Posted on 08/25/2011 1:06:14 PM PDT by winoneforthegipper
We join the Libyan people in gratefulness as we hear of Col. Gaddafi’s defeat. The fall of a tyrant and sponsor of terrorism is a great day for freedom-loving people around the world. But the path to democracy in Libya is not complete, and we must make wise choices to ensure that our national interests are protected.
(Excerpt) Read more at facebook.com ...
We join the Libyan people in gratefulness as we hear of Col. Gaddafi’s defeat. The fall of a tyrant and sponsor of terrorism is a great day for freedom-loving people around the world. But the path to democracy in Libya is not complete, and we must make wise choices to ensure that our national interests are protected.
First, the White House needs to avoid triumphalism. Gaddafi may be gone, but the fighting may not be complete. As we’ve seen in Kosovo, Bosnia, Iraq, and Afghanistan, we must not celebrate too quickly. There are now mounting concerns that we will see tribal and sectarian fighting in Libya like we saw in Iraq. Let’s hope that is not the case, but it must be prepared for.
Second, we must be very concerned about the future government that will emerge to take Gaddafi’s place. History teaches that those with the guns usually prevail when a coalition overthrows a tyrant. We must remember that military power ultimately resides with the rebel commanders. This should be a source of some concern. The armed opposition to Gaddafi is an outgrowth of a group called Islamic Libya Fighting Group, and some rebel commanders admit that they have Al Qaeda links. The rebel fighters are from different tribes, and they have a variety of political views. Some are Islamists, some appear to favor some sort of western democracy. We should work through diplomatic means to help those who want democracy to come out on top.
That said, we should not commit U.S. troops or military assets to serve as peacekeepers or perform humanitarian missions or nation-building in Libya. Our military is already over-committed and strained, and a vaguely designed mission can be the first step toward a quagmire. The internal situation does not seem stable enough for U.S. forces to operate in a purely humanitarian manner without the possibility of coming under attack. Troop deployment to Libya would mean placing America’s finest in a potentially hostile zone that is not in our vital national security interest.
Finally, we must make sure that terrorist groups don’t try to co-opt the revolution, as Al Qaeda is trying to do in Syria. We should continue to use our intelligence assets to monitor the situation in Libya to ensure that potentially dangerous weapons are secured, and that terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda don’t gain a foothold in Libya.
People of Libya, be vigilant. May this opportunity be used to build a free and peaceful country.
- Sarah Palin
.
Another country fallen to the muslim brotherhood.
Yah....but note Sarah stresses no troops for humanitarian purposes..but leaves wide open the door to take care of business using their normal calling cards...lol
Boy - them lots of articulate words for some TV documentary host/star! Too bad someone that thinks like this ain’t running for some type of public office.
*******************
“People of Libya, be vigilant. May this opportunity be used to build a free and peaceful country.”
And in 2012 America gets the opportunity.
No, no , noo , nooooooo
Another country LIFTED into the Muslim Brotherhood, and their upcoming Brotherhood Alliance ~ endorsed, funded by Obama and financed by the American People!
Our CIC has chosen wisely , based on the opinions of Wright, Farrakhan let alone his adolescence in Indonesia.
All hail the Caliph, Obama!
Yup ... thanks to NATO butting in. One more nation for the world wide caliphate; oil and gold for the jihadis and their sponsors.
The rest of the comments pretty much cut the ground out from under that opening. Still, I wish Sarah hadn’t said this.
Libya, the U.S., and the world were far better off when Kaddafi was in power. We had absolutely no business intervening. And how do we avoid getting further involved, with a Muslim agent like Obama in the White House, eager to spend a few billions helping the Muslim Brotherhood?
I’m sorry SP falls into the McCain/Graham axis on another intervention that weakens this country. Wonder what Perry and Romney will say?
What are you talking about? She pretty much said in so many words that if she was President we wouldn’t get involved further, she only in the opening said a “best of luck” and “Here’s hoping” to the Libyian people
The royal “we” used thirteen times. That’s too bad.
Did you read the entire statement? Where is she agreeing with McCain and Graham? It seems like she’s wary and concern about U.S. Involvement - no early celebration, the rebels could be terrorists and we can’t send troops in on the ground
As I said, the rest of the statement contradicts the apparent meaning of the opening. But the opening is, regretably, incautiously worded and liable to misconstruction. That’s not like Sarah. I’m afraid these words may come back and bite her, because they are very easy to take out of context.
