The “Globdists” No Longer Like Obama
Published in Maariv
(Israel) on 29 March 2011
by Ben-Dror Yemini (link to original)
(Israel) on 29 March 2011
by Ben-Dror Yemini (link to original)
Translated from
by Viktoria Lymar.
Edited by Hoishan Chan
.
Just like the war in Iraq, the operation in Libya also has turned in the eyes of “progressive forces” into a Western oil conspiracy. They don’t have a problem with the massacre Gadhafi is unleashing on his people
The legend goes that the United States entered the first Gulf War, and especially the second one, in order to gain control over world oil resources. The effigy of George Bush went up in flames all over the world. This is what awaits someone whom Islamists and globalists wish to denounce.
But Bush is Bush, and Barack Obama is another story. His tour of performances in the capitals of Muslim countries — particularly exemplified in the Cairo speech — made him a darling of progressive forces, from Islamists to globalists. Perhaps not a darling exactly, but in that vein. He, so to speak, has turned the United States into a much less hated state. But this week, it became apparent that nothing lasts forever.
The forces that acted against Bush woke up once again. Obama’s effigy, too, is already being carried in angry demonstrations throughout the world — and burned. Their claims against Obama are exactly the same as those voiced against Bush: The bombing of Libya is intended to maintain, or to take over, the sources of oil.
Everything Because of Oil?
The thing is, urban legends are just legends. They are built on tales. The initial cost estimates regarding the war in Iraq stood at about $50 billion. That was a pipe dream. In 2008, the cost stood at more than $600 billion, and a Nobel Laureate, the economist Joseph Stiglitz, assessed than the war would cost the United States around $4 trillion. His assessment may be exaggerated. However, in any case, there is no chance for the U.S. to cover the actual expenses with oil profits, even if these will be mortgaged to the U.S. Treasury for many years to come.
In 2009, for instance, the oil revenues of Iraq were at $41 billion. This means that even if the income becomes higher and wholly transferred to the United States, it won’t cover the war costs. In fact, oil revenues remain in Iraq, and Iraq is actually suffering from a budget surplus. This doesn’t prevent a great many “globdists” (globalists — jihadists) from repeating the unfailing refrain: Everything is because of oil.
This motif is replayed now with Libya as well. It’s true that Gadhafi is slaughtering his countrymen, and it’s true that the Arab League, in an interesting move, has demanded international intervention, and it’s also true that there was a U.N. resolution, but that hasn’t affected the “globdists.” Even the protection rendered by the West to the Libyan civilians has been remodeled into one more plot by the various coveters of oil. And this line of thinking not only exists in the Muslim world, but also in Spain, where there are quite a few battalions of “progressive forces,” where slogans a la “No more blood for oil” are back on the streets. Soon, this will spread across Europe and the United States.
Their moral judgment is that even if an Arab leader slaughters tens or hundreds of thousands of his citizens, it’s legitimate. It’s his business. Others must not interfere. After all, these were useful idiots from the West who supported Saddam Hussein wholeheartedly. Even if Bush in his days as president had made an all-consuming effort, he would not have arrived at the number of Iraqis killed during Saddam’s reign. And if Obama exerts himself and intensifies the bombardments in Libya by ten times, he’ll still be unable to measure up to Gadhafi’s potential in killing, should the latter be allowed to take revenge on the rebels.
Gadhafi Is in Good Company
Gadhafi is not alone. His fans are bunching and emerging, and they belong to the same psycho-political unit: for example, Robert Mugabe from Zimbabwe and Hugo Chavez from Venezuela. The first managed to make his country into one of the most failed states in the world, while the second is on his way there. And just as there emerged advocates on the side of Saddam Hussein, they too reappear now anew. Obama is going to turn into an imperialist and capitalist pig, while Gadhafi into an authentic leader.
Is there any comfort in this insanity? Not really. But maybe, who knows, one might look from an additional perspective at the crazy campaigns against Israel. For isn’t it about the same fronts? Chavez is a hero for “globdists,” and they awake now to protest against Obama and burn his effigy. But this time, there is a difference. On this occasion, those burning Obama’s image have become enemies of the Arab awakening against their tyrannical rulers.
