cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Advisor

No politics, no blather like here

Just an objective assessment of what's going down in Lybia:

 

http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20110319-libyan-war-2011?utm_source=SpecialReport&utm_medium=email&...

 

 

 

 

10 Replies
Senior Contributor

Re: No politics, no blather like here

This well be interesting to see just how far the coalition goes towards a regime change as ooposed to simply implementing a no fly zone.

 

 

I would like to have been a mouse in the room to hear the discussions between Hillary and Obama after she changed her mind and pleaded with the Obama team to enforce a no fly zone.  I can understand Obama's hesitation to get involved militarily but I think he has not played this hand very well.   Waiting for several days after the Arab League had publicly requested the no fly zone and allowing Gadhafi's forces to make great strides in uprooting and killing the rebel opposition looks like a mistake when you end up agreeing to the no fly zone later on.  Not an easy call to make but one that has made Obama look a little hesitant.

Advisor

Re: No politics, no blather like here

I'd be hesitant too with the press suddenly acting as if they are somehow running the country, and so much of  the press succumbing to financial pressure and taking hard, sudden turns to th right.  It's becoming hard to distinguish the Washington Post from The Weekly Standard, Newsweek from WorldNetDaily or ABC News from FOX.

 

It's all starting to make Orwell's 1984 look like a chrystal ball and Orwell himself look like Nostrodomus.

 

It wasn't actually that you people couldn't wait for a decision out of some concern for the Libyan people (GOP alliances actually would never want democracy in Lybia). To you they were just so much more of a gneric "brown oarde". It's more that you just were walking around with so much wood on that you wanted the decision (which was inevitiable) to come soon so you could get on with ####ing the administration.

Advisor

Re: No politics, no blather like here

   The United Nations made the decision to intervene, did it not?  The administration did not create a pack of lies to mislead other Nations in order to invade Libya.  From the information I followed there was weeks of debate between Nations before the decision was made in the security council.   I do not believe the USA should be running the UN, it appears to me the Administration made a deal for the other nations who were so hot to intervene to do the bulk of the fighting, not the worse outcome of a bad deal..

 

  I haven't watched TV for weeks so do not know where you guys come up with some this information and did not read anything in the world news about Hillarious pleading with Obummer.   Where did this information originate?   

 


Senior Advisor

Re: No politics, no blather like here


@johnaa wrote:

   The United Nations made the decision to intervene, did it not?  The administration did not create a pack of lies to mislead other Nations in order to invade Libya.  From the information I followed there was weeks of debate between Nations before the decision was made in the security council.   I do not believe the USA should be running the UN, it appears to me the Administration made a deal for the other nations who were so hot to intervene to do the bulk of the fighting, not the worse outcome of a bad deal..

 

  I haven't watched TV for weeks so do not know where you guys come up with some this information and did not read anything in the world news about Hillarious pleading with Obummer.   Where did this information originate?   

 



What John, antiwar.com doesn't have anything? The arab league said to quit killing civilians. Obama now a war criminal?

Advisor

Re: No politics, no blather like here

Caught bits of all the neocons backing this attack on Libya this weekend. Lieberman is on board. Kind of surprised the crowd you're keeping. I think I'm hearing a tepid endorsement of us military action from johna, color me shocked.
Senior Contributor

Re: No politics, no blather like here

John, I've seen it reported several times on both on TV and in the press that Hillary who was at first against the no fly zone later changed her mind at the urging of the Arab League but that she had a tough time convincing Obama and others in his administration.  I don't recall which report I read but one also talked about another woman that along with Hillary worked hard to get Obama and the boys to agree to a no fly zone.  Up till then it was just tough words from Obama about the need for Gadhafi to go.

 

 

Yes it was the U.N. that made the decision John of which the U.S. is a very important part of.  Several nations besides the Arab League had been pressing for the no fly zone with France being one of the biggest proponents.  However the U.N. did not agree on it until Obama finally changed his mind.  I'm not saying the other countries could not do it without the U.S. but do think they like to include some of our equipment such as the AWAC planes. 

 

 

I also do not want to have the U.S. running the U.N. and think it's legitimacy is better preserved when the U.S. is not seen steering the ship.

 

Politico:

 

Day after saying no second term, a big win for Hillary Clinton

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s revelation that she won’t be staying on if there is a second Obama term may have been news to those who don’t know her, but did not surprise her friends, who say she’s spending an increasing amount of time considering her post-government options even as challenges mount at Foggy Bottom.

 

 

Clinton has made similar “I’m not here forever” comments before – but it was the timing of her remarks to CNN on Wednesday that raised eyebrows, coming at a critical moment in her fierce internal battle to push President Barack Obama to join the fight to liberate Libya from Muammar Qadhafi.

