PS: "Your president is a ball-less fairy and no one over here fears or respects him."
Posted on 02/24/2011 6:48:04 AM PST by kronos77
(CNN) -- Al Qaeda's North African wing has said "it will do whatever we can to help" the uprising in Libya, according to a statement the militant group posted on jihadist websites
The statement by Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb was posted Thursday, said SITE, a terrorist-tracking organization based outside Washington.
In the statement, the group said Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's decision to hire mercenaries and use planes to fire on protesters invalidates claims that the group is killing innocent civilians.
Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb started as the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat with aspirations to overthrow the Algerian government.
Around 2004, it joined forces with al Qaeda and extended its reach across North and West Africa.
To stop the militant group's growing influence in Libya, the country has in the past denounced al Qaeda and formed an alliance with the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, which once was aligned with al Qaeda before it formally ended a nearly two-decades armed struggle against Gadhafi's regime.
(Excerpt) Read more at edition.cnn.com ...
Isn’t this exactly why we said Sarah shouldn’t have released a statement yesterday?
Oh, wait....
...which is EXACTLY why we in the West should be a bit hesitant about cheering Gaddafi’s quick demise. The new regime in Libya will make Gaddafi look pro-American and pro-Israeli by comparison. Like the cancer cells they are, islamic radicals feed on that which surrounds them.
al Qaeda is opening another major front in North Africa?
Well, isn’t that speshul
PS: "Your president is a ball-less fairy and no one over here fears or respects him."
So we support Gadaffi's wholesale slaughter of his people in a futile attempt to retain power? He's toast. There is nothing we can do to prevent the uprisings anyway, and supporting him will only make a bad situation worse.
bttt
Yes, there’s nothing to be gained by supporting Gadaffi’s acts of murder. We must declare that they are wrong, and that some form of government by the people must replace him.
But neither we nor Palin are rushing to support just any old opponent to Gadaffi. An army strongman who could kill Gadaffi and enforce something resembling government by the people - while killing off the Islamic fanatics - would be Libya’s least-worst option at this point.
Maybe some of the Serbian mercenaries washing around Libya will take over the army and create a country called “New Kosovo”. A man can dream.
Did I SAY I supported Gadaffi's wholesale slaughter of his people?
No.
My point is, a far-worse al-Qaeda will fill that vacuum, because the US, with a weak administration can no longer influence events there. Hastening Gaddafi's demise without a viable alternative will be to our detriment.
A real American president would be in contact with potential pro-Western future leaders and committing resources to helping them attain power.
I relly don’t think people support Gadaffi, they just can’t stomach the other side either.
Which in this case makes them equally noxious.
If Bush was still president, we would already be in control of the oil fields.
OK, say this happened 3 years ago. What influence would the U.S. have had then?
Hastening Gaddafi's demise without a viable alternative will be to our detriment.
What would you have us do to keep Gadaffi in power?
A real American president would be in contact with potential pro-Western future leaders and committing resources to helping them attain power.
What pro-Western future leaders exist in Libya?
Saint Sarah did not take her own advice. She released a statement calling for the U.S. via NATO to pick sides in this civil war on the side of Qaddafi. BTW, the fact that Al Qaeda has taken sides is meaningless. They also took sidses a long time ago on the U.S. side in the Afghan War.
Not necessarily 3 years ago, but in a time when we had better intel capabilities worldwide, we'd have had some idea of potential replacements for Gaddafi. Also, on a larger scale, we'd have better foreseen what's occurring now in North Africa and the ME. Our current director of national intelligence takes his cues from media reports.
What would you have us do to keep Gadaffi in power?
Not looking to take action to keep him in power... nor to push him out.
What pro-Western future leaders exist in Libya?
Pose that question to our CIA. Effective intel would've identified someone long before now.
My point is... before we go all gleeful over the fall of Ghaddafi, we'd better have a wary eye on what's waiting in the shadows to replace him.
Difference is... we're not going to occupy Libya as we did in Afghanistan.
Correction to my post at #18.
Yes, al-Qaeda was on the anti-Soviet side in Afghanistan. IMO, in retrospect we were on the wrong side of that fight.
Wonder how much money $oro$ is making of the uprisings?.
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.