America Deserves Libya Explanation
Please make up your mind, Mr. President. You can’t vacillate when spending America’s human and fiscal resources in yet another foreign country without good reason. You said that Libyan leader Gaddafi has got to go. Many of us heard that as your call to action and agreed, “Okay, you’re right. He’s an evil dictator who kills his own innocent people, so enforce a no-fly zone so he can’t continue an aerial slaughter.” But then you said our mission in Libya isn’t to oust Gaddafi after all. (Or vice versa on the order or your statements. Between you and your advisers the public has been given so many conflicting statements on why we’re intervening in Libya that I apologize if I can’t keep up with the timing and rationale of your murky foreign policy positions.)
At this point, to avoid further mission creep and involvement in a third war – one we certainly can’t afford – you need to step up and justify our Libyan involvement, or Americans are going to demand you pull out. Simply put, what are we doing there? You’ve put us in a strategic no man’s land. If Gaddafi’s got to go, then tell NATO our continued participation hinges on this: We strike hard and Gaddafi will be gone. If, as you and your spokesmen suggest, we’re not to tell Libya what to do when it comes to that country’s leadership, and if you can’t explain to Americans why we’re willing to protect Libyan resources and civilians but not Syria’s, Yemen’s, Bahrain’s, Egypt’s, Israel’s, etc., then there is no justification for U.S. human and fiscal resources to be spent.
I would also ask you to better explain your thinking on Libya. We can’t afford any actions that don’t take care of crucial U.S. needs and meet our own interests at this point. You are the Commander in Chief, so please explain what you believe is our “interest” there and not elsewhere. Mr. President, your hesitation and vacillation in the Middle East breed uncertainty. It’s symptomatic of the puzzling way you govern. See, uncertainty is one of the factors over which you have control, and I would think you’d want to eliminate that additional element that helps breed problems like higher oil prices. Higher oil means exorbitant gas prices weighing down our economy. Consistency and strength – and greater domestic energy production – will help fix higher gas prices and help heal the economy. But only with leadership. These sorts of problems don’t fix themselves.
It’s unbelievable to me that you spent last week in campaign mode, gallivanting around the country to start raising the billion dollars for your reelection bid that is still 19 months away “while Rome burns.” Our economy is in the tank; jobs are as scarce as ever; you’re asking Congress to let you incur even more unsustainable, immoral, freedom-stealing government debt; and many of our brave men and women in uniform are shaking their heads in disbelief over your befuddled military directions. Yet instead of working with Congress and a wise multitude of advisers to fix some problems, you choose all this campaigning, already? As was recently asked: When do you ever just “roll up your sleeves, unplug the teleprompter” and do the job of governing and administrating for which voters hired you?
I know, I know, granted you will be even busier very soon. After all, golf season kicks into high gear shortly. NBA and NHL brackets await. Summer vacations and that all-consuming campaign whistle stop tour will no doubt slam you. But I would ask, while the rest of us are also busy working, saving, planning ahead, fighting to protect our Constitution, and trying to keep up with where and why you’re spending our Department of Defense funds – I’d ask that you find time to tell Americans the truth about the state of our union and what you are doing to find solutions to our challenges. Please start with explaining Libya.
- Sarah Palin
I think the second sentence in her opening is also alluding to our tyrant. ;)
I am so sorry I didn’t see your posting. I just posted the very same and pinged Sarah Palin’s Huge Busy Ping List! Will you ever forgive me?
The only way I would consider supporting a U.S. interventin would be if:
(1) The clearly stated purpose was to ensure that ONLY a secular/non-Islamic democracy was established. One with stated friendship with the U.S., U.K., et. al.
(2) Ensure that any such democracy would have and enforce absolute freedom of religion or freedom not to practice religion. NO state sponsored religion.
(3) Our forces could use any and all force necessary to carry this out and fully protect our own personnel. NO restrictive ROEs. War is hell and innocents will die to remove the guilty....it cannot be avoided.
(4) The U.S. forces WOULD NOT be part of a UN force but those of a coalition of like minded nations.
Under those conditions, I would probably be supportive of ground intervention.
Sheesh Okay...just this once....lol
It would have been much cooler if Sarah would have asked Obama wht the heck are we doing in Libya? What are the American interest?
by Sarah Palin. Thanks winoneforthegipper.
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.