Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Fury on March 17, 2011, 03:53:33 PM
-
U.N. imposes no-fly zone over Libya
The U.N. Security Council on Thursday imposed a no-fly zone extending over all of Libya to try to halt Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's mounting attacks against rebel positions.
The resolution states that "all necessary means" can be used to enforce the no-fly zone. Flights to provide humanitarian aid, medicine or for evacuations are exempt.
The vote was 10 for, none against and five abstentions.
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/17/u-n-imposes-no-fly-zone-over-libya/?hpt=T1&iref=BN1
And by UN I mean the US military will probably end up doing 99% of the work. Not that it matters as it's about two weeks too late.
Hooray for helping jihadist trash! ::)
-
lol.. how can the UN impose something it can't enforce?
-
lol.. how can the UN impose something it can't enforce?
France already said they'll be ready to bomb in a few hours.
Team J-I-H-A-D!!!!!
-
Can't we just let these guys kill eachother off and stay out of it? Are the rebels christians or something? nope... They'll get in power and be just as psycho in short order.
-
Can't we just let these guys kill eachother off and stay out of it? Are the rebels christians or something? nope... They'll get in power and be just as psycho in short order.
We were strong-armed into it by France and England. They need their oil.
-
Rasmussen was saying that he wanted coordination with the Arab League and African Union. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
And I think BF's spot on. By UN, they mean US. :P
-
Rasmussen was saying that he wanted coordination with the Arab League and African Union. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
And I think BF's spot on. By UN, they mean US. :P
Even if we don't do the legwork guess who will get the brunt of the blame by the Islamists? The US, that's who. "Evil imperial America" will have invaded another "holy" Muslim country.
Meanwhile, China and Russia, who cozy up to extremist Muslims left and right, win this entire situation by abstaining. They probably supported the NFZ but knew it would be implemented regardless of their vote so they get to save face by playing dumb.
And the English can fuck off with their "human rights" bullshit. They're the same people that negotiated the Lockerbie bomber's release for oil.
-
Hillary already got bitch slapped in egypt by the opposition leaders.
-
Hillary already got bitch slapped in egypt by the opposition leaders.
So did the Google guy who was one of the leaders of the protests. Blocked from speaking by the MB.
The Saudi King spit in the faces of Hillary and Gates, too. They can't even get an audience with the guy now.
-
Yeah. I heard she was really embarrassed and its really not her fault at all in this. I don't blame her baling out.
-
Where is 240 on this.
-
I've been reading over the past week or two that the Libyian govt. forces/mercenaries have pretty much beaten back the rebels to a pocket in Benghazi and are close to finishing the job and breaking them.
So, if that's true, what the fuck is the point of the no fly zone and punitive strikes?
I'm sorry, but you have to admit that the worlds handling (and the U.S. as we are the muscle, no one else) has been a fucking catastrophe and a total joke. The U.S. especially has been exposed as a hallow, balless, disjointed mess. It's been humiliating for the Obama regime.
-
Gigantor you really need to check out the john batchelor show. I have a thread w the live stream. Its must listen every night.
They have been on this for weeks and are on it now. Best radio show going bar none.
-
Gigantor you really need to check out the john batchelor show. I have a thread w the live stream. Its must listen every night.
They have been on this for weeks and are on it now. Best radio show going bar none.
The dude talking about Iran right now is awesome. Doing a good job laying out how badly these fuckers are fueling these situations.
-
Problem is that this no fly zone will do little now that Gadaffi probably has won. It will probably just get us involved in another military situation with no real point.
What is the point of doing this now that the rebels are mostly defeated?
-
Can't we just let these guys kill eachother off and stay out of it? Are the rebels christians or something? nope... They'll get in power and be just as psycho in short order.
Sean hannity, like Newt, TPaw, Mccain and Kerry, was cheerleading the USA getting into another freaking war here.
Total warmongering by those willing to spend the blood and treasure of others for the wars they desire.
-
lol i hope sweden doesnt send our worthless JAS planes, they will all crash before the reach to libya
2.20 min in to the clip
-
Cease fire called for by Qaddafi. Very smart move on his part considering he's already taken back most of the country and all the oil producing spots.
Won't stop the OIC UN from patting themselves on the back, though.
-
Cease fire called for by Qaddafi. Very smart move on his part considering he's already taken back most of the country and all the oil producing spots.
Won't stop the OIC UN from patting themselves on the back, though.
Gadaffi is laughing his ass off at all of this.
-
Gadaffi is laughing his ass off at all of this.
It's a brilliant move on his part. He stays in power, has control of most of the country and should the UN attack him now it'll look like an act of imperialist aggression and be perceived as an all-out war. Now he'll just cut off any funding and aid to the last rebel strongholds and leave the bill for the rest of the world to pick up.
-
All because of useless dithering and partying.
-
All because of useless dithering and partying.
The sheep on the CNN comments section are already singing the praises of Obama and the UN. ::)
-
why shouldn't the un take credit,that's why libya called for a ceasefire they don't want all their shit blown up,it's a smart move by gadhafi
-
why shouldn't the un take credit,that's why libya called for a ceasefire they don't want all their shit blown up,it's a smart move by gadhafi
Oh, I don't know, maybe because the No-Fly Zone is two weeks too late and Qaddafi has already rolled up most of the rebels and has them pinned down in one last stronghold? He has no reason to not have a cease fire as he's already retaken the oil fields and most of the country.
AND he gets to stay in power, which is something the UN didn't want. Hope France and England enjoy their terrorist attacks down the road.
-
The sheep on the CNN comments section are already singing the praises of Obama and the UN. ::)
Useful idiot
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Useful idiot (disambiguation).
