Quote:
Originally Posted by Solace
Because they themselves were played. They're still being played. Do you really think Gaddafi was fighting a rebellion? One that had time to set up a central bank in the middle of fighting? |
I read somewhere (maybe it was a link on this forum) that Gaddafi wanted to establish an euro like gold dinar for westerners to pay for oil (driving oil prices "to infinity and beyond!") so in that sense the rebels having a goal of establishing a new central bank (to please their western supporters) would make sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ledgem
That's an interesting interpretation of events. The way that I heard it wasn't that Saddam was deceived, but rather than there was a cultural miscommunication.
|
You remind me about a joke I read many years ago in a reader's digest. It was about how the Reagan administration send diplomatic messages i.e. the bombardment of Libya (there were other examples I forgot) and at the end of the joke someone tells Reagan their ambassador in Moscow is asking for a new luxury car because the soviets are starting to think the west isn't so rich, Reagan answers "We have an ambasador in Moscow? We have better methods to deliver diplomatic statements!". With all the experience the diplomatic history the USA has (remember how commodore perry "opened" trade with japan?) it would be quite unheard for a fumble of the size (and the kind) you mention, I would believe it from 21st century China, but not from 20th century USA diplomacy.