The Gods have spoken. Did anyone else hear Her? Let that be the proof the atheists are always clamouring about.
Last edited by reefedjib; 03-20-11 at 08:45 AM.
I just gotta say that Obama has no easy task navigating the ME/NA situations. We don't want to damage relationships with our allies, so we are very cautious. We do want to see democracy flower, but are concerned that Islamists will take the opportunity to hijack the revolutions (see Iraq '79). Several countries are using force against their people (Egypt - a little, Tunisia - a little, Yemen - getting stronger, Iraq - very sad to see, Bahrain - with the help of the Saudis given the Shiite Question, Libya - full on assault). In the case of Libya, its full on and we must put a stop to the unequal footing between the govt and the rebels. Europe needed to take the lead on this.
Therefor, Obama has been fairly quiet, not being the first to express concern or demand change. He has said those things though, so his position is fairly clear. But what is he willing to do about it?
He let France and Britain take the lead on the response to Libya. I think this is the best thing he has done since being in office. Instead of trying to steamroll it, he let our allies take the lead, express their foreign policy in their backyard (Mediterranean), and play a supporting role. Even the Arab League got their toes wet and that's supposed to be the dictators club (or was that the human rights council?).
I am applauding Obama.
EDIT - I gotta add that I do NOT think that going the route of UN Security Council resolution was necessary, and I lot has been lost as a result. On the other hand, the Europeans probably wanted to go this way to reinforce the idea that that is the only way to gain legitimacy. I disagree with that, but I can see where they would want it to be. It also allowed negotiation which resulted in the Arab League stepping up, so its good and bad. Like all things.
Last edited by reefedjib; 03-20-11 at 08:49 AM.
Instead there was too much spectating, and Gaddafi began smashed the insurgents.
Once again we see Obama exhibit indecision in crisis. It has become an MO with him. Not good, as other idiots are watching and seeing weakness.
A further error was telling Gaddafi Duck we would not be sending in ground troops. Since when do you broadcast intentions and take elements off the table while at war?
I AM DEPLORABLE.
NEVER CRIMINAL HILLARY (S-NY)
From your own link Spud:
Colonel Gaddafi earlier flouted his own ceasefire and the UN resolution by continuing heavy artillery bombardment on the eastern city as tanks were reported in the streets.
The national security of the United States can never be left in the hands of liberals.
EDIT - I gotta add that I do NOT think that going the route of UN Security Council resolution was necessary, and a lot has been lost as a result. On the other hand, the Europeans probably wanted to go this way to reinforce the idea that that is the only way to gain legitimacy. I disagree with that, but I can see where they would want it to be. It also allowed negotiation which resulted in the Arab League stepping up, so its good and bad. Like all things.
The announcement that there would be no ground troops was to satisfy the Left that no one would be hurt, that they will only shoot from a safe distance and there will be no images of soldiers arriving home in body bags.
Of course Gadaffi would be pleased to hear this but this is more a political war than a military war. At one time it would have been unthinkable to tell the enemy what your plans might be but when we elect people for reasons other than their competence and experience, this is what we can come to expect.
I'd also point out that Obama's telegraphed plan (or lack thereof) can change in a heartbeat. Depending on what Daffy does, there's no doubt in my mind that we could have boots on the ground. I don't kid myself. Those plans are already on the table.
Thank you, Quazi!