Killing of Gaddafi and NATO's Money-Driven Wars of Conquest

Very fine interview.

What can we call war-making for wars from the Mediterranean to Central Asia, with more to come already planned by the same war makers? World war. Not convinced? Okay, so what can we call it when we also and carefully consider what these wars are really all about and that the consequences will affect almost all of humanity very globally, so all over this world, i.e., planet?". One answer could be, war on this world, most of humanity. It'ld be a possible answer that'ld be valid.

So, what Washington and NATO have been doing for 10 years now has been waging world war, war on most of us. Most of us aren't direct targets for death and of destruction, et cetera, but we're all affected ; while of those who aren't, yet, many will surely come to be.

It would've been great if the rebel forces in Libya had sided with Gadhafi and Libya, instead of with Washington and NATO. I wonder how long it would've then taken for Washington and NATO to "win", or to achieve their goal, which was regime change and killing the chief who probably, if not definitely, could've revealed some embarrassing secrets about Washington et alia.

After all, they've been threatening Iran for years, while Iran has much more population and military power than Libya did and the ousted Libyan leadership and his millions of supporters put up a considerably long battle, especially since relatively few of them were military-trained. I read that most of them were'nt trained for and in military service anyway. Iran has more than 11 times the population Libya had before this war against its leadership and population ; according to Wikipedia anyway. And it has a much larger population than Afghanistan and Iraq each had; including with the two numbers combined. Iran is also more militarily powerful than any of these three countries were ; although, I doubt it'ld want to war alone against Afghanistan resistance forces, especially with all of the difficulty they've given to Washington and NATO forces.

They hopefully won't be attacking any other countries, but they're not leaving much reason for truly believing that they won't do this ; after doing what they've done to tiny Libya, which Pepe Escobar says will now be in civil war for probably years to come. I suppose that they would be capable of hitting Syria for no good reason, now.

Syria is also small. Wikipedia says the 2011 estimate is roughly 22.5 million, and that's less than the population Iraq had before this war was launched in March 2003. And Afghanistan's 2010 estimate is roughly 28.4 million, a more than Iraq had in early 2003.

The 2011 estimate for Libya is 6.6 million, roughly the size of Israel's popuation. The military super-power of this planet and its NATO crime organisation composed of military forces from many countries, all or most all "industrialized", attacks such a tiny country and with extreme violence? The USA has hardly ever had good government, but it's increasingly worse, and when it improves, this doesn't last for long ; because, "home improvement" is a bad idea, the elites figure for the governments of each NATO country, while Washington leads NATO, in terms of what political and military officials are to say for directions, that is. Their masters pull the strings.

But don't fret, none, now. After all, there's a US military General who was interviewed in Iraq and the journalist reported that he said that he "loved turkey shoots". I don't need to tell you who the turkeys were that he was talking about, I hope. But we could "appreciate" another statement that was made by Bush Jr, when he stated in early 2003 or late 2002 that he had been having a discussion, or discussions, with God and that God told him to attack Iraq. This is to tell us that we'ld be committing a holy act by committing war of aggression, all while being real "sporty" about it, too ; real "sportsmen".

Hellishly extreme criminality and high treason ; many !