In political jargon, the term useful idiot was used to describe Soviet sympathizers in Western countries. The implication is that though the person in question naïvely thinks themselves an ally of the Soviets or other ideologies, they are actually held in contempt by them, and were being cynically used. The term is now used more broadly to describe someone who is perceived to be manipulated by a political movement, terrorist group, hostile government, or business, whether or not the group is Communist in nature.
-
Useful idiot
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Useful idiot (disambiguation).
In political jargon, the term useful idiot was used to describe Soviet sympathizers in Western countries. The implication is that though the person in question naïvely thinks themselves an ally of the Soviets or other ideologies, they are actually held in contempt by them, and were being cynically used. The term is now used more broadly to describe someone who is perceived to be manipulated by a political movement, terrorist group, hostile government, or business, whether or not the group is Communist in nature.
It's the equivalent of a team not showing up for three quarters, coming alive in the fourth but still losing by 4 TDs and then spinning it off as a positive performance.
-
..Government attack on Libya's Misrata kills 25: doctor
By Tarek Amara, writing by Silvia Aloisi | Reuters – 21 minutes ago
www.drudgereport.com
EmailPrint......TUNIS (Reuters) - Twenty-five people, including several children, were killed during heavy bombardments by forces loyal to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi on the western city of Misrata on Friday, a doctor in the city told Reuters.
The doctor and another resident said government tanks were still shelling the city, despite an earlier claim by rebels that the attack had been defeated.
"Gaddafi's forces are bombing the city with artillery shells and tanks. We now have 25 people dead at the hospital, including several little girls," the doctor said by satellite phone.
(Reporting by Tarek Amara, writing by Silvia Aloisi)
..
-
Inside classified Hill briefing, administration spells out war plan for Libya
Posted By Josh Rogin Thursday, March 17, 2011 - 8:11 PM Share
Several administration officials held a classified briefing for all senators on Thursday afternoon in the bowels of the Capitol building, leaving lawmakers convinced President Barack Obama is ready to attack Libya but wondering if it isn't too late to help the rebels there.
Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Bill Burns led the briefing and was accompanied by Alan Pino, National Intelligence Officer for the Near East, Gen. John Landry, National Intelligence Officer for Military Issues, Nate Tuchrello, National Intelligence Manager for Near East, Rear Adm. Michael Rogers, Director of Intelligence for the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Rear Admiral Kurt Tidd, Vice Director of Operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Several senators emerged from the briefing convinced that the administration was intent on beginning military action against the forces of Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi within the next few days and that such action would include both a no-fly zone as well as a "no-drive zone" to prevent Qaddafi from crushing the rebel forces, especially those now concentrated in Benghazi.
"It looks like we have Arab countries ready to participate in a no-fly and no-drive endeavor," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told reporters after the briefing.
Asked what he learned from the briefing, Graham said, "I learned that it's not too late, that the opposition forces are under siege but they are holding, and that with a timely intervention, a no-fly zone and no-drive zone, we can turn this thing around."
Asked exactly what the first wave of attacks would look like, Graham said, "We ground his aircraft and some tanks start getting blown up that are headed toward the opposition forces."
As for when the attacks would start, he said "We're talking days, not weeks, and I'm hoping hours, not days," adding that he was told the U.N. Security Council resolution would be crafted to give the international community the authority to be "outcome determinant" and "do whatever's necessary."
The Security Council adopted the resolution on Thursday evening by a vote of 10-0 with 5 abstentions.
Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL) told reporters that he expected the military operations to be run out of Sicily, where NATO Base Sigonella and U.S. Naval Air Station Sigonella are located.
"I know we have naval assets that are some distance away, so this would have to be U.S. Air Force Europe that would have the majority load for the time being, if the order is given," said Kirk.
Inside the briefing, several senators asked questions about how quickly the no-fly zone could be implemented, whether that was enough to stop Qaddafi's forces, what other military options might be used, and whether the administration had waited too long to act.
"There were concerns about the protection of civilians and one of those concerns was, is it too late," one Senate staffer who was in the meeting told The Cable.
Both Graham and Kirk said that they believed it was not too late, but that the success of the mission depended on super-quick implementation.
"It seems that the administration is moving and now the only question is time," said Kirk. "A lot still depends on the rebels at the very least holding Benghazi. If they do, there may be time for the international political system to respond. If they collapse quickly, no."
Graham and Kirk both said that they had thrown their support behind Obama's new Libya policy.
"I want to take back criticism I gave to them yesterday and say, ‘you are doing the right thing,'" said Graham. "My money is on the American Air Force, the American Navy, and our allies to contain the Libyans, and anybody on our side that says we can't contain the Libyan air threat -- I want them fired."
But Obama lost longtime supporter Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) who said in Thursday morning's hearing with Burns that any military intervention in Libya should require a formal declaration of war by the U.S. Congress.
Lugar also opposes military intervention in Libya on the grounds that the nation can't afford it at a time of deep fiscal debt and called on Obama to explain why attacking Libya is in America's national interest. The humanitarian argument just isn't enough, he said.
"We would not like to stand by and see people being shot, but the same argument could be made in Bahrain at present and perhaps in Yemen, so if you have a civil war it's very likely people are going to be out for each other," Lugar told The Cable in an interview. "This debate cannot be totally divorced from the realities of what are the contending issues right here and now."
But Graham responded to Lugar's caution in an interview with The Cable, saying that the risk of doing nothing and allowing Qaddafi to remain in power after Obama said "he must go" is far greater than that of getting involved militarily.
"They have my authorization. You can't have 535 commander in chiefs," Graham said. "I would like to have a vote in the floor when we get back saying they did the right thing. But that shouldn't restrict the president from taking timely action."
At Thursday morning's hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Air Force Chief of Staff Norton Schwartz said that Qaddafi's forces had reestablished control over large swaths of territory and that the Libyan leader had tens of planes and hundreds of helicopters in use.
He called the plan to impose a no-fly zone in a few days "overly optimistic" and said "it would take upwards of a week."