 

 

Clinton’s position was vindicated early Thursday evening when the United Nations Security Council - at the urging of the United States - approved a resolution authorizing “all necessary measures” to protect Libyan civilians, including a no-fly zone. U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice told reporters that such a move could involve direct attacks on pro-Qadhafi forces now bearing down on the rebel stronghold of Benghazi in eastern Libya.

Clinton’s persistence in the anti-Qadhafi cause has been such a constant in the White House in recent days that Obama, according to reports, joked about Clinton lobbing rocks through his window during his remarks at Saturday night’s Gridiron dinner.

For heavens sake Bruce don't you start playing the race card too.  I think it was a tough call if we should get involved in Libya but have stated I preferred we stayed out.  I'm simply saying that if we as part of the U.N.

do agree to help enforce a no fly zone and "to take all necessary measures to protect civilians under threat of attack in the country" that it would have been better to agree to this earlier then later.  I'm not suggesting rushing or making hasty decisions but delaying things allowed Qadgafi to repelled the protestors and reclaimed areas they had won while at the same time killing many of the protestors. 

 

 

Tell me what happened in the last couple of days or week that suddenly may Obama change his mind? 

 

 

I also blame the U.N. as well for dragging their feet as well.  Of course it is hard for them to get serious with a country they allowed on their Security Council which has to go down as one of the U.N.'s most embarrassing moments.


Senior Advisor

Re: No politics, no blather like here

As far as who is running the show, make no mistake, it is Uncle Sam.

 

snip-

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Sunday that the U.S. expects to turn control of the Libya military mission over to a coalition - probably headed either by the French and British or by NATO - "in a matter of days."

In his first public remarks since the start of the bombings, Gates said President Barack Obama felt very strongly about limiting America's role in the operation, adding that the president is "more aware than almost anybody of the stress on the military."

"We agreed to use our unique capabilities and the breadth of those capabilities at the front of this process, and then we expected in a matter of days to be able to turn over the primary responsibility to others," Gates told reporters traveling with him to Russia. "We will continue to support the coalition, we will be a member of the coalition, we will have a military role in the coalition, but we will not have the preeminent role."

 

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_US_LIBYA_GATES?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME...

Veteran Advisor

Re: No politics, no blather like here

does anyone doubt for a moment that the American system was intended to make Congress authorize wars and military  interventions like this one?

 

Bush may not have had UN backing in taking out Saddam Hussein, and he did not have my support, but one thing he did have was a vote by the American congress to authorize military involvement.  Of all the foolhardy things that this neophyte has undertaken in the perilous two years, this has to rank right up there.

 

We need an American president, not one that shows contempt for the American system.

 

Btw, Bruce, I talked about Christian Zionism to my BIL minister, and the ELCA, along with many other American churches is actively trying to move away from supporting Zionism. The following is from Wikipedia, and follows a history of Christian Zionism:

 

Jerusalem Declaration on Christian Zionism

The Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem (Catholic), the Syrian Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem, the Episcopal Church in Jerusalem and the Middle East and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Jordan and the Holy Land, have recently joined together in order to proclaim and to publish the Jerusalem Declaration on Christian Zionism (August 22, 2006). This Declaration rejects Christian Zionism for substituting a political-military program in place of the teachings of Jesus Christ.[12]

[edit] United States

The General Assembly of the National Council of Churches in November 2007 approved a resolution for further study which stated that the "theological stance of Christian Zionism adversely affects:

  • justice and peace in the Middle East, delaying the day when Israelis and Palestinians can live within secure borders
  • relationships with Middle Eastern Christians {prior reference to the Jerusalem Declaration on Christian Zionism}
  • relationships with Jews, since Jews are seen as mere pawns in an eschatological scheme
  • relationships with Muslims, since it ignores the rights of Muslims
  • interfaith dialogue, since it views the world in starkly dichotomous terms"[13]

The Reformed Church in America at its 2004 General Synod found "the ideology of Christian Zionism and the extreme form of dispensationalism that undergirds it to be a distortion of the biblical message noting the impediment it represents to achieving a just peace in Israel/Palestine."[14] The Mennonite Church published an article that referenced what is called the ongoing illegal seizure of additional Palestinian lands by Israeli militants,[15][16] noting that in some churches under the influence of Christian Zionism the "congregations 'adopt' illegal Israeli settlements, sending funds to bolster the defense of these armed colonies." [17] As of September 2007, listed among the Churches in America that have criticized Christian Zionism: the United Methodist Church, the Presbyterian Church (USA), and the United Church of Christ.[18]

[edit]

Senior Contributor

Re: No politics, no blather like here

Your observations are right on the money, it didn't/wouldn't have mattered to the Republican flock, no regardless of what the President did. Nothing he can do will stop them from savaging anything he does. To bad they weren't that concerned when Georgie Porgie the War Criminal started killing people just to save his incompetent regime.