Skip to comments.'No blood for oil' is the chant not heard
Posted on 04/02/2011 8:46:40 PM PDT by Jet Jaguar
"No blood for oil" was a popular slogan chanted by the left in opposition to President George W. Bush's push to send U.S. forces into Iraq. Now that President Obama has authorized Operation Odyssey Dawn in Libya, I have been waiting to hear chants of "no blood for oil." I am happy to report, I don't hear them.
I went to the No Blood For Oil website; its lead item opposes efforts to strike wolves from the endangered species list. In fact, as NATO forces are lobbing missiles to enforce a no-fly zone over the country with Africa's largest oil and gas reserves, the nobloodforoil.org domain name is for sale.
With a Democrat in the White House, the anti-war corner has a much more civil tone. Anti-war House members have asked the GOP leadership to schedule an up-or-down congressional floor vote on the use of military force in Libya. A perfectly reasonable proposal. Congress should take its constitutional responsibilities seriously.
Now the Obama administration is in the hot seat - crushed between critics who charge the White House was too slow to authorize a no-fly zone and those who claim it was too rash in authorizing cruise missile strikes before notifying Congress. Hawks fear that Obama's promise not to put "boots on the ground" will embolden strongman Moammar Khadafy to fight to retain power. Doves believe that Obama went back on his no-boots-on-the-ground promise by authorizing a CIA presence in Libya.
Now, there are some smart questions to be asking the Obama administration. Who are the Libyan rebels? Are al Qaeda operatives or other extremists in their ranks? Can they win? Without answers, it is impossible to support any call to provide them with arms. NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen opposes such a move; Obama said he wouldn't rul
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
All The One’s horses and all The One’s men couldn’t secure a second term for the poser again.
>I went to the No Blood For Oil website; its lead item opposes efforts to strike wolves from the endangered species list.<
lemme make a wild stab here...because only wars are damn acceptable ONLY WHEN a Dummycrat is prez, right?
I was thinking about this today. I used to see “ The Women in Black” every time I went into Eureka. They have been noticibly absent since Jan of 09. I haven’t even seen their pictures on a milk carton.
the left has laid the groundwork for a revolution. The thugs are in power. Do you suppose they're going to let some formality like an election make them give it up?
Shouldn’t there be Dumbo-like ears on that head?
They still exist. The media will not cove them now. Just like the homeless and the people who have lost their homes to foreclosures. Those things only get reported during Republican Administrations.
An excellent question!
Let me begin by saying you already partially answered your own question: "the left has laid the groundwork for a revolution."
Indeed they did but, the revolution they seek may not be the one they expected.
Obama was the 'leftist revolution' and it's not working out all that well for them is it?
Now I understand that the enemy never sleeps and never rests and will use every dirty trick in their arsenal to win elections but sooner or later the house of cards will come tumbling down; then what?
Then free men and women do what they do best . . .
Anyway you slice it, the cultural and political divide in this country is so deep and so wide that no peaceful resolution can be reached. We will not survive this intact.
Obama dithered and America withered
all quiet on the Exit Strategy front tooo...
No clear objectives.
Jets just fly in and get targeted then ask NATO, or France, or the UK, or POTUS, or who for permission?
“Those things only get reported during Republican Administrations”
Yea, I kinda miss Cindy Sheehan.
Note how quite Justin Raimondo of Antiwar has gone.
He has issues with the war but makes certain to never blame the US Commander and chief.
Even his Syria position will not mention Assad’s shooting of civilians
Huh? Do you even read Raimondo? He is merciless in his criticism of Obama. For those who want evidence, just sample his last two columns at www.antiwar.com Raimondo is one of the few people to consistently condemn both Bush’s and Obama’s WArs.
Look up Ivory Coast unrest and deaths and tell my why NATO has not established a no-fly zone.
I despise qaddaffy.
I would like him dead or out of power.
But, I also understand the US Constitution and the requirements that were not met.
We will not survive this intact.
All that matters is that we survive it.
I suppose, but it's a dammed shame that you and I have sacrificed so much for so little.
We may have to sacrifice much more as our founders
did. I am always inspired by the price paid for the
founding of our nation.
If I have to sacrifice all, be sure someone is going
The Obama Administration has never and will never be in the Hot Seat as long as 95% of the Journalistic community are Registered Democrats fulfilling the Progressive Agenda of their Master.
No blood for oil for Europe! (could be my tagline)
To reemphasize the same point: He blames the commander in chief directly and slams him constantly. Your claim that he only has “issues” with the war is simply wrong. He opposes firmly it at every opportunity. Perhaps you were thinking of the comparatively wimpy born-again antiwar politiicans like Newt and Hannity who seem to oppose only
Blood for oil is ok when progressives do it,see media.
Meanwhile over at the Pentagon, Fagmire
Even a suggestion that the Progressive-Left-Revolutionary media might be devoid of hypocrisy and double standards is laughable.
you're kidding, right? What initiative of their ideology that has been put forth by his administration hasn't been implemented?
do you think that he's been a failure simply because he's unpopular with his opponents? That's how it's supposed to be. Because its understood that he's an incompetent fraud? Even with that incontrovertible fact, neither he nor his sponsors' agenda has been slowed in the least. On the contrary, it has been greatly advanced. And the radical choreography on the street has been installed and fine tuned.
Look I'm trying to be a little optimistic here, OK.
There are three major groups of players out there; the right, the left and the ever so important middle of the road independents. Obama and his team of RATs will never lose the left and he never had the right, but now the squishy moderates are abandoning him by the millions. That's the good news.
The bad news is he has been very successful in implementing his agenda so far and it has been exceptionally destructive as you noted, but I believe it is coming to an end.
God, it's rough being a 'glass half full' kinda guy!
My opinion is that the world you describe no longer exists.