Schwartz was also clear that while the U.S. military can impose a no-fly zone, that's not likely to stop Qaddafi all by itself. He also noted that to do so effectively might require diverting some resources from the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"The question is, is a no-fly zone the last step or is it the first step?" Schwartz said.
Asked by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) whether a no-fly zone could turn the momentum, Scwartz replied, "A no-fly zone, sir, would not be sufficient."
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/03/17/inside_classified_hill_briefing_administration_spells_out_war_plan_for_libya
-
Lets see if thosewho trashed bush over iraq will respond in like kind to this.
-
The Inside Story Of How Obama Turned On A Dime and Decided To Intervene in Libya
John Ellis | Mar. 18, 2011, 12:57 PM | 116 | 1
A A A
See Also:
Polls Show Strong Opposition to US Intervention In LibyaPolitics In 60 Seconds: What You Need To Know Right NowQaddafi To Sarkozy: Gimme My Money Back
On Monday, it appeared that there was no way the United States would "intervene" in the uprising against Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi.
After what was described as a "contentious" meeting of his national security advisors on Tuesday night, the Obama Administration decided to do just that. Foreign Policy magazine's blog, The Cable, has the back story:
The key decision was made by President Barack Obama himself at a Tuesday evening senior-level meeting at the White House, which was described by two administration officials as "extremely contentious." Inside that meeting, officials presented arguments both for and against attacking Libya. Obama ultimately sided with the interventionists. His overall thinking was described to a group of experts who had been called to the White House to discuss the crisis in Libya only days earlier.
"This is the greatest opportunity to realign our interests and our values," a senior administration official said at the meeting, telling the experts this sentence came from Obama himself. The president was referring to the broader change going on in the Middle East and the need to rebalance U.S. foreign policy toward a greater focus on democracy and human rights.
But Obama's stance in Libya differs significantly from his strategy regarding the other Arab revolutions. In Egypt and Tunisia, Obama chose to rebalance the American stance gradually backing away from support for President Hosni Mubarak and Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali and allowing the popular movements to run their course. In Yemen and Bahrain, where the uprisings have turned violent, Obama has not even uttered a word in support of armed intervention - instead pressing those regimes to embrace reform on their own. But in deciding to attack Libya, Obama has charted an entirely new strategy, relying on U.S. hard power and the use of force to influence the outcome of Arab events.
You can read the full report here.
Tags: Threats, Obama Administration
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-inside-story-of-how-obama-turned-on-a-dime-and-decided-to-intervene-in-libya-2011-3#ixzz1GyJJds7a
-
Lets see if thosewho trashed bush over iraq will respond in like kind to this.
I am!
This is none of our fucking business.
-
Good article.
_______________________-
The Secret To Toppling Qaddafi Is Moral Assistance, Not Military Aid
Niall Ferguson, The Daily Beast | Mar. 14, 2011, 3:24 PM | 896 | 13
Mr. President, don't send guns to the Libyans. Send them a piece of paper. In this week's Newsweek, Niall Ferguson has a message for Obama—take advice from President Gerald Ford. Yes, President Ford.
President Obama is reluctant to intervene in the bloody civil war now under way in Libya. As a senior aide told The New York Times last week, "He keeps reminding us that the best revolutions are completely organic." I like that notion of organic revolutions—guaranteed no foreign additives, exclusive to Whole Foods. I like it because, like so much about this administration, it is both trendy and ignorant.
Was the American Revolution "completely organic"? Funny, I could have sworn those were French ships off Yorktown. What about Britain's Glorious Revolution, the one that established parliamentary rule? Strange, I had this crazy idea that William III was a Dutchman.
The reality is that very few revolutions, good or bad, succeed without some foreign assistance. Lenin had German money; Mao had Soviet arms. Revolutions that don't get some help from outside aren't so much inorganic as unsuccessful. Indeed, they generally don't go down in history as revolutions at all. More than one revolt has been brutally crushed by an Arab dictator—think of the Marsh Arabs' fate at the hands of Saddam Hussein. Such events tend to be remembered as massacres. We must hope that someone gives President Obama a history lesson before thousands of Libyans share their fate. It will be tragic indeed if America concludes from the experience of overthrowing murderous tyrannies in Afghanistan and Iraq that the correct policy is to turn a blind eye to murder in Libya. That, remember, was the policy pursued by the last Democrat to occupy the White House, in Rwanda as well as, for much too long, in Bosnia.
Yet it would also be an erroneous conclusion that the only form of assistance America can give to good revolutions is military. A no-fly zone was not, after all, what helped the Central and Eastern European revolutionaries of 1989 topple their tyrants. The assistance we gave them was not military. It was moral.
One of the many unsung achievements of President Gerald Ford, the Helsinki Final Act of 1975, was history's biggest-ever poison pill. The document was the result of two years of haggling at the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, originally a Soviet initiative to deal with security issues, but one that veered unexpectedly to address issues of human rights.
Eight of the 35 countries that signed the Final Act were communist. Yet it contained the following startling words:
The participating States will respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief, for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion… The participating States will respect the equal rights of peoples and their right to self-determination.
So accustomed were the Soviet authorities to lying that they saw no harm in subscribing to these pledges. Indeed, the Final Act was reprinted in full in Pravda. But for dissidents inside the Soviet Bloc like the physicist Andrei Sakharov or the Czech playwright Václav Havel, Helsinki represented a huge stick with which to beat their persecutors.
The Cold War ended not because the United States achieved a military edge over the Soviet Union, but because the legitimacy of the Soviet system collapsed from within. Our role was to insist on the importance of those "human rights and fundamental freedoms." Even if not all our allies in the Cold War always upheld them, the other side respected them less.
Why have we failed to learn from that success? Why have we allowed a mockery to be made of the United Nations Human Rights Council, which numbered Libya among its members until just the other day and still includes Saudi Arabia, not to mention China and Cuba?
