|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Apr 8, 2011 21:39:07 GMT -8
Now we have a war that we are not supposed to call a war, characterized by confused strategic goals and atrocious timing, with our allies demonstrating their military weakness and understandably getting more and more worried. NATO without the U.S. taking the lion's share of the action is just not capable to doing the job. The Brits now have 12 whole planes in action. TWELVE, for god's sake! As you will read in the article linked below, NATO (i.e., France, Britain, and maybe a couple of others) is getting very worried that the Libyan thing will be a protracted civil war, something they, and we, for that matter, really, really do not want to happen. I have also linked a piece that is itself linked in the first article, one by a guy from the CATO institute that sums up the troubles we have bought ourselves in Libya. Just what did Obama expect to achieve in Libya by waiting weeks after the moment to strike (meaning when Gadhafi was on the ropes) had passed followed by a sudden withdrawal of our forces? Did he have any reason to believe that the UK and France would be able to maintain the pressure on the Gadhafi forces without us? Did he ask his military advisors? Did he ask the Brits and the French? Did he care? As the first article suggests, a stalemate that may well bring about the deaths of thousands of people we were supposed to have saved is quite possible if not likely. Do you remember Obama's national Libya speech? Sounded a lot like Mission Accomplished to me! Does this man have the slightest understanding of how incompetent he is when dealing with this type of problem? This is the absolutely worst case of foreign affairs bungling I have ever seen. Heaven only knows how this will end, but I wonder how it can possibly end well for us. . . not to mention for the Libyans. www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,755616,00.html www.huffingtonpost.com/doug-bandow/fiasco-in-libya-fools-at_b_844862.htmlAzWm |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Apr 9, 2011 5:25:31 GMT -8
This is all very predictable. NATO is a joke without us and it is still a joke with a dithering Obama making decisions.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Apr 9, 2011 10:35:29 GMT -8
I liken our involvement in Libya to the stupidity of our involvement in Iraq. Nothing good can come from it other than an expansion of Radical Islam. Radical Islam is our proclaimed enemy since they have issued hundreds of Fatwas against the United States and our concept of Democracy which it totally unacceptable to them.
"Sharia Law for All!" is their rallying cry. Democracy is contrary to their teaching.
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Apr 10, 2011 9:32:36 GMT -8
I liken our involvement in Libya to the stupidity of our involvement in Iraq. Nothing good can come from it other than an expansion of Radical Islam. Radical Islam is our proclaimed enemy since they have issued hundreds of Fatwas against the United States and our concept of Democracy which it totally unacceptable to them. "Sharia Law for All!" is their rallying cry. Democracy is contrary to their teaching. I liken our involvement in Libya to the stupidity of our involvement in Iraq. Nothing good can come from it other than an expansion of Radical Islam. Radical Islam is our proclaimed enemy since they have issued hundreds of Fatwas against the United States and our concept of Democracy which it totally unacceptable to them. "Sharia Law for All!" is their rallying cry. Democracy is contrary to their teaching. I'd have to say that this is worse in a way than Iraq. There is still a chance that Iraq will become a stable nation not given to attacking its neighbors. (I am lesss concerned than some are about Iraq's becoming an Iranian satellite. The Arabs, even Shia, are not fond of Persians.) In Libya, I can't see the up side. If Daffy Duck does leave, the chances for a better regime taking over are problemaic to say the least. In any event, Libya is far less important in the grand scheme of things than Egypt, Iraq, or Iran. The Libyan adventrue has all the earmarks of an action Obama was extremely reluctant to take, so much so that he wanted to wash his hands of it almost immediately. With that kind of attitude, the whole thing is likely to fail no matter what. This is leadership? AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Apr 15, 2011 15:41:21 GMT -8
This is all very predictable. NATO is a joke without us and it is still a joke with a dithering Obama making decisions. Yawn. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Apr 15, 2011 17:44:54 GMT -8
