Posted on 03/22/2011 5:21:03 AM PDT by JSDude1
I support using our airpower to keep both sides even and at each other’s thoats for about a decade.
I fear we are sowing the wind.
Remember what Castro said of his revolution?
never heard of an anti war right but there is a right which only wants to go to war when congress approves and when our national interests are involved.
This war is neither and that why s many on the right are against it.
The many on the left are against it.
The middle of the road can’t get a clue still have no idea’
But I bet trolls form the left will be on here trying to spin this war as some what a great thing.
Maimed for a lie, never seen that or even heard of that either but have heard of the usual left’s stickers of not in my name and fund education not war.
No doubt the dumb fools and totally clueless supporting this will be flying those stickers, YEA RIGHT
The left only supports wars which make no sense and have no national security threats .
Do you agree with that?
Ghaddafi is a de-fanged tiger. He wasn’t a threat to us and trade and tourism had opened up between the US and Libya. Ghaddafi was doing our work for us, putting down Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. So the military is doing what we did in Yugoslavia, supporting radical muslims. Oh, and we’re importing them by the thousands every month.
Why would Obama support “white Europeans” in securing oil?
Sure, that makes sense but you’re trading a thug for Al Queda/Muslim Brotherhood. Ghaddafi was de-fanged and engaging in commerce as of recent with the West. Now suddenly we turn on him after he starts mowing down radical muslims. Shades of bombing Serbia?
That being said, two months ago he was an ally. There were workers from every industrial power spread across Libya. Billions in contracts flowed to America, Britain, Italy, Turkey, China, etc., etc., etc. We ‘forgave’ him diplomatically years ago. Should we have? Probably not. But we did. We can't now go kill him because he's an embarrassment. He's been killing his people for decades. We didn't protect the Libyans then. We didn't protect the Chinese in Tienanmen Square. We didn't protect the Rwandans, Sudanese, Armenians, etc. The ‘protect civilians’ excuse doesn't even pass the simplest smell test.
We are there for two reasons and two reasons only:
The Europeans want to secure the oil. Everyone was perfectly happy to be spectators while the rebels were gaining ground and it looked like the oil would be back on in a matter of days. Once that became doubtful and all the European powers realized their horse was fading fast they rushed to jump in. Has anyone ever seen the U.N. pass anything faster unless it was a condemnation of Israel? The Europeans need Gaddafi gone and they need it now.
Reason two is Obama’s love for the U.N. He had no position, no plan and no policy. Every step and statement was dragged out of him by pollsters and reporters pressuring him to not look weak. Face it, he would not have fired missile one if the U.N. hadn't told him to. Once the Arab league and Europeans gave him cover he couldn't rush to ‘save civilians’ fast enough, and maybe revive his war time presidential status.
Our military is now at the command of the United Nations and this will win us no points from anyone. There is no end scenario in which the Libyan people choose their own destiny.
All good leftists seek their own death.
They just want to watch others die first.
It is a mentality, like the environmentalists who love the Earth but hate the people. Horrifying state of mind, but coherent in its generational transmission throughout history. Spreads like herpes simplex and has no cure.
I oppose this war on several grounds.
1. We have an utterly incompetent COC who cannot lead America a foreign war under almost any circumstance.
2. We have no guarantee that whoever replaces Gadaffi will be better than Gadaffi. We may find another home for Al Queda.
3. If Gadaffi remains, he will be even more brutal to his own people and more likely to try to retaliate against the West.
However, if this war significantly weakens the 0bama presidency to the point where it essentially collapses, it will be a godsend. 0bama is by far a greater threat to US security and the freedom of individual Americans than Libya, Gadaffi or the entire Islamo-fascist movement will ever be. Great empires fall as a result of internal weakness, not external force.
The problem is that wars are unpredictable and things could help, hurt or have no effect on 0bama’s presidency. Even in foreign policy, I want 0bama to fail for the reason cited above. America is only worth defending if it is a free nation NOT an 0bamanation.
I support the troops.
Period.
that’s good but who is talking about not supporting the troops?
I know I haven’t.
I don’t support a war which was never given the right way for doing it and where we do not belong which is not a national security threat.
Saying support the troops ignores everything about why we’re there, what we’re doing etc.
not served if you’ve ever served in combat but I did and still know many who are and guess what they don’t support this action in Libya either as many Generals don’t.
Like I said you supporting this and justifying it by saying I support the troops is a cop out which only goes to show saying that would mean you support any war regardless even if it meant the military coming south
Do you support American national interests? Period?
This intervention is probably not in our interests, to say nothing of how amateurishly it's being executed. There's nothing unpatriotic about standing up for American priorities by calling a spade a spade.
And yet Bush normalized relations with Libya and your president sees an acceptable outcome where Gaddafi remains in power.
We recognize this gov't, recognized its legitimacy and presumably its right to defend itself against armed insurrection. This was an internal Libyan matter.
The Americans have been evacuated, not taken hostage. This is not action taken following fresh terrorist attacks maiming or killing Americans. Gaddafi did not violate any ceasefire agreement with the United States. He has not invaded a neighboring country.
Congress has not been asked to approve this non-emergency military action but Obama took the time to get the UN approval. The outlined limited supporting role has been a lie from the first moment. We're not providing logistics for a no-fly zone. We're the "tip of the spear." Targets have not been limited to anti-aircraft assets but included ground forces being used to regain a rebel-held city.
This is the wrong action, done at the wrong time, setting a wrong precedent for military action. It's been undertaken with questionable legal authority and with unclear goals.
This may be the most egregiously reckless interventionism in our lifetime.
Let ‘em kill each other off for awhile.
There is no evidence at all that the rebels are radical Islamists. There is every evidence that they are disgruntled members of clans that have been excluded from Qadaffi's governing clique.
I would note that the Taliban have condemned our airstrikes and so have Hezbollah, even though both of those radical Islamist groups have criticized Qadaffi and his son Saif al-Islam ("Sword Of Islam") for not being sufficiently Islamic. If the rebels were more Islamic than Qadaffi in their opinion, they would not be protesting but keeping silent and waiting to ingratiate themselves with the rebels.
He said many things, mostly lies.
However, there is no evidence yet that this rebel movement has a single charismatic leader who has consolidated all the armed elements of the rebellion into his personal fiefdom.
So far this movement appears to be a coalition of different tribes/clans who were left out in the cold by Qadaffi's government - the only Castro personality in Libya that we have seen so far is Qadaffi.
One of the reasons why Qadaffi did so well in trying to suppress them is that the rebels' leadership really does seem to be an ad hoc group of like minded chieftains - for lack of a better term - as opposed to a centralized ideological bloc with a undisputed and ruthless leader.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.