Memo to the president: Organic revolutions, just like your Whole Foods arugula, need sunlight and watering. It's time for a new Helsinki, aimed at discrediting all of today's unfree states, starting with the four I've just named.
This post originally appeared at The Daily Beast.
Niall Ferguson is a professor of history at Harvard University and a professor of business administration at Harvard Business School. He is also a senior research fellow at Jesus College, Oxford University, and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. His latest book, The Ascent of Money: A Financial History of the World, was published in November.
Tags: Muammar Qaddafi, Libya, Obama, Revolution | Get Alerts for these topics »
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-secret-to-toppling-qaddafi-is-by-providing-moral-not-military-2011-3#ixzz1GyOJZ6Dd
-
civil war in Lybia is very bad for oil prices.
However, for your emotional side, it's just great.
So funny how everyone gives a shit about human rights. Should we invade darfur too?
-
civil war in Lybia is very bad for oil prices.
However, for your emotional side, it's just great.
So funny how everyone gives a shit about human rights. Should we invade darfur too?
The Muslim-dominated UN was too busy playing deaf, blind and dumb to do anything about the genocide of hundreds of thousands of Darfurians carried out by Muslims.
Iran's a good example. Twice now the UN and the rest of the world has thrown the Iranian people under the bus.
-
The Muslim-dominated UN was too busy playing deaf, blind and dumb to do anything about the genocide of hundreds of thousands of Darfurians carried out by Muslims.
Iran's a good example. Twice now the UN and the rest of the world has thrown the Iranian people under the bus.
it may sound rough, but I'm not that concerned about the iranian or libyan people. I don't think US $ or troops sohuld be spent fixing their mess over our own cities. Particularly when many of the groups seeking power have ties to al-Q already.
Better to put up with a dictator that'll play ball and sell oil to us, than some new group who is just going to kick as much local ass as the last guy. Hell, we tolerated Saddam for decades - until he decided to drop the $USD.
-
it may sound rough, but I'm not that concerned about the iranian or libyan people. I don't think US $ or troops sohuld be spent fixing their mess over our own cities. Particularly when many of the groups seeking power have ties to al-Q already.
Better to put up with a dictator that'll play ball and sell oil to us, than some new group who is just going to kick as much local ass as the last guy. Hell, we tolerated Saddam for decades - until he decided to drop the $USD.
So are you ready to trash bama now for this flip flop?
-
So are you ready to trash bama now for this flip flop?
Sure. he got in bed with the chickenhawk war-happy mofo's.
He should have kept kadaffi in power...
And let's be honest- people are only in support of a revolution when they agree with the revolters. if 10,000 libs decided to pick up guns and kick President Christie out of office in 2013, most getbiggers would be fine with them being machine-gunned down and hung for treason, right?
-
it may sound rough, but I'm not that concerned about the iranian or libyan people. I don't think US $ or troops sohuld be spent fixing their mess over our own cities. Particularly when many of the groups seeking power have ties to al-Q already.
Better to put up with a dictator that'll play ball and sell oil to us, than some new group who is just going to kick as much local ass as the last guy. Hell, we tolerated Saddam for decades - until he decided to drop the $USD.
I haven't once advocated for this No-Fly Zone.
Shut the fuck up with that dropping the USD shit. It's as retarded as your oil argument.
-
We can't do a fucking thing right now, our aircraft carriers that were in the Mediterranean are helping in Japan ( Contrary to the Cro Magnon's opinion). Guess someone else is going to have to enforce it.
-
We can't do a fucking thing right now, our aircraft carriers that were in the Mediterranean are helping in Japan ( Contrary to the Cro Magnon's opinion). Guess someone else is going to have to enforce it.
The English negotiated the release of the Lockerbie bomber for oil. They should enforce it by themselves. After all, all they're concerned about is the oil.
-
civil war in Lybia is very bad for oil prices.
However, for your emotional side, it's just great.
So funny how everyone gives a shit about human rights. Should we invade darfur too?
Libya does absolutely nothing for oil prices in America. In fact, they churn out about 2% of the worlds supply and much of it is sweet crude; which is high end stuff that most of the world does not consume anyway. The Saudi's could pick up the slack without blinking an eye.
-
I saw something on the news about oil jumping from 90 to 107 in the 2 weeks from Feb 14 on, when libya mess started.
Even if their oil is negligable, it may sound dickish, but I don't think any USA lives or $ should be spent rescuing their people from their leader. That manpower could be used defending our border or helping rebuild crumbling US infrastructure. We've been in a civil was in iraq for the last few years, and it's practically collapsed our economy.
-
I saw something on the news about oil jumping from 90 to 107 in the 2 weeks from Feb 14 on, when libya mess started.
Even if their oil is negligable, it may sound dickish, but I don't think any USA lives or $ should be spent rescuing their people from their leader. That manpower could be used defending our border or helping rebuild crumbling US infrastructure. We've been in a civil was in iraq for the last few years, and it's practically collapsed our economy.
Thats because America doesn't fight wars anymore, the last war we fought was WWII. Now we just fuck around and try to nation build.
A better question is why is the US sending amphibious assault ships to the area? Can't enforce a no fly zone with Helo's now can you? Seems to me there is atleast some though of putting troops on the ground, even though the POTUS denies it. Actions speak louder than words
-
Thats because America doesn't fight wars anymore, the last war we fought was WWII. Now we just fuck around and try to nation build.
I don't think we should.
Lots of dems and repubs want to stick their nose into Libya. Sure, it's fuccked up, but so are most things in life. He could have lit up that one city, all the rebels give up, and it's back to usual.
NOW? Now it'll be a long, drawn out civil war as punks from all over the region will walk up to Libya for a chance to take a potshot at a US or UK soldier, and the rebels will just smirk as our guys fall.
