-
Foreign Policy as Farce
June 17, 2013 | 83 comments
-
How Not To Buy a Fighter
June 13, 2013 | 95 comments
-
Are We Being ImPrism’ed?
June 10, 2013 | 168 comments
-
Hot Times for Holder
June 3, 2013 | 111 comments
-
Obama Declares Peace
May 28, 2013 | 38 comments
Loose Canons
Charlie Foxtrot Over Libya
There are no facts to support any explanation Obama will give tonight.
France “decided to assume its role, its role before history” to stop Colonel Gaddafi’s “murderous madness,” said French President Nicolas Sarkozy. Any war premised on French pretentions to glory won’t end well.
President Obama eagerly hitched us to Sarko’s team, insisting we won’t take any leadership role, without a word of explanation to the American people about why it was worth risking American blood and treasure.
In a prime-time speech tonight, we are promised, Obama will explain all. Meanwhile, thanks to an agreement yesterday, Sarkozy’s Triple Entente No-Foam NATO Latte (Britain, France and the U.S., joined by whichever hangers-on want to control decisions) will maintain the no-fly zone over Libya for as long as it takes or ninety days, whichever comes first.
Obama won’t say we are at war tonight because, according to his new spokesman, it’s not war: it’s a “kinetic military action.” (Andy McCarthy, with characteristic brilliance, now suggests “jihad” should be referred to as “kinetic Islam.”)
We cannot know when or how Obama’s Libyan kinetic military action of choice will end because, to be charitable, nobody knows what the hell we’re doing. Least of all our president.
America went to war as the junior partner in a coalition with the Brits and the French. Sarko was so eager to turn the French air force loose in Libya that he recognized a “government” of the Libyan rebels before “our” coalition was formed, and French bombs were falling before you could say “fromage.”
One plucky French pilot scored the first kill on Thursday. The first news reports said that a Libyan aircraft was shot down for violating the no-fly zone.
Later reports confirmed the kill. A French fighter had destroyed a Libyan G-2 Galeb trainer. Which had just landed when the French pilot fired an air-to-ground missile at it, demonstrating the bravery, skill, and daring we expect of the gallant Gauls.
At this point, NATO — according to Anders Fogh Rasmussen, its secretary general — will take command of and enforce the entire no-fly zone and arms embargo efforts and “… protect civilians and civilian-populated areas under threat of attack from the Gaddafi regime.” He added, “NATO will implement all aspects of the UN Resolution. Nothing more, nothing less.”
Which, if you’ll pardon the expression, leaves everything about the no-fly zone up in the air, and apparently excludes any anti-Gaddafi operations. Our aircraft are supposed to protect innocent civilians (if any such there be, a highly dubious assumption) from Gaddafi’s forces (unidentifiable in civilian garb) and then apparently leave old Moammar alone to sulk in his tent.
What rules of engagement will be imposed on our airmen to accomplish this has apparently been left to the imagination of NATO diplomutts to decide another day.
It is impossible to understand Obama’s case to enter this war, but when you hear his cabinet members and senior congressional Democrats explain it, the impossible turns into the bizarre. Congressional Republicans and at least one Republican presidential aspirant haven’t had the courage or the smarts to say Barry was just plain wrong.
On ABC and NBC yesterday, Defense Secretary Gates said that Libya posed no threat to the United States and that intervention was not a vital national security interest. Hillary Clinton, smiling beside Gates, talked about how wonderful it was to have the international coalition behind us. (Way behind us.)
Pressed on another show to justify the war, Senate Armed Services Committee chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) couldn’t think of any reason to have American lives at risk, so he defaulted to the idea that the “Arab street” was happy with us for doing that. Which sentiment was echoed by ol’ Joe Lieberman on Fox News Sunday. The less said the better about what John McCain and Newt Gingrich said.
McCain, of course, is rooting for regime change in classic neocon fashion and Newt — having been on three sides of this two-sided issue — managed a McCainesque level of incoherence. Why can’t anyone on the Republican side say the obvious: if it’s not in the interest of the United States to be in Libya, we shouldn’t be?
About the Author
Jed Babbin served as a Deputy Undersecretary of Defense under George H.W. Bush. He is the author of several bestselling books including Inside the Asylum and In the Words of Our Enemies. You can follow him on Twitter @jedbabbin.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (220) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Jed Babbin
More Articles From Loose Canons
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/03/28/charlie-foxtrot-over-libya
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Gabby Giffords Poisons the Well
- Celebrating Our Lady of Paris
- A World Turned Right Side Up
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Who Knows?| 3.28.11 @ 6:38AM
What was it Churchill said---“We’ll fight them in the air, on the beaches, at sea, etc”? Something like that.
Well, while I agree wholeheartedly with you and Michael Ledeen about the terror masters in Iran, and the dire need to focus on fighting them, perhaps we could welcome ANY fighting, even in the woeful hellhole known as Libya.
The natural disaster in Japan, like all those we irregularly suffer on the face of an uncaring Earth, combines with manmade ones; especially the Moslem fanatics attempt to return to those years of yesteryear, to remind us that life is always at risk.
And, still, the numbers of humans alive continue to grow.
Looking at mankind as a business, with total population the “profit”, a quick and dirty look at the statistics of dying could prove interesting.
I just wonder how many people are purposely killed, over time. There are always wars happening, so on any given day no doubt a fixed number of humans are wasted by their enemy.
But, even with the existential war being waged by Islamofascists, I’ll bet that the daily casualty figures pale compared to the war in Vietnam, and especially in the world wars.
And, when you compare the percentages, I’ll bet that more and more people are dying from natural causes---that is, maybe civilized people are winning?
Alan Brooks| 3.28.11 @ 3:43PM
Obama is in trouble now. But it doesn't appear Father Time (McCain) would have been able to do any better if he had been elected; and we'd have had to listen to his 'Nam anecdotes:
"back in '69 I was lying on a cot with mosquitoes..."
obummer| 3.29.11 @ 12:37AM
Fool...McCain wouldn't have involved us in this nonsense. Funny how the empty suit accuses GW about bringing the country into an undeclared war and yet does the same thing. Guess O-gangsta needed some street-cred...hypocrite.
l5j6| 3.28.11 @ 6:40AM
The whole point of this war is to prove a point - liberalism's dream of a "diminishied" USA. Hussein Obama's obsession that he learned from Rev. Wright and Rev. Farakhan.
How's that change working out for ya? Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. 10% unemployment, rising inflation, dollar teetering on irrelevancy and a diminsihed role for the USA internationally.
Weakness rules baby! Put a half-baked, race hustling, street agitator in the White House and this is what you get. He is arming Moooslim fundamentalists! Duh. World War 3 is just around the corner........
Appleby| 3.28.11 @ 6:57AM
The signs are pretty much all in place and things will continue to get interesting. The majority of humanity, as in the days of Noah, will be eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage and know nothing at all until the waters rise and sweep them away.
Be sure that when one of them says to you, *You never warned me!* you can say *I did.*
The prophet| 3.28.11 @ 2:31PM
May 21, 2011.
Less than two months to go.
Appleby| 3.28.11 @ 4:13PM
That's our May Long Weekend.
Yashmak| 3.28.11 @ 6:42PM
Makes me wonder what happens in 2 months if and when there's no mass disappearance of people.
Skippy| 3.28.11 @ 8:21PM
That's been a valid question since the Millerites failed to ascend in the early 19th century.
At the very least, someone's gonna have some 'splainin' to do!
Frisbee| 3.28.11 @ 10:44PM
That Camper guy is a nice man. Too bad he fell into the temptation to predict the (beginning of the) end of the world. Nothing will happen, and then he'll either have to recant, or start making up excuses like the Seventh Day Adventists did.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 3.28.11 @ 7:02AM
If Obama lies to the nation, it's to be expected. It's not so much that he's a politician, it's that he's an ideologue, and his ideology must triumph over everything, including the truth.
If you look closely at this situation, it's a situation where Obama is supplying guns for bitter Al Qaeda operatives to cling to because they don't understand other religions.
In that sense, it's typical Obama and don't think he and the White House doesn't know what they are doing.
The Holder Justice Department top ranks are staffed with attorneys whose only aim in life after 9/11 was to defend the terrorists and this is just another sweep of that operation.
They Obama administration is comprised of a murderous ship of treacherous fools, perhaps a flotilla of traitors who are determined to destroy the Constitution.
In the meantime, Obama's lies are part of the plan to seed confusion amongst the masses. The welcome mat is open to 2012.
cara| 3.28.11 @ 1:57PM
"The welcome mat is open to 2012." ??? The 2012 election is already chosen, done and a closed book. Where have you been?
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 3.28.11 @ 3:24PM
You sound like a complete idiot. The relevant question is do you know where you are and the answer is "Not likely."
Frisbee| 3.28.11 @ 10:45PM
Done and a closed book? Who won?
Michael Tomlinson| 3.28.11 @ 7:08AM
It is clear the first vaginal President is no George W Bush (who sought and got Congressional approval for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq) or even Ronald Reagan (both men beloved by the military). He is in fact a defender and supporter of Muslim dictatorships (Syria and Iran) and anti-Ameican jihadists/terrorists (the Muslim Brotherhood and Lybian rebels).
What will NATO do if kineticly inclined Muslim enemies of the West take power? NOTHING!!
This war is as uselss as Clinton's involving us in the Balkan civil war to defend Muslims. Ronald Reaga was one of America's greatest Presidents, but he made a serious mistake when he ended the Iran-Iraq War. When Muslims, who are anti-American, are killing each other it is a GOOD THING!!!
Republicans in the House and Senate need to hold pulbic hearings on why Obama knowingly went to war supporting anti-American Muslims, why he lied to members of Congress and why he shoudn't be impeached for his actions.
vtwin| 3.28.11 @ 9:47AM
Republican President War Goood, Democratic President War Baaad.
Steve A| 3.28.11 @ 10:44AM
Democrat President War ;makes watching liberals defend it a comedy show.
vtwin| 3.28.11 @ 10:54AM
Yes, as hilarious as watching the Republicans attack it.
