The American Spectator

Occam's Tool| 3.17.11 @ 2:32PM

The razor's Rule states that there is no Third World Country filled with Assholes that couldn't be improved with megatons of explosive.

Ross Kaminsky| 3.17.11 @ 2:39PM

hard to disagree, but those megatons are expensive. far from clear it's worth the money in this case.

Occam's Tool| 3.17.11 @ 5:09PM

Well, not if you only bomb one side...

Seriously, Ross, if he wasn't going to intervene, he should have said so. Or, he should have asked for some concessions/promises regarding American interests from the Rebels in exchange for intervention. It's OK to benefit from your nation's political interests.

Michael L. Hauschild| 3.18.11 @ 12:18AM

Here is a very telling comeuppance for those Monday morning quarterbacks, political prognosticators, and pundits on the retread bandwagon.
http://www.nysun.com/opinion/p.....her/87263/

Clint| 3.18.11 @ 12:26AM

The Fanatic Israel Firster Chickenhawk Tool Job has No Problem Offering Up American Troopers As Cannon Fodder & Spending American Treasure to carry out His Own Personal Agenda.

westie| 3.17.11 @ 2:51PM

I've been 100% against involvement by the US and the thought of involvement at this late date is horrifying.

Floyd Looney| 3.17.11 @ 3:07PM

The US should not get involved period. I have not seen any Congressional authority to get involved anyways.

I have seen no evidence that the rebels are "pro-freedom" or anything else.

Occam's Tool| 3.17.11 @ 5:13PM

Which is precisiely my point. I see no evidence that the Rebels would be better for the US than Q. Obama could have adopted an attitude in favor of national autonomy, and not pissed off Q if he won. He did it with the Iranian revolutionaries, who WERE pro-US. Now, all he's done is lower his appraisal in the eyes of Q and PISSED him off for no reason. Lose-lose. Brilliant.

Too Many Tims| 3.17.11 @ 3:08PM

He was up all night working on B-Ball picks...

Pelligrino| 3.18.11 @ 2:19AM

Well, actually, yes, Tim. He was with his team of top NCAA, ESPN, SI analysts preparing his one-liners, quips, and sage words for what is now -- for the nation -- a March toward Madness.

He probaby spends more time for those ESPN gigs than anything to get ready for real national and free world decision-making.

He still panders to the collegiate crowd. Now that's maturity.

Flee| 3.17.11 @ 3:10PM

US missed the chance to exert positive influence on the outcome and now the Ditherer in Chief thinks the time has come for action. When will he learn that you can't please everybody when it comes to tough decisions. Being decisive is the supreme trait of a successful executive. They live or die by their decision but they make them. W wrote a book with that point reflected in the title and Doe-Bama said he was going to read it. It sounds like even that statement was an attempt to reach out to conservatives rather than an actual attempt to learn something from his predecessor. I did not agree with all his decisions (in fact not many of them) but W made them without spending countless weeks or months contemplating to the point where the decision lost its value. Let's find an executive that can make a decision and stand behind it come hell or high water.

Mike | 3.17.11 @ 3:21PM

So, Ross, you don't want to spend blood and treasure in Libya, but you are lamenting the lost opportunity to impose a no fly zone. I guess you disagree with Secretary Gates' assessment about what it would entail to implement a no fly zone. I'll take Gates' assessment over yours. Also, Ross, how do you propose to pay for something like this? You seem to be suggesting that when the rebels held the oil producing cities, we should have moved. I think I've seen this movie before. The oil would pay for the no-fly zone, right?
Concerning our military reputation. We have projected a great deal of military power in Iraq and Afghanistan. Do you think there is any doubt in the minds of people in the Middle East about our military power or willingness to use it? Isn't the real question whether or not using it in Libya would advance our interests. Can you answer the questions posed by George Will?

All in all, this piece is nothing more than Monday morning quarter backing. And your next to the last paragraph fools few people.

Ross Kaminsky| 3.17.11 @ 9:23PM

Mike,

Go read the 5th paragraph.

Where do you see me lamenting anything or suggesting that I support any US action in Libya?

What I said was: If the US were going to get involved (but not that I supported such involvement), it would have made a lot more sense earlier.

But since Obama doesn't have one leadership bone in his "I vote 'present'" body, this turn of events is hardly surprising.

Michael L. Hauschild| 3.17.11 @ 10:19PM

Ah, the old 'if-but not" gambit……sir, would you please crap, fart, or get off the pot. Monday morning quarter backing, or alternate endings do not endear us to you as a hard hitting AS pundit.

Mike | 3.17.11 @ 10:43PM

Well played dodge, Ross. But simply inserting the word "if" in front of a sentence hardly hides your position or the real purpose of your post.

Mike | 3.17.11 @ 10:45PM

And, again, I challenge you to answer George Will's questions. In doing this, even if I disagree with your answers, you will earn credibility.

Mike | 3.17.11 @ 10:51PM

And Ross, I betting you don't have the balls to take each of George Will's questions and post an answer for each. In short, pal, I'm calling you out.

Wayne | 3.17.11 @ 3:21PM

He does not want to unseat Qaddhafi. He just wants to say he tried (ala Clinton). Qaddhafi is personal friends with Obama's mentor and preacher - Wright.
My question is a no fly zone making any sense if we don't have one over Iran?

David W| 3.17.11 @ 3:43PM

You beat me to it. Obama has no intention of doing anything. But by doing the typical posturing he does so well he can say, "well, gee, we were starting to do something, it's a shame the rebels couldn't have held out longer." Since Obama's buddies all support the Colonel Obama doesn't have much choice.

And no, I don't support going into Libya - I would bet that after we helped free the country the rebels would turn against us and accuse us of being imperialists. Though if we do, then we really do it for oil (obviously we didn't in Iraq, since we ain't getting much of anything from them except aggravation).

Floyd Looney| 3.17.11 @ 5:08PM

I don't think China can afford to fund another US war run by these idjits.

Paul McGrath| 3.17.11 @ 5:46PM

A no-fly zone would not have been terribly expensive, would have likely resulted in no casualties, and would definitely have improved our standing in the middle east. If Khaddafy still wins, we show him that we hate his guts and that he is on borrowed time. If the rebels win, perhaps we have some leverage. And we show the Arab world--a world made up primarily of petty dictators--that we are not afraid to assert ourselves.

What we have done is the worst. We talked support for one side, then failed to do one single thing about it. Whoever wins in Libya will hate and distrust us.

If I am an Iranian leader, I am rubbing my hands together with glee, and putting my action plan together ahead of time, before 2012 comes, and with it the possibility of a stronger American leader.

Pelligrino| 3.18.11 @ 3:00AM

Mr. McGrath, I am with you. One US carrier could enforce this No Fly Zone for 45 days with no problem. Thereafter might require some additional support.

This is not a hard job for our US Navy. In fact, it trumps train-ups, mock drills, paper exercises played out like lavish chess games, and endless safety drills.

When you serve, you are actually eager to "really do your job." (And, folks, this is a cakewalk against Libya; there might be one incident of antiaircraft fire from the colonel's forces, but it would be only ONE.)

When's the last time our Navy fliers have done missions like this? A long time: The No Fly Zones of Iraq prior to April 2003. That is a WHOLE generation of pilots ago. And that was a lot of USAF pilots and aircraft.

A no fly zone gives the rebels a chance. We sit back, negotiate with them, examine their aims, or just enjoy rubbing it into the idiot colonel while threatening him with a trigger happy pilot and a precision bomb.

Can't lose too much if the rebels get to destroy a lot of Libyan military hardware.

Our Navy guys want to do productive things. Yes, helping Japan with the USS Reagan carrier group is fantastic! Hat's off to our boys for doing that.

But...that is not what you are really trained and equipped to do. Sometimes it is best to find out what you'd really be doing in real dogfight war. (What your men and equipment are capable of doing)

A Libya No Fly Zone is like a made-to-order drill that is close to a fireworks conflict without having to do it. A true win-win.

The seamen, the flyboys, the helo teams, etc. want exactly this kind of action. They were more than miffed when a ferry boat from Malta did an evacuation job for them.

And, while on the subject, the real US Navy wants to be totally unleashed to terminate lots of Somali pirates. No, we cannot do the job for all other nations’ merchant vessels. But our proud US Navy guys really want to stamp a message, “Don’t ever mess with a US flag vessel.” They hunger to be untethered to do this.

Why don't we let them do their jobs?

And, Robert Gates? Oh, please. No one in uniform with a brain has the slightest respect for him. (One respects him because of his place in the chain of command; one does not respect him in one's American soul.) Good riddance. He's damaged our armed forces and national defense.

Paul McGrath| 3.17.11 @ 6:02PM

And while we are on the subject, what are we doing to help Japan? President Obama stated that he didn't think we should be involved in Libya because it isn't strategically important. Well, he's wrong, but whether it is or not, Japan IS strategically important. They are one of the three or four strongest free countries on the earth. WHAT ARE WE DOING TO HELP THEM?

The secretary of state should have been ordered to Tokyo three days ago, and with a direct line to the President. The President should be sitting by the phone, and ordering every resource within our means to help these people. They are one of our greatest allies, they are a free country, they have been our ally for sixty years, they are a strong economic power, and they are suffering immeasurably. WHAT ARE WE DOING?

And this silly ass is going to Rio? I, a grown, grizzled, fifty-four year old man, want to cry.

Old Counselor| 3.17.11 @ 8:07PM

Paul,
I share your sentiment toward our seemingly slow response to the devastation in Japan. It will soon be a full week since the earthquake and our POTUS FINALLY responded late today. He spoke of "thousands of POUNDS of food & water" delivered by our military. Surely he meant to say TONS - I earnestly hope he misread his teleprompter. I believe he is one of the coldest politicians I have ever observed. I must presume he cares for his wife and children; beyond them, I am unconvinced.

Pelligrino| 3.18.11 @ 2:28AM

Yes, cold indeed. I think that Belgian water hound Bo has also been thrown under some D.C. Metro bus. Haven't seen the pooch in months.

Oh, what's that you say? Bo outlived his usefulness as a stage prop? Oh, well yes, that explains it then.

DRed| 3.17.11 @ 6:48PM

So you don't think we should get involved (although you could be convinced-you're just not sure yet), but you are sure that if we were going to be involved that we should have already done so, even though you don't really think that would have been a good idea. Perhaps Obama's problem is that he's too much like Ross Kaminsky.

Ross Kaminsky| 3.17.11 @ 9:25PM

I could have possibly been convinced early on, but wasn't convinced even after hearing some of the pro-no-fly-zone's best proponents. I don't believe I could be convinced now, but I leave open the possibility that there would be some set of facts that could change my mind.

I'd bet that this is not what happened with Obama. He's just a dithering naif who is totally unqualified for his job.

All American American| 3.17.11 @ 9:55PM

Yeah I thought that's pretty much what he said too. I was kinda scratching my head--if the bottom line is no involvement, who cares if it was reached after "careful consideration" or with none?

Bert| 3.17.11 @ 7:43PM

Our Muslim Marxist wanna be Chinese Communist Dictator ( he actually said that one) is great buddies with Gaddafi. He sold his buddy US miliary arms in 2009 then he secretly okayed the release of the America mass murder /Libyan terrorist of the Lockerbie Pan Am bombing and got big hugs from Omar during his latest American bashing tours of the Middle east. He carefully delayed on this decision until his buddy had destroyed the rebels . Now this Soros puppet jumps in after it too late to try to fool someone that he was anti Omar.

All American American| 3.17.11 @ 9:53PM

Howsabout we can only get involved defending other countries' borders or what not AFTER all of ours are secure?

Yosemeti Sam| 3.17.11 @ 10:34PM

Yo, SOD Gates - YOUR move!

Pelligrino| 3.18.11 @ 3:09AM

Mr. Paul McGrath, I am with you. (His comments above) One US carrier could enforce this No Fly Zone for 45-60 days with no problem. Thereafter might require some additional support.

This is not a hard job for our US Navy. In fact, it trumps train-ups, mock drills, paper exercises played out like lavish chess games, and endless safety drills.

When you serve, you are actually eager to "really do your job." (And, folks, this is a cakewalk against Libya; there might be one incident of antiaircraft fire from the colonel's forces, but it would be only ONE.)

When's the last time our Navy fliers have done missions like this? A long time: The No Fly Zones of Iraq prior to April 2003. That is a WHOLE generation of pilots ago. And that was a lot of USAF pilots and aircraft.

A no fly zone gives the rebels a chance. We sit back, talk with them, examine their aims, or just enjoy rubbing it into the idiot colonel while threatening him with a trigger happy pilot and a precision bomb.

Gee, can't lose too much if the rebels get to destroy a lot of Libyan military hardware.

Our Navy guys want to do productive things. Yes, helping Japan with the USS Reagan carrier group is fantastic! Hat's off to our boys for doing that.

But...that is not what you are really trained and equipped to do. Sometimes it is best to find out what you'd really be doing in real dogfight war. (What your men and equipment are capable of doing)

A Libya No Fly Zone is a made-to-order drill that is close to a fireworks conflict without having to do it. A true win-win. The seamen, the flyboys, the helo teams, etc. want exactly this kind of action. They were more than miffed when a ferry boat from Malta did an evacuation job for them.

And, while on the subject of action, the real US Navy wants to be totally unleashed to terminate lots of Somali pirates. No, we cannot do the job for all other nations’ merchant vessels. But our proud US Navy guys really want to stamp a message, “Don’t ever mess with a US flag vessel.” They hunger to be untethered to do this.

Why don't we let them do their jobs?

1. The Libyan military is not that capable; they pose no threat to our aircraft above.
2. The slight threat of real SAM/AA military hardware on the ground is indeed fantastic training for our Navy and USAF fliers. You can never credibly simulate this in fancy electronic drills.

And, Robert Gates? Oh, please. No one in uniform with a brain has the slightest respect for him. (One respects him because of his place in the chain of command; one does not respect him in one's American soul.) Good riddance. He's damaged our armed forces and national defense.