Fuck them. Fuck em. Let them deal with their own country's affairs. We are on the verge of collapse here... we don't have a damn red cent to spend protecting people on other side of the world - I'd say we let $100-mil man Mccain fund this war with his own dollars - not our grandchildren's tax dollars.
-
I don't think we should.
Lots of dems and repubs want to stick their nose into Libya. Sure, it's fuccked up, but so are most things in life. He could have lit up that one city, all the rebels give up, and it's back to usual.
NOW? Now it'll be a long, drawn out civil war as punks from all over the region will walk up to Libya for a chance to take a potshot at a US or UK soldier, and the rebels will just smirk as our guys fall.
Fuck them. Fuck em. Let them deal with their own country's affairs. We are on the verge of collapse here... we don't have a damn red cent to spend protecting people on other side of the world - I'd say we let $100-mil man Mccain fund this war with his own dollars - not our grandchildren's tax dollars.
Don't get me wrong, the people of the ME aren't worth or time, effort, or $. In 10 years they will still hate America. So exactly fuck 'em, they want democracy ::) let them handle it.
-
What this all boils down to is that 240 is a whiny liberal bitch who should be tarred and feathered and then waterboarded with 100 proof vodka until he admits he is an islamocommunist agent for the American left.
-
Libya does absolutely nothing for oil prices in America. In fact, they churn out about 2% of the worlds supply and much of it is sweet crude; which is high end stuff that most of the world does not consume anyway. The Saudi's could pick up the slack without blinking an eye.
We don't even get our oil from them but what goes on there does in fact increase our gas prices as evidence by the huge jump when things started getting messy there. Oil futures speculation, whether our oil is involved or not, directly effects our prices. England and France do get oil from Libya and guess who's been putting most of the pressure on us to do something? You don't get three guesses :)
-
I wonder if the nobel committee wants its prize back? Lol.
-
We don't even get our oil from them but what goes on there does in fact increase our gas prices as evidence by the huge jump when things started getting messy there. Oil futures speculation, whether our oil is involved or not, directly effects our prices. England and France do get oil from Libya and guess who's been putting most of the pressure on us to do something? You don't get three guesses :)
Correct, but you are wrong about the effect on oil prices. US policy is what keeps oil prices high, not what happens in Libya. The left wings nightmare initiative to force Americans to use mass transit and windmills is a huge reason. Another huge reason is the fact that the Osama administration owns GM which wants to push horseshit electric cars-- the Chevy volt among others. Another reason is monetary policy and the federal reserves insistence on inflating the value of the dollar; this increases the price of everything across the board-- especially food prices. The increase in food prices here leads to increases overseas, which led to the massive unrest now happening in the middle east+ the Qaddafi situation-- and that in turn is what now affects oil prices to some degree because of the sweet crude that is in Libya. The speculators play a negligible role at best.
-
Here comes a shocker. The WSJ is saying that the Euros and Arabs aren’t anywhere near capable of enforcing the NFZ without us doing the bulk of the work and that this entire thing is on the verge of falling flat on its face because we’re looking for someone else to lead the charge for once. Didn’t see that coming! ::)
Qaddafi's tanks just rolled into Benghazi, too. This rebellion is all but done, anyway.
-
Here comes a shocker. The WSJ is saying that the Euros and Arabs aren’t anywhere near capable of enforcing the NFZ without us doing the bulk of the work and that this entire thing is on the verge of falling flat on its face because we’re looking for someone else to lead the charge for once. Didn’t see that coming! ::)
Qaddafi's tanks just rolled into Benghazi, too. This rebellion is all but done, anyway.
What the hell is the point of a no fly zone in the first place?
-
What the hell is the point of a no fly zone in the first place?
To soothe egos of the UN as they sat on the sidelines and watched another massacre take place. They'll probably use it to ask for more money from the US.
-
To soothe egos of the UN as they sat on the sidelines and watched another massacre take place. They'll probably use it to ask for more money from the US.
This seems like a big waste of time at this point.
Gadaffi already did what he needed to do to crush the rebels nd now its too little to olate and going o require a lot more than fly overs to get him out of there at this point.
-
This seems like a big waste of time at this point.
Gadaffi already did what he needed to do to crush the rebels nd now its too little to olate and going o require a lot more than fly overs to get him out of there at this point.
I wonder if he's even flying planes at this point. This will probably go from NFZ to bombing runs on Libyan forces within a few hours of it starting.
-
To soothe egos of the UN as they sat on the sidelines and watched another massacre take place. They'll probably use it to ask for more money from the US.
in all fairness though-----
Aren't rebels intent on overthrowing the govt and hanging the leaders in the streets.... well, aren't they traitors?
If the president of a country chooses to kill traitors intent on overthrowing his nation, isn't that his right?
If president christie was elected in 2013, and suddenly 2000 liberals decided they were going to take over the country and kick out the leader - we'd call them traitors and they'd be locked up or hung, right? You can't just go knocking over governments.
Plus, aren't these rebels al-Q and/or extemists anyway? We're talking about risking uS lives and money to get into the middle of two grousp of a-holes fighting?
Why not just spend the $ on popcorn and watch them kill each other?
-
in all fairness though-----
Aren't rebels intent on overthrowing the govt and hanging the leaders in the streets.... well, aren't they traitors?
If the president of a country chooses to kill traitors intent on overthrowing his nation, isn't that his right?
If president christie was elected in 2013, and suddenly 2000 liberals decided they were going to take over the country and kick out the leader - we'd call them traitors and they'd be locked up or hung, right? You can't just go knocking over governments.
Plus, aren't these rebels al-Q and/or extemists anyway? We're talking about risking uS lives and money to get into the middle of two grousp of a-holes fighting?
Why not just spend the $ on popcorn and watch them kill each other?
What? I've been against this NFZ from day one. The rebel side is crawling with jihadists and other anti-US scum. It's still a massacre, though.