Yashmak| 3.28.11 @ 6:45PM
Glad you're able to laugh about it. Liberals will need a good sense of humor, if as the polls are all indicating, the percentage of the public which trusts the Republican party over the Democrats continues to climb at this rate.
Frisbee| 3.28.11 @ 10:46PM
Democrats throw bombs.
Republicans station troops.
teejay| 3.28.11 @ 10:49AM
You got that backassward, Leftie, but that's understandable since up = down, etc. in your world.
vtwin| 3.28.11 @ 11:01AM
Get real; the Republicans were complaining Obama wasn’t helping the rebels in Libya…until the bombing started and now the Republicans complaining he’s helping the rebels.
Redstateboy| 3.28.11 @ 11:16AM
So you support endless expensive wars that do not impact our national interest? just checking...
tool.
vtwin| 3.28.11 @ 11:23AM
No, I oppose America involvement in ALL middle east disputes.
Steve A| 3.28.11 @ 11:31AM
vtwin, I happen to agree with you. If it were up to me, I would pull ALL forces out of ALL middle east countries today. I could care less about these people. they resent us & our culture. I would make it perfectly clear that we have the hammer & if you f**k with us, we will put you & your regime out of business in about a week. Otherwise, barbecue your camel & leave us the hell alone. I'm tired of sacrificing our kids & taxes $$ on these savages. It is a complete waste.
A. C. Santore| 3.28.11 @ 11:44AM
Your language might be a little too emphatic, but you're thoughts are similar to mine.
We can and are making things only worse over there, not better, and the anointed one is only hastening the process.
I know full well that it's not that simple, but mine is a foundational argument.
Steve A| 3.28.11 @ 11:59AM
agree. I'm fed up. Just had enough.
AZ| 3.29.11 @ 12:55AM
I completely agree. I would add one more action. Cancel every oil contract with the entire region, and watch every one of their economies crater overnight. Duh...Winning
W| 3.28.11 @ 2:55PM
then you agree we should not be in libya
Steve A| 3.28.11 @ 3:10PM
absolutely no way we should be there.
JimP| 3.28.11 @ 11:26AM
Not exactly accurate. Some Repubs only. Like the world class moron McCain and other neo-con armchair warriors in the punditry. Also a few genuine conservative Repubs like Hannity are on the wrong side of this issue. What do all these rightwingers have in common? They are all part of the elitist bunch that live in the DC-NYC-North East bubble. The majority of Repubs on board for this misadventure are 'Rockefellers'. They are rich, apart from we proles, and through good times and bad never suffer, and their sons and daughters no longer do the dirty work of war.
Publius| 3.28.11 @ 3:35PM
Hey Jim - yeah ol John McCain spent 5+ years in a Vietnamese prison camp getting half beat to death, and had his arms pinned behind his back so long he can to this day not comb his own hair. He has one son who enlisted in the Marines and another in the Naval Academy, and he's the third generation in a row to serve in the military. You may not agree with him, but how dare you question his service or suggest he's an armchair neocon. What has been your service to the country?
vtwin| 3.28.11 @ 4:06PM
I don’t think JimP was “questioning” John McCain service; we are all aware of and respect McCain personal sacrifices for our county, but rather his judgment of late regarding America’s involvement in the Middle East.
JimP| 3.28.11 @ 10:14PM
Well publius, I wasn't refering to McCain as an armchair, but I see why you think I did. Nevertheless, since I am a Vietnam Vet who volunteered for duty and combat I am perfectly entitled to question John McCain and he IS a moron and he should know better than to send our people into harms way when we are backing the worst of the two sides in this fight and this is about oil for Europe and of no direct or vital interest to the U.S. Kaddafi would still sell oil to Europe, but Sarkozy made a deal with the rebels when they were winning but once Kaddafi gained the advantage McCain et al wanted a NFZ. Can you smell the BS? I can. So put that in your indignant self righteous peace pipe and smoke it. McCain's service doesn't give him carte blanche for the rest of his life and all I can say regarding his kids is he must not care much about them OR, and this is my personal conclusion, he's a moron. That explains his not just backing this adventure but calling for an invasion. Thanks for the feedback. I'll make certain I word things more carefully in the future.
Nunya| 3.28.11 @ 1:59PM
WhichRepublicans were complaining? Please give names and examples, because I never heard of one.
vtwin| 3.28.11 @ 3:50PM
Newt Gingrich, for one, demanding Obama impose a no fly-zone over Libya and then complaining about Obama imposing a no fly-zone over Libya. Newt Gingrich, of course, is the one in favor of family values just not for his own FAMILIES.
Kishego| 3.28.11 @ 4:22PM
Newt has been critical of the time Obumbler took making a decision. It seems Obumbler has no trouble jumping on a U.S. ally, but drags his feet for days when it is some hostile regime. The time for a "humanitarian intervention" was gone after the third day. Now we are invlolved in a civil war, not knowing exactly who we are supporting (at least they aren't saying they know, but most credible analysts believe it to be al-qaida. Next thing you know they will be in control of the majority of the middle east and knuckle heads like you will be complaining because we armed the new OBL. After all it was Carter and Ol' Mika's pops Brzyzinski (or some such spelling as that) that armed OBL in the first place. This is all a repeat of a bad nightmare that started in 1978.
Stephanie| 3.28.11 @ 12:21PM
Screw you vtwin and the donkey you rode in on.
vtwin| 3.28.11 @ 12:42PM
Really, you don’t see any hypocrisy? It's all principled opposition?
Steve A| 3.28.11 @ 1:46PM
Hey vtwin, Did I imagine it or did your pal Obama not campaign on ending the wars & closing Gitmo? How's that workin for ya?? You must be soooo proud. Sucker. Your pal can't string 3 sentences together without having to lie.
Nunya| 3.28.11 @ 2:01PM
Or look to his trusty Teleprompter.... :-)
vtwin| 3.28.11 @ 3:35PM
Steve A, it’s not working. How it working for ya?
Bush campaigned against Clinton’s nation building then Bush promptly started his own nation building in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama campaigned against Bush’s “stupid wars” but has not only continued the stupidity but with Libya has added to it. And, as Americans we continue pay with our lives and treasure no matter who is in the White House.
W| 3.28.11 @ 2:57PM
wheter there is hypocrisy or not is not the issue, should we be in libya? focus on the issue. you can always post your lefty rants. but for now, should we be in libya, yes or no?
vtwin| 3.28.11 @ 3:37PM
I’m focused boss, I’m focused. And, I say no!
Warrior | 3.28.11 @ 4:31PM
Of course we shouldn't be in Libya. We still haven't left Germany since WWII. We've been in a perpetual state of war since WWI. Ike said it best "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."
W| 3.28.11 @ 4:59PM
Our first war after we ratified the constitution in 1789 was against the "barbary pirates," as they were called. it was an undeclared war against the muslim terrorists of that era, "...to the shores of Tripoli..." in the Marines hymn. we were in Tripoli 210 years ago, and now we are back. at least then we went to protect our citizens, now we are in a civil war between a an acknowledged terrorist,Quadaffi, and the muslim brotherhood/al quaeda, also terrorists. we should let them wipe each other out.
Thom| 3.28.11 @ 7:10PM
Warrior that same President signed repeated Defense budget authorizations that were greater as a percentage of GDP than anything you’ve seen in the last 40 years or so. Lincoln said he could not end slavery too and then went about manning a military force that totaled over 2.8 million men as opposed to about 965 thousand Confederates doing exactly what he said he did not have the power to do under the Constitution. There is more to both Ike and George Washington than their farewell speeches to the Nation……
Warrior | 3.29.11 @ 10:43AM
I agree Thom. The quote stands not as an endorsement to Ike or his non-Consitutional positions but simply as a quote.
Yashmak| 3.28.11 @ 6:49PM
You don't see the hypocrisy in Obama declaring in 2007 that the President doesn't have the constitutional authority to do what he has just done? The hypocrisy of Biden saying he would move to impeach a President who did what Obama has done?
After all, THAT is the truly obvious hypocrisy. Well, that and the fact that a humanitarian case could just as easily been made for Iraq, or Afghanistan, where Saddam & the Taliban respectively had a long track record of committing atrocities against civilians. But the same folks saying that's enough of a reason now, certainly didn't think so when we committed to THOSE engagements.
So don't start swinging that hypocrisy sword vtwin. . .it's bound to come back and bite you.
Dee See| 3.28.11 @ 7:58AM
AS genuine Christian culture has been
systematically undermined and destroyed by close to
a century of EUGENIST/Globalist 'social
engineering' (i.e. corruption) ---and as third
world immigration inundates Britain and elsewhere ----time to 'bring in' the muslims
from their absurd resistance to franchise slums,
debt service usury, extermination of the unborn
and -----MASS covert sterilization and dumb-down, carcinogenic 'vaccines'.
"Understand, the Globalists, to a man at the top,
are inbred, inter-bred, inter-generational,
inter-national, genocidal psychopaths."
-ALAN WATT
(essential online coverage)
'INTER' --def. to bury, to put under, to entomb
Yoda| 3.28.11 @ 12:32PM
Mm. Strong with this one the tinfoil is.
DCD-in-Indiana| 3.28.11 @ 8:10AM
I can see no useful purpose in shedding another drop of American blood on behalf of Muslims worldwide, Arab Muslims in particular. While many of them are probably fine people, their culture and religion are inherently at odds with democratic governance and Judeo-Christian ethics. We should leave them to their own way of life and do what we can to prevent it from infecting ours.
For all the blood shed by American soldiers in Kosovo, Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan, can anyone come up with a single instance of gratitude expressed openly, outspokenly and without condition by any leader of the Arab world?
Me neither.
btims| 3.28.11 @ 8:14AM
The only way to prevent their culture from infecting ours is to restrict their immigration. They have been flooding into our country at a rate making them the 2nd highest ethnic group behind illegal amigos from south of the border.
It's the immigration, stoopid. That's why mosques are going up across the USA. They are here now.
btims| 3.28.11 @ 8:15AM
DCD-in-Indiana - not calling you "stoopid" in previous post.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 10:42AM
We're all immigrants you vile racist bigoted piece of scum. It is what our country is all about.
