-
Obama’s Drone War
May 23, 2013 | 16 comments
-
How Long Is This War?
May 20, 2013 | 15 comments
-
Next: The Benghazi Select Committee
May 13, 2013 | 94 comments
-
Nobody Died in Watergate
May 9, 2013 | 148 comments
-
Benghazi Bullchips
May 6, 2013 | 184 comments
Loose Canons
Boehner’s Oliver Resolution
For resolution on Obama’s Libya policy one has to turn to Rep. Louie Gohmert’s effort, which garnered 87 Republican votes.
To put things in perspective, Muammar Gaddafi had a better week than Anthony Weiner. Perspective is in very short supply on President Obama’s “kinetic military action” in support of the NATO effort to forestall something to protect somebody and maybe accomplish that regime change thingy.
Last week, House Speaker John Boehner offered a resolution on Obama’s Libya policy intended to assert influence upon the expiration of the War Powers Resolution limitation on presidential power to commit troops to combat without congressional authorization. The resolution Boehner offered — about which more in a moment — was so bowdlerized that it brought to mind the scene in Oliver when the hungry waif held out his porridge bowl to ask, “Please, sir, can I have some more?”
A few facts about our military commitment to the Libya op illustrate the problem. We are — again — engaged in a limited war to accomplish a stated mission that cannot be achieved without succeeding in another unstated mission which is larger and harder than our leadership is willing to pursue.
President Obama justified our intervention in the Libyan revolt on humanitarian grounds and said it would take weeks, not months. That was three months ago, and no end is in sight. He and the other NATO leaders have always said that success cannot be achieved without Gaddafi’s removal. And because neither Obama nor his partners — France’s Sarkozy and Britain’s Cameron — have admitted the dependency of one mission on the other, they have led us into the worst sort open-ended fuzzy-goaled “limited war,” in which American strategic interests in the Middle East were not implicated before it began.
According to a congressional source who had heard the Obama administration’s briefing on Libya last week, American forces form the backbone of the NATO task force.
We are operating, in support of the NATO mission, fighters, ISR (intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance), electronic warfare and aerial refueling aircraft, one destroyer and a number of drone aircraft. Our aircraft represent 24% of the total NATO force and have flown 27% of all sorties. (Our tanker guys, God bless ‘em, are again pulling disproportionate duty, having flown over 75% of the refueling missions.)
All of this is at a cost of about $2 million a day. According to my source, the Pentagon puts the total cost of the Libya operation at $663.7 million as of mid-May. (That total seems far too low, considering we’ve fired about 150 Tomahawk cruise missiles at Libya so far, at a cost of about $1 million each.)
It’s fair to ask — now that our guys have been in action for over two months — just what are we getting for that investment? The answer is: nothing.
As I wrote when Obama commenced this charlie foxtrot, we have no interest in Gaddafi’s demise sufficient to justify the risk of American lives and the open-ended commitment of forces to the NATO operation.
It was less than three months ago when NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen assured the world that the NATO mission over Libya would only enforce the UN Resolution to “protect civilians and civilian-populated areas under threat of attack from the Gaddafi regime.” He said, “NATO will implement all aspects of the UN Resolution. Nothing more, nothing less.” From that false premise, NATO has proceeded to half-heartedly attempt to kill Gaddafi, resulting in the deaths of some of his relatives and increasing his resolve to remain in power.
Last weekend, having failed to remove Gaddafi, NATO decided to commit attack helicopters to combat. That raises the ante considerably: helicopters are far more vulnerable to antiaircraft weapons than fast-moving jets. British Defense Minister Liam Fox denied that this was NATO’s “plan B,” saying that the deployment of attack helos was just “…a logical extension of what we had already been doing.”
Fox’s denial rings entirely hollow. Limited wars — fought with limited weapons employed under restrictions that deny the opportunity to strike a fatal blow at the enemy — always evolve in their objectives from limited success to accepted failure.
In their briefing to Congress, the Obama team cited four reasons to justify our continuing involvement. The four reasons boil down to these: that if we pull back from the Libya operation, our NATO allies may pull out of Afghanistan sooner than we’d like; that if we end our Libya commitment, other Middle Eastern dictators will believe they can outlast us; and that leaving Gaddafi in place would enable him to destabilize Egypt.
Obama’s worry about Afghanistan is only that NATO’s shrinking presence will lead to a crisis there that could make him look bad before the 2012 election. Britain — almost alone among the NATO nations in providing troops that actually fight in Afghanistan — may begin a quick pullout this year.
The President shouldn’t worry about encouraging terrorist dictators to wait us out. They’ve done it successfully in Iraq (Iran principally, and Syria as well) and in Afghanistan (Iran, and the ever-helpful Pakistanis). In a decade of war against terrorists, only one of their sponsors — the late and unlamented Saddam Hussein — has been persuaded to cease sponsoring terrorism.
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 (31) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Jed Babbin
More Articles From Loose Canons
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/06/06/boehners-oliver-resolution
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
- Razing Reagan
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
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Intelligent Design| 6.6.11 @ 8:02AM
One might say that U.S. policy is fundamentally flawed, if a policy existed. We have now been in Iraq and Afghanistan for several years, and as soon as we leave both will unravel. In addition, we are intervening in Libya. Consistency would lead to foolish, unaffordable U.S. military action in Syria, Egypt, Yemen, Palestine, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, etc., etc.
The solution is to withdraw from Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Let the Muslims in those countries fight and kill each other. We should focus on the countries which present a real threat in the form of nuclear weapons, namely North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan. We can't sit by and watch al Qaeda & Co. gain control over Pakistan's nuclear weapons, so it might take boots on the ground there. We should bomb Iran's and North Korea's nuclear and military sites. In both countries, regime change would follow.
In addition, we should stop all UN funding (yes, "all") and all aid to countries such as Egypt or the Palestinian Authority, while significantly increasing military aid to Israel. The U.S. should shut down all immigration by Muslims, ban Muslims from U.S. airports and airplanes, and destroy the Muslim Brotherhood's subversive organization inside the U.S. Congress should identify Islam as a subversive totalitarian political ideology hostile to the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights. It is not a religion.
Also, station 25,000 or more U.S. soldiers along the border with Mexico. How many hundreds of terrorists, and how many drug gangs, have infiltrated the U.S. by walking across the Mexican border while our troops are pre-occupied finding terrorists elsewhere?
Pelligrino| 6.6.11 @ 10:28AM
Intel. Design, I like what you state. Here, here! I'd activate those 25,000 for our Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California borders TODAY.
I bet many National Guardsmen from those states would rather be there protecting the homefront than off in 24/7 enclosed encampments in bleak and unfriendly Afghanistan.
And, yes, bomb Iran and North Korea this month. Next Monday would be just fine. (Surely a nation like ours can out-do, out-maneuver, out-think North Korea's tiny cadre of despots?)
The author is right to point out that none of the GOP presidential nominee aspirants even wades into these waters. How cowardly.
SpiralArchitect| 6.6.11 @ 12:31PM
Iran = likely no Nukes to date & certainly no delivery system ( consider the Venezulan missle base for Iran)
N. Korea = Nukes & a decent delivery system & most certainly owuld strike out somewhere if bombed.
Caution is the key.
dee see| 6.6.11 @ 8:57AM
Crass DIS-traction to steal your
vital consciousness on this, the again
'overlooked', 61st Anniversary of the
cosmically relevant, urgently significant (Globalism/betrayal/RC/EUGENICS)
61st Anniversary of the KOREAN WAR.
ALAS, buried deeper than Fuksihima, deeper
than the ever unfolding Globalist TREASON
op ----even here, in the 'American' Spectator.
Makes one wonder just who's watching who?
What is a NON hypnotized, NON POST American
to do--?
REMEMBERING those who served, and those
who sacrificed, Americans, Koreans, Allies
soldiers, civilians, men women and children
---these 61 'EUGENICS friendly' years later.
And now, speaking of things POST American
--this will be our FINAL POST.
GOD-ward one and all
FAREWELL
Cpm| 6.6.11 @ 4:29PM
Now don't go making promises you don't intend to keep.
Have you considered| 6.6.11 @ 8:59AM
This is not what the TEA Party voted for.
The Republican establishment has taken a goodly amount of wind out of the sails of their supporters.
Ken (Old Texican)| 6.6.11 @ 9:00AM
-Design...
You have read my book haven't you, heh heh?
Any of you folks who have not gotten it yet,
you can check it out at
www.txbooks.blogspot.com
You can also get my day to day brilliant thought on current events there.
Michael Tomlinson| 6.6.11 @ 9:26AM
Your sources at the Pentagon are not factoring in the cost of the 22d MEU off the coast of Libya.
Being overshadowed by Obama's personal war in Libya is his sellout of US forces in Afghanistan where he is negotiating with the Taliban in a power “sharing” deal that throws the Afghan people under the bus and makes a mockery of Americans fighting and dying there.
A few lowpoints in Obama’s betrayal/negotiations:
*Team Obama is not requiring the Taliban to renounce their ties to al-Qaeda before we negotiate with them
*Team Obama no longer requires preconditions to negotiate —like the Taliban stop killing innocent civilians and our troops or break with al-Qaeda
*Team Obama isn't even requiring that the Taliban embrace the Afghan constitution
Despite our groveling concessions Taliban leaders refused to show up at highly publicized “peace” talks in Germany. News that the Taliban jilted Obama at the negotiating table filled European papers just as Obama’s entourage hit the continent, but the Democrat MSM dutifully failed to report on it.
SpiralArchitect| 6.6.11 @ 12:34PM
Forget not a major factor in the US involvement in two countries (the gold Dinar for oil trade) Iraq & Lybia. Other countries we have been involved in but still ignore others - there are only a few possible links.
link-
http://failedempire.wordpress......can-dinar/
SpiralArchitect| 6.6.11 @ 12:35PM
Do not be foolish enough to think the US gets involved in any dispute globally for humanitarian reasons.
MONEY is always the reason - everything boils down to money - money IS power =control.
DonW| 6.6.11 @ 9:46AM
While our foreign policy is a travesty, the bigger issue is that once again, Obama and his regime flout the Constitution. They look more like a dictatorship and a tyranny of the minority daily.
martin j smith| 6.6.11 @ 10:05AM
Ah the leadership issue--that is a good one. This lack of leadership explains why the field of candidates is fluid and uncertain. It explains the lack of enthusaism for many candidates and it explains why Sara Palin stepped into the breach--not necessarily as a candidate-though she might yet do so--but as an instigator to get things going --to move someone to do or say something.
This is a problem beyond Military it is very serious and scary because unless we can get the right candidate we could be stuck with Obama for four more years. Think about that !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think that the most important thing is to think of defeating the SOCIALISTS AND OBAMA AS THE ONE AND ONLY GOAL FOR NOW.
Michael Hawke | 6.6.11 @ 10:08AM
Part of the problem is that the GOP leadership is still wedded to the radical "neocon" (for lack of a better word) ideology of the Bush administration. They can't condemn Obama's actions as unconstitutional because they bought in to the writings of radical Berkeley law professor, John Yoo, who advocated an all-powerful commander-in-chief. The "neocons" favor this, but want their own despot in power.
SpiralArchitect| 6.6.11 @ 12:56PM
No. They know the reasons, they simply feel left out - control is the underlying theme, as always.
canuckistani| 6.6.11 @ 1:26PM
Agreed, I find it rich that writers here bitch and complain about a mission that has cost almost nothing, zero American lives and is being sanctioned by France - FRANCE!!! Especially on D-day, the day we became "better" than the French 67 years ago. That's rich.
I remember the outrage at Libya for the Lockerbie bombing, but I failed to notice the rage when Blair was sent as Junior's toadie to shake the Colonel's hands in his tent after the bogus nuke deal.
The bomber released back to Libya, rage again. Likely part of the Junior deal as well. Condi Rice has been VERY quiet on that point.
The uprisings in Benghazi, according to Newtie et al: he should be bombed tonight. More rage.
Now the exotic is making tracks, keeping the French on the front lines and we get all sanctimonious about it?
Shame on you.
Bruno| 6.6.11 @ 7:21PM
Shut up you war mongering weiner lover.
John M| 6.6.11 @ 12:16PM
Leadership from Congress is required and has been lacking for a long time. Congress can shut down the military actions in Libya and all of the other unconstitutional activities of the President. Congress should also declare war on a country harboring terrorists. The US can clean house and build relatively strong allies like Japan and Germany. The US will then be taken seriously when we tell another nation to clean their own house.
John| 6.6.11 @ 12:22PM
I agree with Intel. Design for the most part -- very astute analysis.
I would add to stop building up China’s military with our trade wealth, especially giving them our manufacturing capability and technology. However, I do not believe it is wise to pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq unless we are prepared to use massive airpower afterwards when necessary.
I fear the GOP presidential candidates are all singing from the same isolationist songbook. Sarah Palin, with her finger in the wind, just recommended Obama’s faster withdrawal from Afghanistan because of cost. Shades of pre-WWII appeasement are in the political air.
And only Donald Trump has called for an increase in our shrunken military instead of putting it on the Obama/Ryan chopping block.
SpiralArchitect| 6.6.11 @ 12:58PM
Military expenses are such a small amout of our expenditure.
St. Thor| 6.6.11 @ 1:24PM
Every member of congress who has been in office more than two years should resign voluntarily now or be ridden out of town on a rail, tarred and feathered. Their limp-wristed mealy-mouthing, go-along-to-get-along has put this country in deep trouble, and continuing those clowns in power will do nothing but get us into executive driven wars and constituent-driven theft and bankruptcy.
Chef Schnauzer| 6.6.11 @ 8:39PM
100% Right. There will be a form of hell to pay.
Jerome Brick| 6.6.11 @ 1:46PM
The template for our military action in Libya can be found in Kosovo 12 years ago - an undeclared, NATO-led war based on humanitarian needs of Kosovars being abused by the Milosevic regime in Serbia. The ultimate goal of the bombing campaign (no boots on the ground were allowed) was to overthrow the Milosevic regime in Belgrade. Initially the bombing targets were designed entirely to degrade the Serbian military. When that proved to be less than successful, the targets got progressively softer until the Serbs threw in the towel and overthrew the despised Milosevic.
lrgon| 6.6.11 @ 1:59PM
Boehner's lack of slapping down the Obombernator shows that he is nothing but a rat, albeit, an establsihment fat one!
Kucinich's bill would have ordered the Obombernator to leave in in a few days; get the hell out of Libya but in jumped cry baby Boehner to save the prez's carcass .
Chef Schnauzer| 6.6.11 @ 8:41PM
Withhold all funding from the republican party, all of it. If you find an individual candidate, of course, by all means.... the GOP - screw 'em.
Cpm| 6.6.11 @ 4:31PM
I'm surprised Barry hasn't tried calling it "Operation Libyan Freedom".
e track from saq| 6.6.11 @ 6:20PM
I wish only the worst for the socialist that occupy the seat of power in this country.Yet,I can't help wondering how another seal team or marine mission simply to capture Gaddafi would be a crown of glory to the decent people of this country.It's useless in reality,Islam insures that another "Allah"
probably worst than Gaddafi will rise up to the knelling of the Libyan masses.Or what is that hidden force that condems countless generations of Muslim to one blood thirsty ruler after another.
Intelligent Design| 6.6.11 @ 6:26PM
A quote from George Gilder who writes in the June 2011 issue of The American Spectator, p. 35: "...U.S. strategy has slid into total incoherence, drifting from a futile and deadly funambulism (it means tight-rope walking) among the tribes of Afghanistan to propping up the Lebanese Army (i.e., Hezbollah) with sophisticated night-fighting gear to be used against no other target than Israel ..."
sablegsd| 6.6.11 @ 10:23PM
Boehner is a useless tool.
The heck with a prissy letter that zero could care less about. He should have had impeachment papers for our liar in chief.
Morgan| 6.7.11 @ 11:48AM
I'm not really sure how we got to the point where it seems to be conventional wisdom that the President has essential war-making powers under the Constitution. The President does not, and did not even prior to the War Powers Act in 1973. The fact that the President can move more expediently does not justify the usurpation of power and in fact provides a powerful argument against it. The framers of the Constitution did not want an efficient executive.
Gohmert is right; funding should be cut off after a short drop-dead date, and the resolution should explicitly provide that Obama may not dip into one of his slush funds to cover it.
As for why the candidates do not address the issue, I suspect that in some cases (like Cain) they are not entirely sure what the issue is (no rap on him but he has shown that foreign policy is not his strong suit); and I suspect that in others it is some version of the "Obama trap": they don't want to be on record opposing a course of conduct they might someday want to pursue themselves. It is, after all, one thing to be against this misadventure and another to be against this usurpation of the war-making power in principle.
The candidates need to declare themselves on the question of principle.
shipley130| 6.8.11 @ 2:05PM
The world needs more glass factories in the middle east.
weddingdresses | 6.14.11 @ 4:29AM
Article is very interesting,thanks for your sharing.I will visit this site.