The UN has almost 200 nations in it. The USA, who already pays 22% of its yearly bill, shouldn't have to do everything.
And you know the USA and Japan account for over 1/3 of the yearly UN budget? That organization is nothing more than a money-sucking vampire.
-
What? I've been against this NFZ from day one. The rebel side is crawling with jihadists and other anti-US scum. Fuck them.
agreed.
I dont understand why so many ppl in our govt - from both parties - are so anxious to start a 3rd war to rescue some group of people who hate us anyway.
-
agreed.
I dont understand why so many ppl in our govt - from both parties - are so anxious to start a 3rd war to rescue some group of people who hate us anyway.
Here is the problem 240 - Obama's incompetence in this is going to lead to a war.
-
agreed.
I dont understand why so many ppl in our govt - from both parties - are so anxious to start a 3rd war to rescue some group of people who hate us anyway.
Because Obama opened his fuckhole and threw his weight behind the protesters early on. Now, as the NY Times pointed out, should Qaddafi remain in power then it's likely he's going to reprise with terrorist attacks down the road.
Obama kowtowed to British and French pressure to put this NFZ in. Now those two c*nts, along with their buddies in the Arab League, aren't even capable of implementing the NFZ without the US doing the legwork.
When did our military become a tool of Western Europe?
-
Because Obama opened his fuckhole and threw his weight behind the protesters early on. Now, as the NY Times pointed out, should Qaddafi remain in power then it's likely he's going to reprise with terrorist attacks down the road.
Obama kowtowed to British and French pressure to put this NFZ in. Now those two c*nts, along with their buddies in the Arab League, aren't even capable of implementing the NFZ without the US doing the legwork.
When did our military become a tool of Western Europe?
When Barak Hussein Osama realized that teleprompters and race based quotas couldn't help him in diplomatic relations with the rest of the world.
-
When Barak Hussein Osama realized that teleprompters and race based quotas couldn't help him in diplomatic relations with the rest of the world.
;D
Racist post reported.
-
John Bolton: Barack Obama 'still not qualified' to be president
By JUANA SUMMERS | 3/19/11 1:09 AM EDT Updated: 3/19/11 9:56 AM EDT
SACRAMENTO, Calif - President Barack Obama is unqualified, disinterested and not ready to lead on foreign policy, John Bolton said Friday night.
Making no mention of his own flirtations with a 2012 presidential bid, the former ambassador to the United Nations told California Republicans that it could take hours to outline all the challenges the Obama administration faces.
"When President Obama took the office on Jan. 20, 2009, when it came to foreign policy and national security, he wasn't qualified to be president," Bolton said. "Today, more than two years later, he's still not qualified."
During his 27-minute speech to a state GOP convention here, Bolton criticized Obama's handling of nearly every significant foreign policy matter.
On Libya, Bolton blasted Obama's latest statement of American goals, saying the White House's objectives are now "utterly inexplicable," and that Obama had done a "180-degree shift" on the issue of a no-fly zone.
Likewise, Bolton said Obama was a flip-flopper on Egypt. "Obama had, by my count, four positions on Egypt before Mubarak finally fell."
Though not by name, Bolton also jabbed recent comments by potential 2012 rival Haley Barbour that America should consider shrinking its presence in Afghanistan.
"Many people wonder why we're there and what the objectives are," Bolton said, noting that an American presence in Afghanistan will help keep the country from becoming a "base for international terrorism."
"We're not there fighting for them. We're there fighting for us," he said.
Prior to his speech, Bolton told reporters he was "considering" a 2012 run, but that he hadn't made up his mind. He didn't offer a timeline for when he'd make a decision.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51584.html#ixzz1H3xk01D4
-
Bolton is frequently on Batchelor and gives great commentary. He clearly is a man who likes being in the trenches on these issues.
He was one of the other things GWB did right that the far left freaked about. Bolton was appointed in a recess appointment and the left exploded.
-
Looks like im the only one who supports this then
-
should Qaddafi remain in power then it's likely he's going to reprise with terrorist attacks down the road.
I doubt it. He is very happy we did nothing while he smoked the rebels, town by town, then delivered this weak "in"action at the last minute which stops nothing.
And the thought of him starting shit with the USA, that would be suicide. Obama will let him cap his own people, but you start shit here and Obama's approval moves to 80% overnight and kadaffi sees his nation turned to Iraq II.
Won't happen.
-
I doubt it. He is very happy we did nothing while he smoked the rebels, town by town, then delivered this weak "in"action at the last minute which stops nothing.
And the thought of him starting shit with the USA, that would be suicide. Obama will let him cap his own people, but you start shit here and Obama's approval moves to 80% overnight and kadaffi sees his nation turned to Iraq II.
Won't happen.
48 to go!
-
We need to stay out of this one.
-
European governments "completely puzzled" about US position on Libya
(Foreign Policy) — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s meetings in Paris with the G8 foreign ministers on Monday left her European interlocutors with more questions than answers about the Obama administration’s stance on intervention in Libya.
Inside the foreign ministers’ meeting, a loud and contentious debate erupted about whether to move forward with stronger action to halt Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi’s campaign against the Libyan rebels and the violence being perpetrated against civilians. Britain and France argued for immediate action while Germany and Russia opposed such a move, according to two European diplomats who were briefed on the meeting.
Clinton stayed out of the fray, repeating the administration’s position that all options are on the table but not specifically endorsing any particular step. She also did not voice support for stronger action in the near term, such as a no-fly zone or military aid to the rebels, both diplomats said.
“The way the U.S. acted was to let the Germans and the Russians block everything, which announced for us an alignment with the Germans as far as we are concerned,” one of the diplomats told The Cable.
Clinton’s unwillingness to commit the United States to a specific position led many in the room to wonder exactly where the administration stood on the situation in Libya.