Save a very small percentage of natives.
And if you don't like it it is you that can leave.
God you people are stupid.
Momma Harp.| 3.28.11 @ 11:15AM
Please excuse Junior for being a complete imbecile. He thinks most Americans were born in a foreign country.
He listens to NPR.
Allah, My Junior's a Moron.
irish19| 3.28.11 @ 12:45PM
Small nit to pick. Actually, most of our ancestors were born in foreign countries. However, they emigrated with the goal of becoming Americans. Not so the saracens and illegal amigos (loved that description!).
George True| 3.28.11 @ 11:27AM
Well, Mr "God you people are stupid" is baaack!!!
Where ya been lately, Jfart? Did all the demonstrations if Wisconsin finally peter out? No G-8 or G-20 summits going on right now? Did your parents finally get the computer fixed?
Until you can refrain from your GYPAS exclamation at the end of every post, it will continue to be YOU who takes stupid to a new level.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 11:34AM
I have been in Detroit. Dearborn to be precise.
Figured I might as well get right smack in the middle of our largest mid eastern population for my trip.
They were very kind and polite and respectful. And highly educated.
The antithesis of the American redneck teabaggers.
Aunt Hassy Harp.| 3.28.11 @ 12:12PM
Junior is a blackneck.
He got a thing about washin'.
And around these parts,they call him the low hangin' fruit picker.
Allah, Junior's The Poster Boy for The Movie "Deliverance".
irish19| 3.28.11 @ 12:46PM
But can he play the banjo?
Aunt Hassy Harp.| 3.28.11 @ 1:01PM
Junior's been known to strum his banjo, but he started to go blind.
Allah, Junior's A Mouth Breather & Drooler.
irish19| 3.28.11 @ 1:29PM
"Junior's been known to strum his banjo, but he started to go blind."
Let's not go there, shall we. It's dark and scary there.
Uncle Bubba Harp.| 3.28.11 @ 1:45PM
If You think that's dark & scary,
you don't wanna meet Junior's Boyfriend, Lester.
Teaghan| 3.28.11 @ 12:27PM
Yeah, jharp, I heard the schools are great in detroit! And it's so great that people are leaving the slum of a city in droves! A great city indeed because it's been under democrat rule for decade upon decade. Keep'em poor, that's their motto.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 12:56PM
"I heard the schools are great in detroit!"
I was speaking of Dearborn you dumbf*ck.
And yes they are great schools. Unlike you redneck teabaggers the middle eastern population of Dearborn values education and is willing to spend the money to educate their children.
And you wonder why white trash such as yourself are losing economic power?
God you people are stupid.
George True| 3.28.11 @ 1:02PM
"God you people are stupid" invalidates everything that was said prior. Anybody who doesn't realize that is, himself, galactically stupid.
We can't fix stupid here, Jfart.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 1:15PM
"We can't fix stupid here"
I'm aware. But it is not too late for your children. Raise taxes and spend some money on education. The countries that do are kicking our asses.
And I know that you are too f*cking stupid to grasp the concept that a good education pays off.
So sad.
irish19| 3.28.11 @ 1:31PM
Hardly. However, just throwing money to the teachers unions does not a good education make.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 1:36PM
"just throwing money to the teachers unions does not a good education make"
No one. Not one soul. Has ever made such a claim.
You are an incredible dumbass.
God you people are stupid.
George True| 3.28.11 @ 2:53PM
What is sad is the delusional state of someone who considers everyone but himself to be stupid.
We can't fix that here.
FREEDOM FIGHTER| 3.28.11 @ 3:06PM
We can tell that your education sure did not pay off for you!! What year did you drop out or did your teacher just pass you? What planet are you on? Most teachers sux and a lot kids are illiterate. They are given a passing grade. Now that is a good education. Try 3rd grade level in 11th grade! I almost rolled in the floor....Detroit?......Yeah, all the schools are great in Detroit....some school system. LOL....hahahaha.
Also..did you every hear of the lottery?....moron
Kishego| 3.28.11 @ 4:30PM
So true, you will find no dust on the whips of the local Dearborn madrassas errr schools. They are very disciplined at beating those little boys if they don't have their noses in the koran.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 5:08PM
"They are very disciplined at beating those little boys if they don't have their noses in the koran."
Hmmm. I had no idea.
Do you mean like the Catholic Priests used to do?
And please don't tell me they are also raping the children like the Christians do.
God you people are stupid.
Bydand76| 3.28.11 @ 5:22PM
JHarp, you flippin tool!
You mean like pederasty? Is that what you are talking about? Which was practically invented in the Arab world? Try reading a book sometime you A-hole!
Do the world a favor you giant douchbag and go eat a lead sandwich or read a stinkin history book and quit with the silliness already !
Your foggin up the windows!
( Jharp---Finnish translation for a 2 bit ass clown )
cara| 3.28.11 @ 2:04PM
The problem jr, is that immigrants today do NOT want to be american. They just want the so called american dream. ie. the money. Obviously, you know nothing about the immigrants of the past coming here. THAT IS WHAT AMERICA IS ABOUT. But you jr's don't get it, don't want to get it. All you want is me, mine, gimme gimme.
W| 3.28.11 @ 2:58PM
harpie, We are legal immigrants
btims| 3.28.11 @ 3:08PM
Really jharp, you're an immigrant? Where were you born? I was born in the USA, like my parents, like my grandparents. Where do your kind come from?
Logically, every nation in the world is "nation of imigrants". But it's a useless point to argue. Countries have borders and a legal definition of citizenship. The Founders were not immigrants (a few were but most were not). The Founder's parents and even grandparents were born here. You make the common, univesity induced mistake of calling "Indian tribes", Americans. They were not; they were (and are) members of various tribes.
Consider youself better educated now. No charge for my services.
teejay| 3.28.11 @ 10:53AM
Maybe the Kuwaiti royal family after they returned from the Riviera to reclaim their country after we ran Saddam's forces back to Iraq.
DCD-in-Indiana| 3.28.11 @ 3:44PM
Good one.
Jersey Mark| 3.28.11 @ 1:18PM
It would be nice to just leave the arab muslims alone, but unfortunately, with the Democrats refusing to allow us to develop our own energy resources, we are linked to them for our economic survival. Energy resource development failure will be THE issue moving forward as it greatly impacts our national security as well as our economic strength with hundreds of thousands of jobs not being created and hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars going to those folks who do not like us very much. The Democrat energy policy is treasonous in nature as it has laid us open to national/economic disaster and unless it is reversed immediately, it will be too late.
Paul in Colorado| 3.28.11 @ 3:51PM
Right on the screws, Mark. The same folks who happily chain themselves to drilling rigs, and will live for years sleeping on a couch and eating ramen noodles to prevent the construction of a nuclear power plant, also say that our individual freedoms consume too much of the energy they allow us to produce. The solution, of course, is not to produce more energy, but rather to curtail our freedoms, and government coercion is always their favorite tool.
Obama's central vision is that America's need to import foreign oil is causing us to behave as a colonial power, but rather than producing more energy domestically, his solution is for America to become smaller, weaker, and most importantly, contrite. Its high time America had a vigorous discussion of this matter, and the Republicans have a duty to make it the central issue of the 2012 elections. The Democrats must be made to answer for their forty-year policy of consciously and systematically suppressing domestic energy production, and the consequences of that policy, both foreign and domestic.
Paul in Colorado| 3.28.11 @ 3:05PM
I was watching a documentary on Guantanamo a couple nights ago, and one of our former guests was gushing about how loved America was by the Muslim world before we realized that we need a prison like Gitmo. "America stood for freedom, America was the friend of the weak," etc. Regrettably, the next speaker was a terrorism expert who was so unkind as to point out various pro-American Muslim initiatives such as the first World Trade Center attack, bombing our embassies in Africa, bombing the USS Cole, bombing the Marine's barracks in Beirut, etc. - all of which occurred long before the atrocities of 9/11. Perhaps the speaker had forgotten these outrages, but as we've since learned, in some cultures lying for the cause is encouraged.
With the cold-blooded murders of Robbie Stethem and Leo Klinghoffer - whose only offense was being Americans - Arab affection for America was long ago made clear. What's amazing is that anyone from those countries is still allowed to set foot in America. It should all be cut off - no students, no tourists, no business travel, no medical emergencies - no one from there should be allowed to come here, for any reason. If you're from anywhere between Gibraltar and the Khyber Pass, no visa for you. Is this unfair? Of course, but so what? No foreigner has the right to come to America. Can't bear to hurt anyone's feelings? Tell it to the Stethems and Klinghoffers. Or the families of the Marines who tried to help the Lebanese, and were blown to bits for their trouble. Or the families of the Rangers who tried to help the starving Somalis, and had their corpses dragged through the filthy alleys of Mogadishu. America is the only country in the world that has lifted a finger to protect Muslim lives, particularly from other Muslims, and its now clear that we've been wasting our time. For fear of offending it, we clutch the viper to our breast. This is madness.
JP| 3.28.11 @ 8:12AM
A No-Fly-Zone means that coalition forces prevent the Lybian Air Force from operating. The press continues to use the term NFZ; however, coalition forces are doing much more than maintaining a NFZ. They're bombing air fields, ammo dumps, communication centers, and Air-to-Air defence radars (which makes some sense). They're also providing tactical air-to-ground support to the rebels, not to mention straffing Lybian ground formations and bunkers.
The Obama Administration in effect is taking sides with rebels that just two weeks ago sent British SAS operators packing. Who are these "rebels"? How many factions are they? Are they secular in nature? Or are they proxies for the Musilim Brotherhood or Al Qaida? Will the President let us know? Does he know? Why won't the MSM ask him? Thier lack of curiosity is deplorable.
If this action is purely humanitarian why are we targeting Syria, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Iran, and Jordan?
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 1:18PM
"The Obama Administration in effect is taking sides with rebels"
Not quite. We are taking sides with our allies and following the U.N. security council.
You know. The security council you teabggers used to justify our invasion of Iraq.
God you people are stupid.
cara| 3.28.11 @ 2:05PM
now i see why no one has responded to you.
LiveFreeOrDie| 3.28.11 @ 3:13PM
He's rude, ignorant, a liar and a troll. Don't feed him.
George True| 3.28.11 @ 2:57PM
As Cara has said, nobody here will take you seriously or for the most part even respond to you because of your delusional proclamation that everybody except you is stupid. When (if) you can grow up and start acting like an adult, maybe you can take part here. Until then, we won't even bother to address your mostly baseless rantings.
Jack Bauer| 3.28.11 @ 8:12AM
No chance the remarkably incurious US news media will establish a NO LIE ZONE around Obama, I suppose?
Dixie Pixie| 3.28.11 @ 12:54PM
Not a chance Jack.
But the Truth and Facts Deflector Shields are working perfectly.
The truth is Obama is not the creature the MSM manufactured.
What is amazing is the MSM can not believe we can see through their fog of lies.
Paevo| 3.28.11 @ 8:24AM
Charlie, Reagan bombed Tripoli in response to the Lockerbie bombing, not the other way around...
Purple Lips| 3.28.11 @ 8:42AM
The bombing of Tripoli occured in 1986 in response to Lybain sponsored terror strikes in Europe. The Lockerbie bombing occcured three years later.
Jack Bauer| 3.28.11 @ 8:45AM
Correct.
If my memory serves, it was the Ghadaffi-sponsored murder of two US servicemen in Frankfurt, Germany, which was the final straw.
vtwin| 3.28.11 @ 10:31AM
Reagan with less than six months into his first term and out to prove he was no wimp like Cater downed two Libyan aircraft in the Gulf of Sidra in 1981.
Qaddafi proving he was no wimp either responded by bombing a discotheque in Berlin frequented by U.S. soldiers killing at least two American service men in 1986.
Reagan again responded by bombing Libya. Among the dead was Qaddafi daughter.
Qaddafi again responded with to downing of Pan Am Flight 103 killing everyone on broad 1988.
vtwin| 3.28.11 @ 10:37AM
A couple of brave men with lives of other people.
Cincinnatius| 3.28.11 @ 11:59AM
Vtwin, you're wrong! I was there and Reagan did NOT down the Libyan a/c in '81, my buddies did!
Tokoloshe| 3.28.11 @ 8:38AM
Bush started TWO wars and Babbin and other Cons were orgasmic..........
Obama implements a no fly zone, and Babbin - and most of the posters here - are ready to cut off their willies in despair?
Babbin is babbling, as usual.
JP| 3.28.11 @ 8:44AM
It's not exactly a No-Fly Zone when fighter bombers are straffing infantry and armor formations; supply dumps, and bunkers. I would call it an Air War.
BTW, I cannot for the life of me remember how Bush took down the Twin Towers. Oh well, you probably think that FDR started WWII.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 11:04AM
"I cannot for the life of me remember how Bush took down the Twin Towers."
It was Bush's negligence that permitted the attack that brought down the towers.
Remember the August 6th memo "bin laden determined to attack within the United States using aircraft"?
And Bush did nothing. He ignored the warning and instead went on vacation.
Drunken Sailor| 3.28.11 @ 11:49AM
Yada, yada, yada. And Clinton let Bin Laden get away when he had the chance to take him after the garage bomb in the WTC, thus preventing 9/11.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 12:07PM
"And Clinton let Bin Laden get away when he had the chance to take him after the garage bomb in the WTC"
You lie. Did not happen.
Uncle Barky Harp.| 3.28.11 @ 5:13PM
"Bill Clinton denies it now, but he once admitted he passed up an opportunity to extradite Osama bin Laden.
And NewsMax has the former President making the claim on audiotape. [You can listen to the tape yourself] "
http://archive.newsmax.com/arc.....1819.shtml
Allah, Junior is A Worldclass Idiot.
JmsA| 3.29.11 @ 9:35PM
Oh yes, it did. It's all in the 9/11 report. At least ten times did Clinton pass up on taking out Bin Laden. Just ask Michael Scheuer, he of the CIA Bin Laden Task Force at the CIA during the mid 90s. One of those times, the Sudanese offered Bin Laden to Clinton, but he passed.
Teaghan| 3.28.11 @ 12:31PM
And Slick Willy responded with nothing after the bombing of the USS Cole.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 12:49PM
Clinton had 3 months left in office you effing retard.
Tell me again what President Bush's response to the USS Cole was.
God you people are stupid.
George True| 3.28.11 @ 1:06PM
Mr "God you people are stupid" is too stupid to realize that such an exclamation at the end of every post not only invalidates whatever argument he just made, but it also identifies himself as the one who is terminally stupid.
We can't fix such stupidity here.
JmsA| 3.29.11 @ 9:44PM
Don't forget now, the very reason why the USS Cole was at anchor in Yemen: military cutbacks by Clinton, reducing the number of available oilers to refuel our Navy. How convenient of you to forget, or, did you even know about it? I doubt it, given that your proctologist called again advising that a deeper search is required to find and extricate your head out of your ass.
JimP| 3.28.11 @ 12:54PM
LOL Hey, thanks for the ad hominems. That's always persuasive. As for increasing airport security, good point. It's on a par with Clinton taking Bin Ladin into custody when he had the chance, but didn't. In otherwords, simple, obvious and there's no excuse for it not happening. And please, no excuse making about it being against the law or Constitution or U.N. mandate or any other legalistic BS. We all know that none of the pols follow the laws when they want to ignore them. Thanks for the feedback.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 1:21PM
"It's on a par with Clinton taking Bin Ladin into custody when he had the chance"
A lie. Did not happen.
Or maybe you'd like to substantiate your claim?
Liar.
How many American's were killed on Clinton's watch?
And how many on Bush's watch?
God you people are stupid.
George True| 3.28.11 @ 3:00PM
Until you can start acting like an adult, nobody here will even bother to respond to you.
JimP| 3.28.11 @ 11:57AM
So, you would have been ok with Bush rounding up every Muslim in America and placing them in detention centers for interrogation to prevent 9/11? Or going to war with every Muslim country in order to root out the terrorists involved so as to prevent 9/11? Recall it has been letwinger and neo-con policy to allow all the foreigners into our country on visas etc in the first place. So given the landscape at the time, what exactly do you believe Bush could have and should have done? Please tell us. Recall also, what was not in that memo. It did not give the names, addresses, dates, flight numbers etc of the terror attacks of 9/11. If Bush had all that, and done nothing you'd have a case for sure. Meantime, again, tells us what you think Bush should have done. Thanks in advance.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 12:18PM
"So, you would have been ok with Bush rounding up every Muslim in America and placing them in detention centers for interrogation to prevent 9/11?"
No you f*cking dumbsh*t, I wouldn't.
I'd think maybe step up airport security might be an option though.
Kinda like Clinton did back in the early nineties when another crazy bastard had threatened to blow up American 747's flying out of Asia.
I remember that quite well as I was on those flights.
It is amazing what a little tightened security accomplished. Too bad for us that Bush was too stupid and lazy to even so much as lift a finger.
JimP| 3.28.11 @ 12:59PM
LOL Hey, thanks for the ad hominems. That's always persuasive. As for increasing airport security, good point. It's on a par with Clinton taking Bin Ladin into custody when he had the chance, but didn't. In otherwords, simple, obvious and there's no excuse for it not happening. And please, no excuse making about it being against the law or Constitution or U.N. mandate or any other legalistic BS. We all know that none of the pols follow the laws when they want to ignore them. Thanks for the feedback.
George True| 3.28.11 @ 1:09PM
You really enjoy calling people names, don't you Jfart? You can't resist, can you? Besides being a fundamental character flaw, it also identifies you as someone who is extremely immature, and has nothing to say worth listening to.
GavInTucson| 3.28.11 @ 5:48PM
"Remember the August 6th memo 'bin laden determined to attack within the United States using aircraft'?"
You added the "using aircraft" bit yourself. Seriously, stop trying to rewrite history.
JmsA| 3.29.11 @ 9:45PM
That's what the leftist morons do, change the story, when the lose arguments, GavInTucson.
Rico| 3.28.11 @ 9:29AM
Congress approved both of Bush's military actions. Obama has not even deigned to explain his actions to Congress or the nation, much less seek its approval.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 10:39AM
"Congress approved both of Bush's military actions."
Are you so effing stupid to not realize Iraq and Afghanistan were invasions? And this is the enforcement of a no fly zone?
And I was wondering about Reagan's attack on Qaddafi 30 years ago. I don't remember him pleading his case to the Congress.
God you people are stupid.
George True| 3.28.11 @ 11:33AM
Jfart, every time you use your "God you people are stupid", you demonstrate for all to see just how incredibly stupid YOU are. You are the stupid one. Got it? The one calling everybody else stupid (you) is in fact the one who is galactically stupid.
Drunken Sailor| 3.28.11 @ 11:51AM
Sigh,
Jharp. There is no difference between a armed invasion of another country or establishing a no fly zone, as far as the constitution is concerned. All that matters is a threat to national security. Still trying to figure out what threat Libya posed to us. And as for Reagan attacking qaddafi, it was in retalation to killing US Servicemen. Not that you care.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 12:03PM
"Still trying to figure out what threat Libya posed to us."
Lay off the booze. You are getting way ahead of things.
We still haven't figured out what threat Iraq was to us.
Drunken Sailor| 3.28.11 @ 12:11PM
Revising history again are you? We established the threat at that time based on our intelligence. That intelligence later proved faulty (well, partially, there were weapons and yellowcake but they were gone by the time we attacked). Let me guess, next your going to say it was a evil Bush lie. Then I guess all those Dems and foreign intelligence services that had the same info must feel foolish now too.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 12:21PM
"We established the threat at that time based on our intelligence. That intelligence later proved faulty"
We established the threat and it turns out the threat didn't exist.
That would mean there was no threat you idiot.
"(well, partially, there were weapons and yellowcake but they were gone by the time we attacked)."
A lie. There were no WMD's and no yellowcake.
God you people are stupid.
