday, August 28th, 2013 4:25pm PDT - promote requested by kulpims.

I broadly agree with what he's saying but he's wrong about Africa. Africa is different because the west's supply chains and the gimping of local resistance to this is already very strong and much more well established (also Somalia was in Africa last time I checked Wes).

The global supply of Gold, Diamonds, Cocoa and Coltan (used to make micro electronics) amongst others are all heavily based in African countries.
Were their supply to be jeopardised (especially Coltan) by local politics you can be assured that the relevant African country would swiftly become a scorching political hot potato.
Unfortunately such a good job as been done over the last 100 or so years of suppressing African development that such problems (with a little encouragement) tend to take care of themselves before they become a big deal. Then western interests can just back whichever co-operative warlord/corrupt regime comes out on top, quietly and without fuss.

The spice must flow!

Simply put, Africa has been beaten around by the west for that bit longer and harder than the middle east. The exploitation of Africa goes back 100's of years and around 100 years ago when western powers began to cede their direct control they made sure to fuck up the local cultural politics so badly that most countries have still yet to recover from the fallout.

The middle east only became a candy store about 60-100 years ago with the oil boom. Before that western attempts to control the middle east were largely religious in nature (though no less brutal I suppose).

I assume the "powers that shouldn't be" are well aware of this and as such the plan to which Mr. Clarke is referring represents a scheme to try and break the back of the middle east financially, politically and culturally while they still can.

That said old ideologies die hard and I suspect the old western religious motivation is still not to be downplayed. The Christian ideologues and Jewish Zionists may not use words like "Kafir" but in some way their beliefs demand that they think of outsiders in the same way.

If the God of Abraham does really exist I'm sure he finds this whole arrangement greatly amusing (I imagine nothing pleases an ego maniac more than watching sycophants fighting and killing each other for your affection).

God must die. God must remain dead. And we must kill him.

Is it me or does he looks and sounds like the guy who ate the turtles in The Office?
http://youtu.be/gMMkztRN-ns

The 20th?? Oliver Stone says Rumsfeld ordered the invasion plan of Iraq drawn up on 9/11 while Dubya was still reading about little goats.
He is supposed to have told them to "Sweep it all up".

By the time Bush got on the megaphone at ground zero and told a cheering crowd he was going to get even he'd already told his Daddy's business partners the Bin Ladens they were letting Saudi Arabia off.

I believe it was made public a few decades ago that the US has had a roadmap for overtaking the middle-east for at least 3 or 4 decades. I recall hearing that around 2005 or so, but it's been so long I don't remember the source. Only that there was a specific plan that the US had laid out that was a strip of specific land across the mid-east that military strategists had basically said "we topple here, here and here, and we run the world forever", or some such equally power-mongering statement.
Then I again maybe the info in this clip is what I heard back then and I'm just getting it mixed up.

I gotta say the 'anti-interventionist' mentality just pisses me off when gets so extreme as to lament the middle eastern curse of oil and that if only it wasn't there the middle east could be more like Africa where nobody considers intervention. I'm not sure how many middle eastern people are longing to trade places with Somalia, Rwanda, Sudan, Liberia, the DRC and on, and on. Africa's a great place, when the local dictator or militia decides to hold a genocide, nobody else in the world cares enough to do a bloody thing, it's like a paradise.

I'm pretty confident both Russia and China do as well. In fact, I'm sure pretty much all major powers have road maps and war plans for war with virtually every possible combination of enemies. It would be irresponsible for the top Chinese, American or Russian strategic command to not have drawn up a dozen different plans for war here, there and everywhere and the expected outcomes, goals and costs.

For more information on oil and what we're willing to do for it, see: Robert Newman's History of OIl