“Frankly we are just completely puzzled,” the diplomat said. “We are wondering if this is a priority for the United States.”
On the same day, Clinton had a short meeting with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, in which Sarkozy pressed Clinton to come out more forcefully in favor of action in Libya. She declined Sarkozy’s request, according to a government source familiar with the meeting.
Sarkozy told Clinton that “we need action now” and she responded to him, “there are difficulties,” the source said, explaining that Clinton was referring to China and Russia’s opposition to intervention at the United Nations. Sarkozy replied that the United States should at least try to overcome the difficulties by leading a strong push at the U.N., but Clinton simply repeated, ”There are difficulties.”
One diplomat, who supports stronger action in Libya, contended that the United States’ lack of clarity on this issue is only strengthening those who oppose action.
“The risk we run is to look weak because we’ve asked him to leave and we aren’t taking any action to support our rhetoric and that has consequences on the ground and in the region,” said the European diplomat.
British and French frustration with the lack of international will to intervene in Libya is growing. British Prime Minister David Cameron said on Tuesday that Arab sentiment was, “if you don’t show your support for the Libyan people and for democracy at this time, you are saying you will intervene only when it’s about your security, but you won’t help when it’s about our democracy.”
France sent letters on Wednesday to all the members of the U.N. Security Council, which is discussing a Lebanon-sponsored resolution to implement a no-fly zone, calling on them to support the resolution, as has been requested by the Arab League.
“Together, we can save the martyred people of Libya. It is now a matter of days, if not hours. The worst would be that the appeal of the League of the Arab States and the Security Council decisions be overruled by the force of arms,” the letter stated.
French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe wrote on his blog, “It is not enough to proclaim, as did almost all of the major democracies that ‘Qaddafi must go.’ We must give ourselves the means to effectively assist those who took up arms against his dictatorship.”
In an interview with the BBC on Wednesday in Cairo, Clinton pointed to the U.N. Security Council as the proper venue for any decision to be made and she pushed back at the contention by the British and the French that the U.S. was dragging its feet.
“I don’t think that is fair. I think, based on my conversations in Paris with the G-8 ministers, which, of course, included those two countries, I think we all agree that given the Arab League statement, it was time to move to the Security Council to see what was possible,” Clinton said. I don’t want to prejudge it because countries are still very concerned about it. And I know how anxious the British and the French and the Lebanese are, and they have taken a big step in presenting something. But we want to get something that will do what needs to be done and can be passed.”
“It won’t do us any good to consult, negotiate, and then have something vetoed or not have enough votes to pass it,” Clinton added.
Clinton met with Libyan opposition leader Mahmoud Jibril in Paris as well, but declined to make any promises on specific actions to support the Libyan opposition.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman John Kerry (D-MA) also doubled down on his call for a no-fly zone over Libya in a speech on Wednesday at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
“The international community cannot simply watch from the sidelines as this quest for democracy is met with violence,” he said. “The Arab League’s call for a U.N. no-fly zone over Libya is an unprecedented signal that the old rules of impunity for autocratic leaders no longer stand. . . The world needs to respond immediately to avert a humanitarian disaster.”
And Clinton’s former top aide Anne-Marie Slaughter accused the Obama administration of prioritizing oil over the human rights of the people of Libya.
“U.S. is defining ‘vital strategic interest’ in terms of oil and geography, not universal values. Wrong call that will come back to haunt us,” she wrote on Wednesday on her Twitter page.
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/03/16/european_governments_completely_puzzled_about_us_position_on_libya
I doubt it. He is very happy we did nothing while he smoked the rebels, town by town, then delivered this weak "in"action at the last minute which stops nothing.
And the thought of him starting shit with the USA, that would be suicide. Obama will let him cap his own people, but you start shit here and Obama's approval moves to 80% overnight and kadaffi sees his nation turned to Iraq II.
Won't happen.
I was referring more towards England and France who are probably going to pay in some form. Qaddafi seems to be alright with the US response. Not that something like that means much. He's no angel.
-
We need to stay out of this one.
Good call.
Please tell warmongers like Newt, T-Paw, Kerry, Mccain and Hannity that unless they are funding the war themselves, it's a no-win for the US to get involved.
-
Good call.
Please tell warmongers like Newt, T-Paw, Kerry, Mccain and Hannity that unless they are funding the war themselves, it's a no-win for the US to get involved.
And Obama, KC Baller, Straw Man, Benny, an Andre
-
And Obama, KC Baller, Straw Man, Benny, an Andre
Obama.... not so much... the totality of his action was a purposefully too-late vote, followed by zero action. Bush would have (and did!) pushed the UN vote thru while massing troops for instant action.
Obama and gates made it very clear early on that we were not getting involved. And we didn't. If you don't see the wink-wink of such a late vote (which even Rush and hannity called too little to late to change a thing), you're just being blind on purpose.
Obama said we were gonna sit it out, and that's what we did ;)
-
Obama.... not so much... the totality of his action was a purposefully too-late vote, followed by zero action. Bush would have (and did!) pushed the UN vote thru while massing troops for instant action.
Obama and gates made it very clear early on that we were not getting involved. And we didn't. If you don't see the wink-wink of such a late vote (which even Rush and hannity called too little to late to change a thing), you're just being blind on purpose.
Obama said we were gonna sit it out, and that's what we did ;)
::) ::)
This thing has not even gotten underway yet moron and you are declaring victory for your messiah?
-
::) ::)
This thing has not even gotten underway yet moron and you are declaring victory for your messiah?
Don't worry, he's "libertarian". ::)
-
Godspeed to our boys
in the air. at sea. 8)
-
Obama.... not so much... the totality of his action was a purposefully too-late vote, followed by zero action. Bush would have (and did!) pushed the UN vote thru while massing troops for instant action.