Drunken Sailor| 3.28.11 @ 12:30PM
Tell that to the Kurds and Assange.
http://www.wired.com/dangerroo.....g-results/
Drunken Sailor| 3.28.11 @ 12:32PM
Tell that to the Kurds and Julian Assange
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/i.....7AZ3RO9qnM
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 12:45PM
"Tell that to the Kurds"
OK.
There were no WMD's period. It was all a lie.
You are welcome.
Bydand76| 3.28.11 @ 6:15PM
So.... I guess all those WMD's we found when I was actually there.........weren't? Is that what you are suggesting JHarp?
You silly wanker. Your making the flowers wilt now!
Don't bother with the bong there meathead! I already now what you are going to say.......
(JHarp- Finnish for 2 bit ass clown)
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 12:47PM
"That intelligence later proved faulty (well, partially, there were weapons and yellowcake but they were gone by the time we attacked)."
Completely contradicts your post from the NY Post you f*cking dumbsh*t.
You are arguing with yourself. And losing.
God you people are stupid.
Drunken Sailor| 3.28.11 @ 12:32PM
Tell that to the Kurds and Julian Assange
Drunken Sailor| 3.28.11 @ 12:35PM
Finding out that intelligence was flawed "after" the attack does not mean a threat was not believed to have existed.
And as for WMD. Tell that to the Kurds and Julian Assange.
irish19| 3.28.11 @ 12:51PM
Not a lie. The U.S. military moved something like 500 metric tons of yellowcake out of the country. Bush kept the lid on it so that the patriotic MSM (think the Old Gay Whore, aka the New York Times) wouldn't be able to leak out the details.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 1:38PM
"The U.S. military moved something like 500 metric tons of yellowcake out of the country"
Link?
Liar.
God you people are stupid.
Uncle Barky Harp.| 3.28.11 @ 2:06PM
Junior Has Trouble Readin'.
"The United States secretly shipped out of Iraq more than 500 tons of low-grade uranium dating back to the Saddam Hussein era, the Pentagon said Monday.
The U.S. military spent $70 million ensuring the safe transportation of 550 metric tons of the uranium from Iraq to Canada, said Pentagon spokesman Brian Whitman.
The shipment, which until recently was kept secret, involved a U.S. truck convoy, 37 cargo flights out of Baghdad to a transitional location, and then a transoceanic voyage on board a U.S.-government-owned ship designed to carry troops to a war zone, he said.
The "yellowcake" uranium transfer was requested by the Iraqi government at the encouragement of the U.S. government, Whitman said."
http://articles.cnn.com/2008-0.....o?_s=PM:US
Allah, Junior's The Mother Of Stupid.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 2:52PM
the uranium
a) was not weapons grade and
b) was well known to the UN and IAEA and was being stored legally by Saddam's government. It was legally in Iraq according to international law.
and from your link
"yellowcake uranium is a commonly traded commodity used for nuclear power generation. It is not enriched and cannot be used without first going through a complicated enrichment process"
Again, dumbass.
There were no WMD's.
God you people are stupid.
Uncle Barky Harp.| 3.28.11 @ 4:27PM
Doesn't Matter A Whit, Asshat Junior
.
You Posted:
" jharp| 3.28.11 @ 1:38PM
"The U.S. military moved something like 500 metric tons of yellowcake out of the country"
Link?
Liar.
God you people are stupid."
The U.S. military did move something like 500 metric tons of yellowcake out of the country, just as irish 19 posted.
Aaaaaaaand, there's The Link You Questioned.
You don't get to move the goal posts on your questioning post.
Allah,You're A Negative Attention Craving Imbecile.
George True| 3.28.11 @ 3:01PM
You have the maturity of a five year old, Jfart.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 4:31PM
Yada yada yada.
And you have the intellect of that same five year old.
Funny funny guy you are with your fart references. I'm thinking 4th and 5th grade level humor.
God you people are stupid.
George True| 3.28.11 @ 1:13PM
Every time you say "God you people are stupid" you display how juvenile and lacking in intelligence YOU are, Jfart.
You are nothing but a little fart in a big wind.
We can't fix your kind of stupid here.
FREEDOM FIGHTER| 3.28.11 @ 3:20PM
Man you are stupid.
IRAQ? He was talking about Libya soopid!
They were a threat. That is why!!!! Also remember Alletoyah? Reagan meant business then too and he let the hostages go!
Stay off the crack!
Man you are stupid.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 12:06PM
"And as for Reagan attacking qaddafi, it was in retalation to killing US Servicemen."
Reagan was a cut and run pussy. When attacked in Lebanon and hundreds of U.S. Servicemen were killed he tucked his tail and ran like the cowardly lion.
Oh, and Reagan granted amnesty to people that were in the United States illegally.
God you people are stupid.
Drunken Sailor| 3.28.11 @ 12:15PM
Actually he had a planned response but allowed himself to be advised against it.
"In retaliation for the attacks, France launched an airstrike in the Beqaa Valley against alleged Islamic Revolutionary Guards positions. President Reagan assembled his national security team and planned to target the Sheik Abdullah barracks in Baalbek, Lebanon, which housed Iranian Revolutionary Guards believed to be training Hezbollah militants.[19] A joint American-French air assault on the camp where the bombing was planned was also approved by Reagan and Mitterrand. Defense Secretary Weinberger, however, lobbied successfully against the missions, because at the time it was not certain that Iran was behind the attack."
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 12:25PM
"Actually he had a planned response but allowed himself to be advised against it."
Ahhh, I see.
The buck stops with those who give advice to the President. The President cannot be blamed for decisions related to him listening to advice from those who are wrong. Is that how it goes?
You people are unbelievably stupid. Amazing. How in the hell are you even able to make a living?
Drunken Sailor| 3.28.11 @ 12:38PM
So you think a President should not listen to his advisors? Then why have them? Why does Obama do everything his advisors tell him? Especially Axelrod? I get it. Listening to all sides and making a informed decision is only wise if it is done by "The annointed one"? Isn't it time to collect your check from George Soros?
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 1:41PM
"So you think a President should not listen to his advisors?"
Yeah, right. That's what I'm saying.
Are you f*cking retarded?
I'm saying the buck stops with the President.
God you people are stupid.
George True| 3.28.11 @ 1:16PM
By your continued proclamation of how stupid everyone but you supposedly, you have identified yourself as being a special kind of stupid. You also show yourself to be someone with nothing to say worth listening to.
We can't fix your kind of stupid here.
JmsA| 3.29.11 @ 9:37PM
Not according to Hillary, Kerry, and the rest of the leftist morons (like you), who voted for the approving resolution before proclaiming they were against it.
vtwin| 3.28.11 @ 10:47AM
In 1983, President Reagan invaded Grenada without the required congressional approval.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 11:00AM
How about it teabaggers?
Is it OK when it's your boyfriend that does the invading?
George True| 3.28.11 @ 11:35AM
Why are you using a (homo)sexual perjorative to describe people who are for smaller government and lower taxes? Sounds like you have first hand knowledge of this practice.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 12:01PM
"Why are you using a (homo)sexual perjorative to describe people who are for smaller government and lower taxes?"
Obama cut taxes. For 95% of us. And the dumbass teabaggers protested. How is that being for lower taxes you dumbsh*t?
They are frauds. They are republicans too ashamed and cowardly to admit it after the George Bush debacle.
And teabaggers is the term they coined themselves. That is why I use the term.
God you people are stupid.
Drunken Sailor| 3.28.11 @ 12:40PM
How is continuing a tax cut already in place (By the evil George Bush) cutting my taxes? Wouldn't that just be paying the same amount?
irish19| 3.28.11 @ 12:54PM
:Wouldn't that just be paying the same amount?"
Why yes, yes it would. zero wanted to let them expire for what he considered "the wealthy." Playing the same class warfare game he learned studying Alinsky.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 1:32PM
:Wouldn't that just be paying the same amount?"
No. Obama cut taxes to lower than George Bush's tax cuts.
In other words, 95% of paid less tax under Obama than we did under Bush.
And the teabaggers protested Obama's tax cuts.
God you people are stupid.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 1:28PM
"Finding out that intelligence was flawed "after" the attack does not mean a threat was not believed to have existed."
Nor does it confirm that a threat was believed to have existed.
Bush got it WRONG, dumb*ss. That is all that matters. I think Bush knew it was a lie. You don't.
I guess I think Bush was smarter than you think he was.
Do you believe Bush was stupid enough to believe the WMD lies?
Steve A| 3.28.11 @ 2:33PM
jharp, Hey there genius. Saddam intentionally led the intelligence community to believe he had WMDs. The motive was to bluff Iran & prevent an attack. This was all confirmed from long term CIA soft interrogation as he was awaiting trial prior to having his neck stretched.
Get a grip on reality. "Bush lied people died" was spoon fed to morons, like yourself, for mass consumption in order to elect a socialist.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 1:30PM
Obama first cut taxes in 2008. The Making Work Pay tax cuts that made taxes lower than what we paid under Bush.
Then later he extended the Bush tax cuts.
God you people are stupid.
FREEDOM FIGHTER| 3.28.11 @ 3:33PM
Obama first cut taxes in 2008. WHO & HOW could he cuts taxes for anyone? 2008 oh you mean Bush tax cuts. 2008???? DUH!!
MAN you are stupid.
Then later he extended the Bush tax cuts.
God you people are stupid.
George True| 3.28.11 @ 1:19PM
Nothing you just said is actually true. This may come as a shock to you, but Jharp claiming something is true doesn't MAKE it true.
Secondly, even if you actually had something worth saying and listening to, your proclamation of everybody else's stupidity at the end of your screed automatically invalidates your argument.
If you weren't so stupid, you might realize that.
Pops Harp.| 3.28.11 @ 1:32PM
Junior likes Obama's Scam of giving refundable tax credits to non-income taxpayers.
Of course, Junior has done time in Federal Prison,for givin' himself refundable tax credits for income tax he never paid.
Allah, Junior is an Industrial Strength Retard.
FREEDOM FIGHTER| 3.28.11 @ 3:26PM
When did you get your extra check?