This is all very predictable. NATO is a joke without us and it is still a joke with a dithering Obama making decisions. Yawn. =Bob The other NATO nations do not have even close to our capabilities, Bob. As adjuncts to U.S. action, they are valuable, but they can't do it alone. It is looking more and more like Gadhafi is not going to leave any time soon. Does anyone think that his continued presence will not make Obama look like a fool? It isn't going to make anti-Gadhafi Libyans feel too chipper, either. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Apr 15, 2011 18:58:14 GMT -8
The other NATO nations do not have even close to our capabilities, Bob. As adjuncts to U.S. action, they are valuable, but they can't do it alone. It is looking more and more like Gadhafi is not going to leave any time soon. Does anyone think that his continued presence will not make Obama look like a fool? It isn't going to make anti-Gadhafi Libyans feel too chipper, either. AzWm Yawn. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Apr 15, 2011 19:13:59 GMT -8
The other NATO nations do not have even close to our capabilities, Bob. As adjuncts to U.S. action, they are valuable, but they can't do it alone. It is looking more and more like Gadhafi is not going to leave any time soon. Does anyone think that his continued presence will not make Obama look like a fool? It isn't going to make anti-Gadhafi Libyans feel too chipper, either. AzWm I wrote "Yawn" because the right wing are drama queens who live and die over this or that"enemy". The simple fact is you cannot survive without having an enemy. It's horrific to you don't want one - doesn't surprise me given the bull$#!+ ethos that occurred in the '50s. After all, you clowns voted that the Greeks were correct when it came to killing Socrates. In short Will, you're a right-wing bone h =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Apr 15, 2011 20:42:25 GMT -8
The other NATO nations do not have even close to our capabilities, Bob. As adjuncts to U.S. action, they are valuable, but they can't do it alone. It is looking more and more like Gadhafi is not going to leave any time soon. Does anyone think that his continued presence will not make Obama look like a fool? It isn't going to make anti-Gadhafi Libyans feel too chipper, either. AzWm I wrote "Yawn" because the right wing are drama queens who live and die over this or that"enemy". The simple fact is you cannot survive without having an enemy. It's horrific to you don't want one - doesn't surprise me given the bull$#!+ ethos that occurred in the '50s. After all, you clowns voted that the Greeks were correct when it came to killing Socrates. In short Will, you're a right-wing bone h =Bob Bob, your response makes no sense to me. My point, which perhaps you missed, is that Obama's policy regarding Libya . . . halting and unfocused . . . harms the U.S. Better to have taken one of the two following courses. (A) Stay the hell out of the fight. (B) Jump in two or three weeks earlier when the rebels had a decent chance to oust the bum, bring in a couple of carriers, bomb the hell out of the government forces, and provide the rebels with serious arms and supplies. The latter course would have entailed great long range political risks, but it probably would have achieved the main goal, which was not to save innocent lives (Gadhafi is still killing his own people, by the way), as admirable as that goal may be. No, the real goal was to get ride of Daffy Duck. How do we know that? Simple; the administration has said so more than once. The course Obama did choose was obviously an attempt to be, to use a biological impossibility, half pregnant. I suspect that he really, really did not want to get involved but did so due to pressure from the Sec. of State plus France and Britain. Therefore his plan was to do something so as to answer those who were pressuring him, but so little that he could wash his hands of the whole thing as soon as possible. However, that plan is creating a situation that will not please anyone and may drag on for months. It surely has given Gadhafi new life. How does it look to world for him to drive around Tripoli in an open car gesticulating wildly to his admiring followers. He might just as well have given the finger to the cameras and said "Up yours, Barack baby!" There is nothing so exhilarating to a Muslim strongman as being able to stand up to the U.S. Obama has given the Libyan strongman just such a chance. Nice going, Barry! I would like to see no wars, Bob. Your statement regarding needing a war is simply bizarre. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Apr 18, 2011 11:32:27 GMT -8
It is looking more and more like Gadhafi is not going to leave any time soon. Does anyone think that his continued presence will not make Obama look like a fool? AzWm When will our lefties figure out that it is not just a look?  |
|
