Page 52 of 66 FirstFirst ... 242505152535462 ... LastLast
Results 511 to 520 of 657

Thread: White House denies regime change is part of Libya mission [edited]

  1. #511
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: White House denies regime change is part of Libya mission [edited]

    In a joint op-ed published outside the U.S., President Obama, Prime Minister Cameron, and President Sarkozy have mentioned that the fighting will continue onto Col. Gadhafi has been driven from power. Of course, to avoid a technical violation of UNSC Res. 1973, they have denied that regime change is their goal. But in substance, if they vow to fight until he is gone, then regime change is the goal. Actions speak louder than words.

    Some highlights from the op-ed, which is posted on the White House's website:

    Our duty and our mandate under U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973 is to protect civilians, and we are doing that. It is not to remove Qaddafi by force. But it is impossible to imagine a future for Libya with Qaddafi in power. The International Criminal Court is rightly investigating the crimes committed against civilians and the grievous violations of international law. It is unthinkable that someone who has tried to massacre his own people can play a part in their future government. The brave citizens of those towns that have held out against forces that have been mercilessly targeting them would face a fearful vengeance if the world accepted such an arrangement. It would be an unconscionable betrayal...

    The regime has to pull back from the cities it is besieging, including Ajdabiya, Misurata and Zintan, and return to their barracks. However, so long as Qaddafi is in power, NATO must maintain its operations so that civilians remain protected and the pressure on the regime builds. Then a genuine transition from dictatorship to an inclusive constitutional process can really begin, led by a new generation of leaders. In order for that transition to succeed, Qaddafi must go and go for good. At that point, the United Nations and its members should help the Libyan people as they rebuild where Qaddafi has destroyed — to repair homes and hospitals, to restore basic utilities, and to assist Libyans as they develop the institutions to underpin a prosperous and open society.
    Joint Op-ed by President Obama, Prime Minister Cameron and President Sarkozy:

    Given the lack of critical U.S. interests in Libya, the lack of broad popular support for the anti-Gadhafi movement, and the gross incompetence of the anti-Gadhafi movement, I do not favor regime change. Moreover, the contradiction between the statements that "It is not to remove Qaddafi by force" and "However, so long as Qaddafi is in power, NATO must maintain its operations..." leaves the operation to be judged by actions, alone. Following regime change, what is known as nation-building will be required. The op-ed acknowledges for perhaps the first time that nation-building will, in fact, follow. The three leaders write, "At that point, the United Nations and its members should help the Libyan people as they rebuild where Qaddafi has destroyed — to repair homes and hospitals, to restore basic utilities, and to assist Libyans as they develop the institutions to underpin a prosperous and open society."
    Last edited by donsutherland1; 04-15-11 at 07:44 AM.

  2. #512
    Ideologically Impure
    Simon W. Moon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Fayettenam
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,935
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: White House denies regime change is part of Libya mission [edited]

    double plus double speak
    I may be wrong.

  3. #513
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    dimensionally transcendental
    Last Seen
    08-15-11 @ 04:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,153

    Re: White House denies regime change is part of Libya mission [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    In a joint op-ed published outside the U.S., President Obama, Prime Minister Cameron, and President Sarkozy have mentioned that the fighting will continue onto Col. Gadhafi has been driven from power. Of course, to avoid a technical violation of UNSC Res. 1973, they have denied that regime change is their goal. But in substance, if they vow to fight until he is gone, then regime change is the goal. Actions speak louder than words.

    Some highlights from the op-ed, which is posted on the White House's website:



    Joint Op-ed by President Obama, Prime Minister Cameron and President Sarkozy:

    Given the lack of critical U.S. interests in Libya, the lack of broad popular support for the anti-Gadhafi movement, and the gross incompetence of the anti-Gadhafi movement, I do not favor regime change. Moreover, the contradiction between the statements that "It is not to remove Qaddafi by force" and "However, so long as Qaddafi is in power, NATO must maintain its operations..." leaves the operation to be judged by actions, alone. Following regime change, what is known as nation-building will be required. The op-ed acknowledges for perhaps the first time that nation-building will, in fact, follow. The three leaders write, "At that point, the United Nations and its members should help the Libyan people as they rebuild where Qaddafi has destroyed — to repair homes and hospitals, to restore basic utilities, and to assist Libyans as they develop the institutions to underpin a prosperous and open society."
    In other words... 'regime change'.

  4. #514
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: White House denies regime change is part of Libya mission [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by Whovian View Post
    In other words... 'regime change'.
    If Obama invades Libya, espeically outside the UN with the coalition of the willing, to remove the leader of that country, he will be a stupid and wrong as Bush was with Iraq.

