- Joined
- Oct 20, 2013
- Messages
- 24,820
- Reaction score
- 10,579
- Location
- daily dukkha
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
that's about it. He was led by the "neoliberals" Rice/Powers/ClintonI'm far less concerned with Benghazi than I am with why we let ourselves attack Libya in 2011.
Bush gave Saddam notice, let the public know what was happening and why.
It's as if one day, Obomba woke up and said...
I want some shine new missiles. Where can we use these ones?
The French got it going by leading the UN, then Clinton got in to get the Arab League support ( without military interventionism).
Meanwhile Rice was ginning up the false accusations of mass rape by Qaddafi troops (Viagra rape),
Look at the Email I posted last page, you can see Clinton was an organizer and driver of policy to "Qadaffi must go"
Obama was still pretty green on foreign policy, and relied on his NSC, which steamrolled this whole deal into 'Kinetic military action"
which is regime change, getting into their civil war by massive bombardments -but Obama could distance himself to it by claiming it wasn't a war.
Then events took over as they always do (Just like Syria)