He has NEVER ...let's stress this NEVER cut TAXES. Now we have an extension of taxes but no new cuts....DUH!!
Man you are stupid.
Granny Harp.| 3.28.11 @ 11:39AM
Kind People Of American Spectator, please excuse my idiot grandson.
The Boy's A Village People Groupie. He wants to be The Injun.
Allah, Junior's Light In His Loafers.
Drunken Sailor| 3.28.11 @ 11:53AM
Here we go again. We were asked to intervene and there were American citizens at risk (medical students), Hence a threat to our citizens.
vtwin| 3.28.11 @ 12:22PM
Oh yes, Reagan had his at “risk medical students,” Clinton his Genocide, Bush his WMD … Same dance, different tune.
Skippy| 3.28.11 @ 3:47PM
There are those of us who never ever cared about WMD's, yellowcake or sprinkly frosting.
We want beligerent Muslim nations and all our enemies crushed.
We want America defended.
We want the world to fear us if they cross us, and appreciate us when we bail them out of whatever mess they are in.
We don't care what the Euroweenies think of us. At all.
We are not afraid to use force to keep the peace.
How can I be any more clear?
Drunken Sailor| 3.28.11 @ 11:56AM
Also, the airstrip was being built by Cubans.
Bishop invited Cuban engineers to his island to build an international airport to enhance tourism. That was seen by President Ronald Reagan as a threat to the United States because the airstrip could be used to build up an arms cache, and propel a military build-up in the Caribbean.
http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h2047.html
JimP| 3.28.11 @ 3:36PM
Jharp, man you are really cracking me up. Why don't you admit it. You are here because your are displacing your anger on us instead of directing it at your Prez. Obama is in a war for oil. Oil for the French no less. Sarkozy entered an agreement with the provisional rebel government for oil when the rebs were winning. Then Kaddafi gained the advantage and suddenly everyone wants Kaddafi stopped. Sarko went to Hillary, who browbeat Barry into WAR FOR OIL. ROTFL. Obama lies and people die----- for oil. "Isn't it ironic..." How dumb do you and your side look voting for this corrupt, lying, spineless boob? They've tried every explanation in the book and none of them are rational, AND they keep changing their reason. We are backing the worst of the evil sides fighting in Libya. Kaddafi had been defanged since 9/11. He wasn't bothering anyone, but the rebels are Al Qaida and even the NY Times knows it. When they take over they will be attacking innocent Westerners again, and your Prez will be responsible because he went to WAR FOR OIL, just like Bush according your side. OBAMA = BUSH Too funny. Just too, too funny. Bombs away, eh jharp? And pass the crude oil.
JmsA| 3.29.11 @ 9:39PM
American medical students, including a friend of mine, were in danger, and Reagan knew that the Castro loving lefties in congress would have dragged their feet. Reagan is rather popular figure in Grenada now, by the way.
Mike Hawk| 3.28.11 @ 9:46AM
Your stupidity is showing. (__!__) W did not start anything. After Kobar Towers, USS Cole etc and the Al Queda declaration that they were at war with us, Der Schlickmeister emboldened them by doing nothing. We then had 9/11, but I suppose that was our fault in your world. President Bush recognized it for what it was and with full cooperation of Congress and the citizenry responded. But then the Liberal Dems turned it political about 3 months later and that is from where you are now irrationally bloviating.
Brian Mc| 3.28.11 @ 8:38AM
"It's role before history"
Is this the same France, (since we're on the subject of history) that attacked Alsace when the rest of the Christian Armies of Europe were otherwise distracted, having banned together to turn the tide of Islam at the seige of Vienna?
Ellis Wyatt| 3.28.11 @ 9:00AM
I think a better title would have been - Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
Nunya| 3.28.11 @ 5:24PM
Charlie Foxtrot is very apro pos....
Otherwise known as a Cluster... um......Foxtrot.
:-)
Indy| 3.28.11 @ 9:04AM
VDH also comments on Libya
President Obama’s Ten Libyan Paradoxes
http://pajamasmedia.com/victor.....dent-obama’-s-ten-libyan-paradoxes/?singlepage=true
How many troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are more at risk because we are diverting valuable assets to Libya?
What is the exit strategy and please do not say turning over command to NATO, we make up the bulk of NATO.
My senators won't even take an official position, I keep calling their office...crickets.
hunter| 3.28.11 @ 9:21AM
Watch his lips tonight, do they move? Most eyes are on Libya, where the trickster wants them, while the 'magic' gets forgotten. Obomba care birth certificate, high unemployment, deficit spending, Donald Trump, 2012, golf, basketball Rio, vacations, real foreign policy issues, illegal immigration, deficit trade balances. etc. etc...You can fool some people all the time.....
Rico| 3.28.11 @ 9:24AM
Bootlick Barry is happiest when taking orders from other nations. His minions made it clear on the Sunday talk shows that the sole criteria for taking action or not in foreign affairs now depends upon what other nations want us to do. It appears Obama is incapable of leading and is most comfortable when following. This applies not only to his handling of foreign affairs, but also in domestic matters. He seems capable only of reading off teleprompters, strutting about self-importantly, and otherwise enjoying the perquisites of celebrity.
Mike D.| 3.28.11 @ 10:03AM
Thats what I posted before. Just tell the Comrade to stay home, turn the teleprompter 180 degrees around and just let us read it instead. Saves us the displeasure of having to watch the middleman in the exchange.
Frisbee| 3.28.11 @ 10:50PM
"turn the teleprompter around and let us read it"
LOL!
JimP| 3.28.11 @ 9:39AM
An exceptional column Mr. Babbin. 'Right on!' to borrow from all the VN war protestors. You nailed it. I would suggest that you send a copy via Western Union to Sen. McCain, who of all people should know better than to be onboard for this adventure, but he has proven repeatedly that he isn't a wise person. Indeed, this is one big Charlie Foxtrot.
Dan Abbett| 3.28.11 @ 9:48AM
Secretary of Defense, Gates, said it best over the weekend, Libya is not a threat to our national security or our national interest. This is the reality upon which Barack Obama will have to sell our intervention in Libya to the American people. He will say nothing different tonight from what he has already said; only the inflection and painstakingly crafted rhetorical obfuscation to sell this lemon will have changed. In short, a pack of lies.
Rep. Joe Wilson's emotional outburst, "you lie," during Obama's State of the Union Address was quite accurate. Barack Obama will make Joe's case this evening.
Interested Conservative| 3.28.11 @ 9:52AM
Why not go all the way back to 1955 and follow the French and British there as well - let's retake the Suez Canal!
The French built it after all. Then the formerly various Christian cities scattered throughout Africa and Asia - why should ethnic and religious cleansing be allowed to prevail? Then the sites of historic world importance - start with the cathedrals and churches of Byzantium. And why stop there - innocents cry out for protection everywhere.
jharp| 3.28.11 @ 10:36AM
"Any war premised on French pretentions to glory won't end well."
Do you mean a war like the American Revolutionary War?
God you people are stupid.
Cousin Arlo Harp.| 3.28.11 @ 11:28AM
Cousin Junior didn't learn about Rights & Liberty.
He went to Public School.
Allah, Cousin Junior's A Buffoon.
George True| 3.28.11 @ 11:52AM
God, Jfart is stupid.
Strudwick Wickerwire| 3.28.11 @ 3:24PM
Is this Brittany???
Sue| 3.28.11 @ 3:51PM
Can you explain why you are so much smarter than anyone else on this board? Do you have a crystal ball and the "facts" situated the way you want them? Or, do you just pick certain facts to support your "god you people are stupid" comments?
I'm asking you nice and politely to explain why we are "stupid" to you and you are so superior to everyone else. If you can't, then apparently "stupid" is in the eye of the beholder.
Stupid can't be fixed; ignorance can. So, if you're not stupid and of superior intellectect, show us you're not an ignoramus.
Sam Levi| 3.29.11 @ 6:05PM
Ignorance is the lack of knowledge, and is both forgivable and curable.
Stupidity is willful ignorance, and is neither.
winterhawk| 3.28.11 @ 10:44AM
obama is fast becoming the laughing stock of the world. He is not a leader. He is a follower. A follower of lenin and marx and other communists he grew up learning about and living with. His agenda is ruining the United
states and he loves it. Perhaps soon there will be protesters on Pennsylvania Ave., like there is in Libya, Syria and Yemen. He is taking us to that result.
Wayne | 3.28.11 @ 12:24PM
He is doing his job according to Soros and delivering the US military to the UN.
da monk| 3.28.11 @ 10:50AM
Mr. Babbin assumes a lot when he devines the President speech this evening. Or he has a copy of the speech in his hip pocket? Let's wait and see what the President says and then you can criticsize.
In his article Mr. Babbin states "Our aircraft are supposed to protect innocent civilians (IF THERE SUCH BE, A HIGHLY DUBIOUS ASSUMPTION" my caps) Huh? There are NO INNOCENT LYBIANS? That is a harsh, mean spirited accusation, shame on you.
Also, Mr. Babbin almost actually accuses anyone on the with political differences left of his as traitors when he writes "We know that every Liberal professes love and admiration for every American soldier, sailor, airman, marine, coast guardsman, policeman, fireman, ambulance driver and meter maid. AND OF COURSE THEY DON'T MEAN IT" (my caps) What a hateful, disingenous statement. I and many others to the left of you have as much love for this country and all those that serve regardless of their political persuasion, faith, or occupation. It's you sir who is the un-American and it's you sir who reeks of fascistic, traitorist ideolgy that anyone who thinks differently than you is evil, immoral,inequetious and sinful. Mr. Babbit the label belongs on your lapel. Shame on you!
Butch | 3.28.11 @ 4:25PM
Well, evil, immoral, iniquitous, and sinful all mean more or less the same thing. Those are possible explanations, but uneducated, indoctrinated, unaware, and just plain stupid are also possible explanations.
Mark Jeffery Koch| 3.28.11 @ 11:01AM
The United States cannot and should not immerse itself in every conflict but we cannot afford to do nothing either. History has shown that only when America takes the lead have brutality, oppression, and genocide ended. It was America whose strength brought down Hitler’s Germany, the Facists in Italy, and imperial Japan, and it is because of America that South Koreans breathe the air of freedom every day while their counterparts in the north fight famine and oppression and zero freedom.
It was America that helped bring down the iron curtain of Communism across Europe and when one visits Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and many other countries in Europe we realize that the democracies these countries have and the liberties their people now possess are due in large part to America’s strength of will, and that although America did not have to fire one bullet or drop one bomb in their defense it was America that helped defeat Russia’s stranglehold on eastern Europe. It was the Statue of Liberty the protesters in Tianenman Square held high, not the symbols of any other country.
It was America that ended the famine in Somalia and America that helped end genocide in Kosovo. Yes, we made many mistakes in Iraq and Afghanistan but fifty million people from those countries are able to vote for their leaders for the first time in their history and although their democracies are imperfect they do not compare with the brutality of Saddam Hussein or the oppression of the Taliban, and thankfully, because of America, young girls in Afghanistan can grow up dreaming about being a lawyer, doctor, or business owner instead of being terrorized and made to marry when they are ten or eleven years old.
Just as with our experience in Vietnam, we cannot and should not let the debacle in Iraq keep us silent and acquiesce to dictatorships around the world. America should have been more forceful with our ally Bahrain and prevented them from beating and killing the protestors. Unfortunately, America is caught in a Sunni Shia feud that is being exacerbated by Iran who is doing everything it can to export trouble to Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia. Iran seeks to destabilize the Middle East and despite Obama’s hand that was extended in friendship they have refused all overtures from the White House. We cannot prevent Bahrain and Saudi Arabia’s fears about the Shiites destabilizing their regimes until we are firm with Iran – not with the threat of military force but with crippling sanctions that have teeth even if the Chinese and Russians, for monetary reasons only, refuse to side with America.
Ghadaffi’s assets must be frozen and members of his family must be charged along with him with crimes against humanity. Although we should not send troops we should encourage and aid nations from the Arab world and Europe in supplying humanitarian needs to the people and if Ghadaffi’s killings go on airlifting arms to the rebels thru our allies should take place. The United Nations must make Libya a pariah instead of the prior insanity of allowing Libya to have a seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council. (Likewise, we should refuse the recent request of Syria to have a seat on the council as they are a serial violator of human rights.)
Without America there will never be a solution to the Israeli Palestinian conflict. The genocide in Darfur will not end unless America is involved, and the massive aid that Japan needs will not be possible without America. Whether it is responding to the earthquake in Haiti or the tsunami in Japan it is America the world looks to for leadership. Oh, there are those who will decry and belittle the term “American Exceptionalism” but the words should convey leadership and strength in the face of oppression, brutality, genocide, natural disasters, and famine. Many Americans question why we have to always be the ones who make the greater sacrifices but the end result in most cases has been a freer and better world, and I fear that if America’s voice ever becomes silent the world will become a far darker place.
Nunya| 3.28.11 @ 5:29PM
Mark, well said. Excellent post.
diviz| 3.28.11 @ 11:04AM
I heard that Kadafi has weapons of mass destruction or is at least thinking about making some WMDs. That justifies everything.
vtwin| 3.28.11 @ 11:11AM
“Let's support the troops for real and stop funding Obama's war of choice before we lose one American life.”
I agree, but let's support the troops for real and stop funding Bush’s wars of choice in Iraq and Afghanistan before we lose another American life.”
Drunken Sailor| 3.28.11 @ 12:00PM
Just how is Obama doing on that? Oh that's right, he is continuing them. I guess it is easier to criticize than do.
John Talleos | 3.28.11 @ 11:21AM
How can it not be in our interests to take out Gaddafi? Isn't Lockerbie enough? That he was able to remain in power after that was a mistake. Now a chance exist to topple him and we can nudge it a bit, why not? I know, Obama and his silly way of doing things with the French, I get all that. But lets get rid of this punk before, like Saddam, his creepy sons take over and if some nut case comes around as a result of the rebels taking over it could be argued that he would not be as emboldened as other dictators and start blowing planes up through proxy.
Doctor Right| 3.28.11 @ 11:22AM
When have facts EVER impeded Obama?
irish19| 3.28.11 @ 12:58PM
They never do. He just makes up new ones to support his actions. And the legacy media never, ever questions them.
Wayne | 3.28.11 @ 12:20PM
The first lie is calling this a "No Fly Zone". The UN is engaged in Imperialism and using our assets to take sides in this civil war. They are killing tanks and doing the damage for the rebels.
If you look at the women pushing this war, you see the anti-semites. Guess what their goal is?
This war could easily escalate and Iran and Pakistan could start supporting Q'Daffy.
Meanwhile, the GOP have once again left me with no one to vote for in 2012. By siding with Obama, they have abandoned us. They may quibble about leadership and timing, but in the end they have proven themselves to be warmongers themselves. God help us all.
vtwin| 3.28.11 @ 12:36PM
Sure Wayne, everything in the world boils down to an anti-semitism vs. pro-semitism question.
Wayne | 3.28.11 @ 3:40PM
Power’s ultimate aim is to send a massive American or Western force into Israel to stop what Power apparently sees as an Israeli genocide against the Palestinians. She specifically states that the force has to be “massive”, not like a Srebrenica- or Bosnia-sized force. Why would it need to be so large? In order to neutralize the Israeli Defense Force, and protect the forces of Fatah and Hamas.
- written in 2008. You need to do your homework on Obama's advisor Samantha Powers.
Mike S| 3.28.11 @ 12:30PM
So Babbin wants the Republicans to become the pro-Gaddafi party? He is nuts.
Michael L. Hauschild| 3.28.11 @ 1:41PM
Obama him Bravo Charlie Delta Delta (beau coup dinky dau). Same same Jimma Carter.
Strudwick Wickerwire| 3.28.11 @ 1:45PM
Obama will speak -- and speak -- and say NOTHING!!! If anything he says will be of enough of a hook of substance to hang a hat of smoke on, I will be astounded...
If Obuckethead had done his job in the beginning, it wouldn't have been necessary for him to waste America's time tonight!!!
Anthony| 3.28.11 @ 2:11PM
This administration, led by Obozo, is dangerous, amaturish and foolhardy.
Tonight, Obozo, after all his NCAA picks have failed, will finally address the American people and "define the mission", of course, having first waited weeks to see what the Europeans have accomplished and how progress is going on the ground, Obozo will define the mission after the fact.
Circumstances on the ground will fit hand in glove with what Obozo will tell tonight was his plan, despite Clinton and Gates contradicting each other. The LSM has and will accept Obozo's description of " kinetic military action", without the least bit of irony or howls of protest.
Obozo will tell us this is a humanitarian effort. So did Bush, with 50-75 million people in Iraq and Afghanstan, with a vital American interest, and the media and the left went nuts.
Obozo is managing to do all the wrong things in all the wrong ways, and all but the ultra-loony left are calling him on it. Bush spent months building a 19 nation force while going to the UN, Obozo did nothing of the sort.
America is seen as weak, ineffective and indecisive, yet tonight, Obozo will take credit for none of this, but rather, willl take credit for America's sceond rate status disguised as Obozo doing things "smarter".
Can we survive until 2012???
George True| 3.28.11 @ 3:12PM
Folks, do not respond to the leftist troll who calls himself Jharp. As you know, he ends each of his rantings with "God you people are stupid". This automatically disqualifies him as someone who has anything to say worth responding to.
I would recommend limiting any responses to him to suggestions that he grow up and stop acting like a five year old. But do NOT engage him on any other topic as long as he continues to hurl blanket insults at everybody here.
We have other leftist trolls here who make their points without blanket ad hominems, and who occasionally even say something thought provoking. Jharp is not one of them. The only response he is worthy of is "Grow up!".
LiveFreeOrDie| 3.28.11 @ 3:42PM
I suggest sending an email to editor@spectator.org and request jharp be removed.
Pecos Pete| 3.28.11 @ 4:56PM
Remove jharp? If that happened then there would be a lot less humor here.
On the other hand, the threads would be shorter.
Pat| 3.28.11 @ 4:21PM
And us citizens believe electing a president means all we can expect are increased taxes, boring speeches and the predictable photo ops. Wrong – we also give some middle aged guy a chance to kill your kid in the military and make political points with the voters as “a strong leader”. Monkeying around with the military is the historic prerogative of our President and gives him the right to create “policy” to be disseminated by four star flunkies – today, we’ve recently repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t’ Tell”, during WWII it was hot debates, courtesy of pressure from the Temperance Movement still going strong after Prohibition, over whether beer should be served in the enlisted man’s club on base.
We also go to war for domestic political reasons. When Monica lifted up her skirt to display her brand new thong and then did things to Bill not defined as “sex” in a biblically technical sort of way, we immediately had to make war on Bosnia. As a diversion from a growing political scandal, we delivered considerable shock and awe to Bosnians, Serbs, Croats and anyone else unlucky enough to be hanging about - but, as a decisive military victory, most of us are still wondering who actually won that war. With a couple years to go, Obama must regain his popularity after failing in his promise to miraculously save us from this fiercely tenacious economic recession – so it shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone when we once again fling the armed might of a full carrier group against the vile regime of Grenada.
Budman| 3.28.11 @ 5:11PM
A kinetic military Action?!!! What the.... Is that!
A new Obamism. I can't stand it when ge says Pak-e-stan or Div-is-ive. Now this fake term that he can give his own meaning to. Comes in handy when you don't know what your doing and how it will turn out. So you invent a term fir your action and fill in the meaning POST MORTUM. How's that for a term? Maybe that's what I'll nick name Obama, "post mortum" as in his agenda. DOA!
My mom had a term for guys like Obama ....
"GOOF BALL". I can live with that one.
President Goof Ball. January 21, 2013 president Goof Ball will be history. He should be selling ties by the pool in Miami. Except the only job he's qualified for us floor walker in a phone booth.
Who Knows?| 3.28.11 @ 7:19PM
A lot of people are confused and therefore suffering from rabid misconceptions.