    If Obama goes under the UN banner, that would be better, but still foolish and wrong as we have no business in deciding who does or doesn't rule any country.

    If France and the UN take a position of regime change and use the UN to accomplish it, And Obama doesn't object, and spend a lot of US capital, that too would be wrong.

    If the UN tries to save lives and seeks to allow the people to do their business safely, I would take pause. Condier the arguments, and try to determine if it is even possible.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  5. #515
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: White House denies regime change is part of Libya mission [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by Whovian View Post
    In other words... 'regime change'.
    I agree. And from BBC a short time ago:

    The French defence minister has suggested a new UN Security Council resolution may be needed for Nato allies to achieve their goals in Libya.

    Gerard Longuet was speaking after a joint letter by the US, UK and French leaders said there could be no peace while Col Muammar Gaddafi was in power.
    BBC News - Libya conflict: France eyes new UN resolution

    If the mission is about civilian protection and not regime change, then UNSC Res. 1973 provides ample authority. However, the joint op-ed tying the end of military operations to Gadhafi's departure and periodic close-air support provided to the rebels to shape the battlefield strongly argue otherwise. That a new resolution "may be needed for Nato allies to achieve their goals in Libya" highlights the possible existence of tensions the unstated goal of regime change may have produced. A resolution that expressly authorizes regime change could reduce those tensions and allow those who are currently pursuing it to work toward that goal without having to try to conceal it.

  6. #516
    Sage
    ric27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    06-15-17 @ 02:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,539

    Re: White House denies regime change is part of Libya mission [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    If Obama invades Libya, espeically outside the UN with the coalition of the willing, to remove the leader of that country, he will be a stupid and wrong as Bush was with Iraq.

    If Obama goes under the UN banner, that would be better, but still foolish and wrong as we have no business in deciding who does or doesn't rule any country.

    If France and the UN take a position of regime change and use the UN to accomplish it, And Obama doesn't object, and spend a lot of US capital, that too would be wrong.

    If the UN tries to save lives and seeks to allow the people to do their business safely, I would take pause. Condier the arguments, and try to determine if it is even possible.
    Libya is a losing proposition...anyway you slice it

    Is Libya a threat to US interests? Nope

    Then why create democracies or even tear down dictatorships??? Unless they become a threat to American interests, which are largely described as our people.

    If Omar want to oppress his own people, but doesn't kill Americans or help those who do, leave him, the **** alone. The US can't or should NOT fix their problems.

    Removing one dictator is just as likely to result in another one who is anti-American.

    This cycle continues....ad infinitum

  7. #517
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: White House denies regime change is part of Libya mission [edited]

    A report on the U.S. assessment of the anti-Gadhafi forces. From Reuters:

    But the more the intelligence agencies learn about rebel forces, the more they appear to be hopelessly disorganized and incapable of coalescing in the foreseeable future.

    U.S. government experts believe the state of the opposition is so grave that it could take years to organize, arm and train them into a fighting force strong enough to drive Gaddafi from power and set up a working government.
    U.S., allies see Libyan rebels in hopeless disarray | Reuters

    Nonetheless, U.S. Intelligence assessments notwithstanding, the U.S. is engaged in a regime change operation. If the military regime change operation is successful, big and potentially costly tasks of nation-building and averting civil war will likely loom.

  8. #518
    Sage
    lpast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Last Seen
    05-21-16 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,565

    Re: White House denies regime change is part of Libya mission [edited]

    Mr President, get us out of Libya get us out of Iraq now...and start setting up a withdrawl from Afghanistan we are no longer accomplishing anything except making us deeper in debt My humble opinion

  9. #519
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: White House denies regime change is part of Libya mission [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    A report on the U.S. assessment of the anti-Gadhafi forces. From Reuters:



    U.S., allies see Libyan rebels in hopeless disarray | Reuters

    Nonetheless, U.S. Intelligence assessments notwithstanding, the U.S. is engaged in a regime change operation. If the military regime change operation is successful, big and potentially costly tasks of nation-building and averting civil war will likely loom.
    The entire Middle East is now in total disarray with none of its leaders now trusting Obama. Whose resignation will he call for next? And does anyone really care?

    Either his handling of the economy and his foreign initiatives are seriously stupid or he is out to destroy the United States and create a world revolution.

  10. #520
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

    Re: White House denies regime change is part of Libya mission [edited]

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    The entire Middle East is now in total disarray with none of its leaders now trusting Obama.
    Nobody trusts anybody in international politics.

Page 52 of 66 FirstFirst ... 242505152535462 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •