-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Esquire Blogger Sees Paul Ryan, Shreds His Safety Net
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Ross Douthat mostly hit it out of the park with today’s column on questions the president must answer about Libya. But one question I wished he’d have lingered on longer is: Who are the rebels? Byron York writes:
Evidence is emerging that United States forces are waging war in Libya on behalf of rebels whose ranks include jihadis who fought against the U.S. in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Britain’s Daily Telegraph reports that Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, a leader of U.S.-supported rebel forces in the fighting around Adjabiya, went to Afghanistan in 2002 to fight against the “foreign invasion” — that is, U.S. troops who invaded Afghanistan in retaliation for the September 11 attacks. The Telegraph says al-Hasidi told an Italian newspaper, Il Sole 24 Ore, that he was captured in 2002 in Peshawar, Pakistan. “He was later handed over to the U.S., and then held in Libya before being released in 2008,” the Telegraph reports. Al-Hasidi also told the Italian paper he recruited about 25 Libyan men to fight against U.S. forces in Iraq.
Now, we don’t really know how representative this is of the Libyan rebellion as a whole. Maybe it’s not all. But our government really should know before intervening militarily on behalf of these rebels. A major flaw of U.S. military interventions from Kosovo to Iraq is that we’ve simply asked if the ruler we’re intervening against is a bad guy, without considering what kind of guys we’d be empowering.
View all comments (13) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/03/28/who-are-the-libyan-rebels
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
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
Floyd Looney | 3.28.11 @ 11:18AM
I think it is pretty safe to say that Libya is going to end up controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood-types who are becoming empowered in Egypt.
Too Many Tims| 3.28.11 @ 11:23AM
The enemy of my enemy is my enemy.
All American American| 3.28.11 @ 1:15PM
Funny this website asks this question---NOW? All the amchair generals and other assorted chickenhawks here have either been calling for intervention or tacitly approving of it by their silence. Hell I don't think the first wave of Tomahawks had finished firing and these pages were bringing up intervening in Syria.
Now we ask questions????? *EYEROLL*
W. James Antle III | 3.28.11 @ 8:09PM
Um, I think I've been pretty obviously against this intervention since before it started.
All American American| 3.29.11 @ 12:23AM
If you say so. Don't see where you wrote much of anything on Libya to be honest.
Occam's Tool| 3.28.11 @ 11:36PM
Triple A, even I, the ultimate interventionalist, thought this one was a bad idea. Q is predictable; the Muslim Brotherhood is not. We should hit Iran and finish this crap.
All American American| 3.29.11 @ 12:43AM
OT the time to really act against islam is sadly passed. In the immediate aftermath of 9/11 GWB had a perfect opportunity to finally educate the American people on just what islam is and what its stated goals are. We were (for the most part) united as a country and ready to strike back and fight for our way of life.
Instead, we got "Islam is a religion of peace" nonsense 9 fricking days after the attack. We got troops acting as dhimmis in the ME instead of cleaning house. We are still letting islam set the rules because we don't want to offeeeeeend anyone or turn those millions upon millions of mooooooderate muslims against us.
For cripes sake they want to put a huge mega-mosque up at Ground Zero!!!!! And there are Americans who think it is OK!
We lost on 9/20/01. We lost. Before the first shot was fired or the first bomb dropped, we lost. We are too afraid to even NAME the enemy. How can you win when you can't even name your enemy? When you're too scared to call a spade a spade?
Ya know my wife is still active duty and she is in public affairs. She asked me if I looked at the pictures of the Army's "kill team" and what they did to "civilians" in Afghanistan. No I told her. Instead I went to www.thereligionofpeace.com and checked out some headlines. Wondered why there are no photos of the 21 year old woman who was murdered by her father--stabbed FIFTY-THREE TIMES--for bringing "dishonor" on the family. Or of the recent church burning in Pakistan. Or the suicide bombing in Afghanistan. Or Iraq. Etc. Etc.
But nobody seems to see the irony that now that those photos have surfaced, the militayr is preparing for backlash from the civilian populations in Afghanistan. You know all those fine moooooooderate muslims who looooooove us so much? Ya know the ones who when I was active duty they would come around and ask for donations for their little muslim kids who didn't haaaaaaaave anything (I ALWAYS refused). "But little Abdullah doesn't have any pencils" they would say. Screw him I would say.
These people were out celebrating in the street a few weeks ago because a 1 month old BABY was nearly beheaded by their kind, and we think they value life and freedom? We think they can be reasoned with? We think they can respond to diplomacy?
We're crazy. And we lost. And the worst part is we deserve it. We deserve it because no people that lives in fear of the Truth deserves to bask in its light.
PattyMor| 3.28.11 @ 1:49PM
Well its obvious that B Hussein Obama will support anybody or group which is harmful to the interests of the United States. So he threw Mubarack over for the MuBros in Egypt, so why would anyone be suprised that he would throw QuaDaffy under the bus for another bunch of terrorists? Can Bahrain be far behind?
Fred| 3.28.11 @ 2:08PM
The Libyan rebels are Islamist jihadists? In the immortal words of Gilbert Gottfried in Aladdin: "There's a surpri . . . I'm having a heart attack from NOT surprise."
Jonah| 3.28.11 @ 6:29PM
Obama really hates the US military.
Rich Rostrom| 3.28.11 @ 7:11PM
It seems very likely to me that if jihadis were recruited from Libya to fight in Iraq or Afghanistan, it was with the knowledge and approval of the government, i.e. Gaddaffi.
Which is to say that whatever "good behavior" he was on since seeing what happened to Saddam, he was still our blood enemy all along.
The Bruce| 3.28.11 @ 11:43PM
The President and Secretary of State were briefed and know this. What's absolutely treasonous is that now there's been some consideration taking place to actually give arms to these rebels.
That's right. We could actually start arming our enemies.
The Bruce| 3.28.11 @ 11:47PM
http://www.reuters.com/article.....GS20110315
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....story.html