Who thinks Americans are all "immigrants"?
I subbed once, in a fine district near San Diego about ten years ago. As happens a lot when the regular teacher is out, some students always try to get one to talk about themselves, instead of do the lesson plan.
Well, in this one politically correct and "diversified" class, this guy asked about "what I was?" You know, like on a census form or other paperwork they want to know your racial classification.
Being an experienced sub, who NEVER talked much about myself, except maybe my qualifications to teach, etc, replied---
"I'm an American".
Of course, this stopped the kid, but not for long.
He persisted, and wise guy that I am, before long I said,
"Oh, you mean my ANCESTORS?"
Well, hey man!
What does it have to do with me, at this moment, that one grandmother came from Germany at the turn of the century, or there's some Scotch and Irish way back even previously?
By the PHYSICAL way, the body is totally new after seven years, elementally. Most atoms pop in and out much faster, but even the deepest and longest lasting pass away before seven years are up.
Don't let me get going about our psychic and mental passages through time, which pass through us, as well!
You are, TRULY, never in danger of knowing a single thing!
To be whatever you're appearing to be really doesn't make a damn bit of difference.
Immigrant shmegmagrant--what's that secret behind the green door?
One of my favorite admonitions garnered from soaking in some Zen back in the 70's, is---
"Return to what you were before your mother and father were born".
Wow---that'll put hair on your immigrant balls!
Sparked by some recent PBS specials about telescopes, and space, etc, it dawned on me that even people who completely buy a materialistic and only physical view of It-All---say a Christopher Hitchens---could be well served to REALLY return to the "before" ANY THING was "born", right back to the mystery instantly prior to the Big Bang that's been spreading space-time ever since "appearing".
Anyway, those locked in immigrant identifications might ponder the night sky, looking back into time, with wide open eyes to capture light from way back when.
Us spiritual Beings only seem to be "having" a material existence.
Beam me up, JIM!
Thom| 3.28.11 @ 7:45PM
If American citizens die because of our intervention in Libya’s civil war the folly of this ill conceived military action will be crystal clear even to the supporters of this folly masquerading as a humanitarian action. So called Nato can’t sustain this kind of operation over Libya without our considerable logistical support and special power projection capabilities. The US military doesn’t do anything not measured in billions of dollars…. Reagan road into Lebanon on that White Humanitarian horse and left with considerable American blood on it. In the age of well organized terrorism and the Muslin belief in “an enemy of my enemy is a friend of mine” it won’t be that difficult to see us getting wacked by Libyan military trained people with some competence as opposed to the hillbillies we mostly deal with. If we suffer for this adventure, the record low ratings this thing has now will become record high ratings for removing the source of this irritation. Ask Harry S. Truman, “the buck stops here” dumbass who rushed into a conflict without thinking it through and lacking the will to finish what he started how this goes over when the best of intentions goes south.
dave| 3.28.11 @ 11:16PM
This administration only cares about perception and how they can make the citizens of this country and the world believe that Obama is some type of great humanitarian. The big issue for the regime is that they thought it would only take a couple of days to get rid of Gadaffy. Sounds like he didn't get the memo. Now they are in damage control mode.
Now let see, how do we spin this to make him appear to be doing this only because he cares about the poor oppresed people of Libya. Yes, yes, we are there to protect them from this evil dictators who is willing to kill his own people. Well what about Waco when Bill Clinton had 70 some innocent people killed. What about when Clinton pulled the Nato troops out of Rawanda and allowed 700,000 people to be slaughtered.
Wait a second, maybe this is why the regime went into Libya. So Obama couldn't be seen as someone who would allow the mass slaughter of people. After all, he is going to be president of the world.
Dee See| 3.29.11 @ 12:28AM
"Starbucks
----n' Oprah
----n' EUGENICS --------OH MY!"
"Starbucks
---n' Oprah
----n' EUGENICS -------OH MY!"
"Pay NO attention to those men behind the curtains!"
C Smith| 3.29.11 @ 3:48AM
“No,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton bluntly stated when asked on “Face the Nation” if the U.S. would intervene in Syrian unrest as in Libya. She defended her position by saying that the situations in Libya and Syria are respectively "unique." Yes, they are unique, but not for reasons mentioned:
Syria's human rights record is among the worst according to Human Rights Watch. Syrian secret police detain, torture, and are suspect in the disappearance of an estimated 17,000 political prisoners. Libya, by comparison, is not even in the ball park.
Syria, according to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), supports the following terrorist organizations: Hezbollah, the Iraqi insurgency, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. Libya of course is culpable for Lockerbie, but even here Gaddafi personal sanction on the matter is debatable.
Iran and Syria maintain a mutual defense agreement, while Iran and Libya are enemies with the former encouraging the West to arm their anarchist allies.
Syria possesses weapons of mass destruction (chemical and biological) and the capability to deliver them according to U.S.defense and intelligence reports. However, a September 2007 Israeli air strike is generally credited with putting Syria's nuclear program on hold. Libya, in stark contrast, has complied with the "world community," and what was her reward, "decimation":
"On December 19, 2003, Libya announced it would dismantle its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and ballistic missile programs. Since then, U.S., British, and international officials have inspected and removed or destroyed key components of those programs, and Libya has provided valuable information, particularly about foreign suppliers. Libya’s WMD disarmament is a critical step towards reintegration into the world community.... " (Sharon A. Squassoni and Andrew Feickert (Specialists in National Defense Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division), CRS Report for Congress, Disarming Libya: Weapons of Mass Destruction, September 22, 2006).
Clinton's unsubstantiated preference of Syria over Libya is not an error in judgment, but rather something more sinister:
Frank Gaffney, a columnist at the Washington Times and unlike the media, recently made the obvious connection in an analysis titled “The Gadhafi Precedent.” Gaffney indicates that the hostilities initiated against Libya might soon be used to “justify and threaten the use of U.S. military forces against an American ally: Israel.” Actually, Gaffney was too restrained in his analysis. The coalition's assault on Libya was a test run or perhaps a dress rehearsal of the "Expedient for Jerusalem":
Palestinian preparations for the opportune moment to initiate anarchy in Israel are complete, pending Secretary Clinton's affirmation of the Gadhafi Precedent. However, the situations in Libya and Israel are respectively "unique". Secretary Clinton and her coalition are unaware "the LORD hath chosen" Israel (cf. Deuteronomy 14:2), and has "chosen Jerusalem" (cf. 2 Chronicles 6:6) and unto Abraham has promised: "... all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever" (Genesis 13:15).
Secretary Clinton and her coalition are also unaware the LORD doesn't settles His accounts on Friday, but has chosen one DAY in all eternity to judge the earth. Yet as that DAY draws ever nearer "the kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us" (Psalms 2:2-3). And Secretary Clinton and her coalition are arrogantly unaware the LORD "... will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people... and in that day will... make Jerusalem a burdensome stone... " (Zechariah 12:2-3).
http://theisraelofgod.blogspot.....salem.html
C Smith| 3.31.11 @ 2:38AM
The Gadhafi Precedent
“No,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton bluntly stated when asked on “Face the Nation” if the U.S. would intervene in Syrian unrest as in Libya. She defended her position by saying that the situations in Libya and Syria are respectively "unique." Yes, they are unique, but not for reasons mentioned:
Syria's human rights record is among the worst according to Human Rights Watch. Syrian secret police detain, torture, and are suspect in the disappearance of an estimated 17,000 political prisoners. Libya, by comparison, is not even in the ball park.
Syria, according to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), supports the following terrorist organizations: Hezbollah, the Iraqi insurgency, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. Libya of course is culpable for Lockerbie, but even here Gaddafi personal sanction on the matter is debatable.
Iran and Syria maintain a mutual defense agreement, while Iran and Libya are enemies with the former encouraging the West to arm their anarchist allies.
Syria possesses weapons of mass destruction (chemical and biological) and the capability to deliver them according to U.S.defense and intelligence reports. However, a September 2007 Israeli air strike is generally credited with putting Syria's nuclear program on hold. Libya, in stark contrast, has complied with the "world community," and what was her reward, "decimation":
"On December 19, 2003, Libya announced it would dismantle its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and ballistic missile programs. Since then, U.S., British, and international officials have inspected and removed or destroyed key components of those programs, and Libya has provided valuable information, particularly about foreign suppliers. Libya’s WMD disarmament is a critical step towards reintegration into the world community.... " (Sharon A. Squassoni and Andrew Feickert (Specialists in National Defense Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division), CRS Report for Congress, Disarming Libya: Weapons of Mass Destruction, September 22, 2006).
Clinton's unsubstantiated preference of Syria over Libya is not an error in judgment, but rather something more sinister:
Frank Gaffney, a columnist at the Washington Times and unlike the media, recently made the obvious connection in an analysis titled “The Gadhafi Precedent.” Gaffney indicates that the hostilities initiated against Libya might soon be used to “justify and threaten the use of U.S. military forces against an American ally: Israel.” Actually, Gaffney was too restrained in his analysis. The coalition's assault on Libya was a test run or perhaps a dress rehearsal of the "Expedient for Jerusalem":
Palestinian preparations for the opportune moment to initiate anarchy in Israel are complete, pending Secretary Clinton's affirmation of the Gadhafi Precedent. However, the situations in Libya and Israel are respectively "unique". Secretary Clinton and her coalition are unaware "the LORD hath chosen" Israel (cf. Deuteronomy 14:2), and has "chosen Jerusalem" (cf. 2 Chronicles 6:6) and unto Abraham has promised: "... all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever" (Genesis 13:15).
Secretary Clinton and her coalition are also unaware the LORD doesn't settles His accounts on Friday, but has chosen one DAY in all eternity to judge the earth. Yet as that DAY draws ever nearer "the kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us" (Psalms 2:2-3). And Secretary Clinton and her coalition are arrogantly unaware the LORD "... will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people... and in that day will... make Jerusalem a burdensome stone... " (Zechariah 12:2-3).
http://theisraelofgod.blogspot.....salem.html
Creative Recreation | 8.10.11 @ 11:20PM
is good