The old coalitions are falling apart. Muslims can be found on both sides of the barricade. Not that this is a great relief. But, who knows, perhaps there is a little consolation in that. See, it’s already not solely Israel who is suffering from the foreground of madness. The Arabs themselves are likely to become its victims as well.
The legend goes that the United States entered the first Gulf War, and especially the second one, in order to gain control over world oil resources. The effigy of George Bush went up in flames all over the world. This is what awaits someone whom Islamists and globalists wish to denounce.
But Bush is Bush, and Barack Obama is another story. His tour of performances in the capitals of Muslim countries — particularly exemplified in the Cairo speech — made him a darling of progressive forces, from Islamists to globalists. Perhaps not a darling exactly, but in that vein. He, so to speak, has turned the United States into a much less hated state. But this week, it became apparent that nothing lasts forever.
The forces that acted against Bush woke up once again. Obama’s effigy, too, is already being carried in angry demonstrations throughout the world — and burned. Their claims against Obama are exactly the same as those voiced against Bush: The bombing of Libya is intended to maintain, or to take over, the sources of oil.
Everything Because of Oil?
The thing is, urban legends are just legends. They are built on tales. The initial cost estimates regarding the war in Iraq stood at about $50 billion. That was a pipe dream. In 2008, the cost stood at more than $600 billion, and a Nobel Laureate, the economist Joseph Stiglitz, assessed than the war would cost the United States around $4 trillion. His assessment may be exaggerated. However, in any case, there is no chance for the U.S. to cover the actual expenses with oil profits, even if these will be mortgaged to the U.S. Treasury for many years to come.
In 2009, for instance, the oil revenues of Iraq were at $41 billion. This means that even if the income becomes higher and wholly transferred to the United States, it won’t cover the war costs. In fact, oil revenues remain in Iraq, and Iraq is actually suffering from a budget surplus. This doesn’t prevent a great many “globdists” (globalists — jihadists) from repeating the unfailing refrain: Everything is because of oil.
This motif is replayed now with Libya as well. It’s true that Gadhafi is slaughtering his countrymen, and it’s true that the Arab League, in an interesting move, has demanded international intervention, and it’s also true that there was a U.N. resolution, but that hasn’t affected the “globdists.” Even the protection rendered by the West to the Libyan civilians has been remodeled into one more plot by the various coveters of oil. And this line of thinking not only exists in the Muslim world, but also in Spain, where there are quite a few battalions of “progressive forces,” where slogans a la “No more blood for oil” are back on the streets. Soon, this will spread across Europe and the United States.
Their moral judgment is that even if an Arab leader slaughters tens or hundreds of thousands of his citizens, it’s legitimate. It’s his business. Others must not interfere. After all, these were useful idiots from the West who supported Saddam Hussein wholeheartedly. Even if Bush in his days as president had made an all-consuming effort, he would not have arrived at the number of Iraqis killed during Saddam’s reign. And if Obama exerts himself and intensifies the bombardments in Libya by ten times, he’ll still be unable to measure up to Gadhafi’s potential in killing, should the latter be allowed to take revenge on the rebels.
Gadhafi Is in Good Company
Gadhafi is not alone. His fans are bunching and emerging, and they belong to the same psycho-political unit: for example, Robert Mugabe from Zimbabwe and Hugo Chavez from Venezuela. The first managed to make his country into one of the most failed states in the world, while the second is on his way there. And just as there emerged advocates on the side of Saddam Hussein, they too reappear now anew. Obama is going to turn into an imperialist and capitalist pig, while Gadhafi into an authentic leader.
Is there any comfort in this insanity? Not really. But maybe, who knows, one might look from an additional perspective at the crazy campaigns against Israel. For isn’t it about the same fronts? Chavez is a hero for “globdists,” and they awake now to protest against Obama and burn his effigy. But this time, there is a difference. On this occasion, those burning Obama’s image have become enemies of the Arab awakening against their tyrannical rulers.
The old coalitions are falling apart. Muslims can be found on both sides of the barricade. Not that this is a great relief. But, who knows, perhaps there is a little consolation in that. See, it’s already not solely Israel who is suffering from the foreground of madness. The Arabs themselves are likely to become its victims as well.