Obama and gates made it very clear early on that we were not getting involved. And we didn't. If you don't see the wink-wink of such a late vote (which even Rush and hannity called too little to late to change a thing), you're just being blind on purpose.
Obama said we were gonna sit it out, and that's what we did ;)
Too late vote and zero action?
What the fuck do you call all those missiles we shot over there. We're knee deep in this muck - and you can thank Barry.
-
Too late vote and zero action?
What the fuck do you call all those missiles we shot over there. We're knee deep in this muck - and you can thank Barry.
Spin? It's easy.
Obama was able to trick kadaffi into letting down his guard, then POW. lights out baby.
-
The spin from you libs on this is bizarre to say the least.
-
Spin? It's easy.
Obama was able to trick kadaffi into letting down his guard, then POW. lights out baby.
That's silly. Let down what guard? They couldn't have done a thing differently had we dropped leaflets announcing the date and time our missiles would hit.
-
Just read on reuters that this is only the first step today.
Wow. Bama got his own little war to call his own now.
-
(Politico)- A hard-core group of liberal House Democrats is questioning the constitutionality of U.S. missile strikes against Libya, with one lawmaker raising the prospect of impeachment during a Democratic Caucus conference call on Saturday.
Reps. Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.), Donna Edwards (Md.), Mike Capuano (Mass.), Dennis Kucinich (Ohio), Maxine Waters (Calif.), Rob Andrews (N.J.), Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas), Barbara Lee (Calif.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.) “all strongly raised objections to the constitutionality of the president’s actions” during that call, said two Democratic lawmakers who took part.
Kucinich, who wanted to bring impeachment articles against both former President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney over Iraq — only to be blocked by his own leadership — asked why the U.S. missile strikes aren’t impeachable offenses.
Kucinich also questioned why Democratic leaders didn’t object when President Barack Obama told them of his plan for American participation in enforcing the Libyan no-fly zone during a White House Situation Room meeting on Friday, sources told POLITICO.
And liberals fumed that Congress hadn’t been formally consulted before the attack and expressed concern that it would lead to a third U.S. war in the Muslim world.
-
Here's a shocker. The Arab League is already bitching about the military action. Who would have thought that these scumbags would have done nothing to contribute to it? Talk about a nice set-up by them.
(Reuters) — The Arab League chief said on Sunday that Arabs did not want military strikes by Western powers that hit civilians when the League called for a no-fly zone over Libya.
In comments carried by Egypt’s official state news agency, Secretary-General Amr Moussa also said he was calling for an emergency Arab League meeting to discuss the situation in the Arab world and particularly Libya.
“What is happening in Libya differs from the aim of imposing a no-fly zone, and what we want is the protection of civilians and not the bombardment of more civilians,” he said.
-
Here's a shocker. The Arab League is already bitching about the military action. Who would have thought that these scumbags would have done nothing to contribute to it? Talk about a nice set-up by them.
(Reuters) — The Arab League chief said on Sunday that Arabs did not want military strikes by Western powers that hit civilians when the League called for a no-fly zone over Libya.
In comments carried by Egypt’s official state news agency, Secretary-General Amr Moussa also said he was calling for an emergency Arab League meeting to discuss the situation in the Arab world and particularly Libya.
“What is happening in Libya differs from the aim of imposing a no-fly zone, and what we want is the protection of civilians and not the bombardment of more civilians,” he said.
Exactly. They're completely full of shit and knew precisely what a NFZ meant. And I'd be willing to bet that somebody (maybe us, maybe not) has boots on the ground doing recon on Libya's air defense positions. And if any of those brave souls are caught, I can only imagine the cry baby shit coming from the AL.
-
Exactly. They're completely full of shit and knew precisely what a NFZ meant. And I'd be willing to bet that somebody (maybe us, maybe not) has boots on the ground doing recon on Libya's air defense positions. And if any of those brave souls are caught, I can only imagine the cry baby shit coming from the AL.
We were played for fools by them and the Euros. We'll, once again, be the focus of Muslim rage for being "imperialists", the Euros will get their oil and the Arab League, who pushed for this, comes off looking like the saviors when they contribute nothing to it and condemn it. And we all know they wouldn't be saying shit if those bombs were falling on Iranian air defenses.
I don't think Obama's foreign policy could be more idiotic.
-
WTF?
I thought this was a lib war. Only the GOP canddiates were all over it. Now the libs in congress are protesting and the repubs are quiet.
Still a leftist war? ;)
Or can we admit it's just a war machine war now?
-
WTF?
I thought this was a lib war. Only the GOP canddiates were all over it. Now the libs in congress are protesting and the repubs are quiet.
Still a leftist war? ;)
Or can we admit it's just a war machine war now?
You know that you were the twat that started the lib/conservative slant when you purposely ignored Kerry in your little diatribe about McCain, right? ::)
-
I could care less its stupid regardless.
-
You know that you were the twat that started the lib/conservative slant when you purposely ignored Kerry in your little diatribe about McCain, right? ::)
you're 100% right. We should give John Kerry, the windsurfing d-bag, complete credit for convincing Newt, mccain and t-paw to join the 'leftist' war effort.
he's a powerful leader and they seem to be lib tools. Nice.
-
John Fn Kerry better come out and say this is the right war at the right time.
-
John Fn Kerry better come out and say this is the right war at the right time.
He's a tool of the war industry. Just like newt, hilary, and the rest of them. This isn't a "democrat" war. Period.
-
Was iraq a repub war.
-
Was iraq a repub war.
nope. another warmonger war. just like afghanistan and the wars before it.
elective and avoidable. saddam tried to flee iraq/surrender with 24 horus left - we wanted war. Taleban offered to deliver OBL to NYC in a pine box - we preferred to invade.
it's all about war, baby. big business. To sit there and say "but but the leftists want this and that..." is incredible naive dude. It's about evil rich a-holes who profit from war and conflict.
-
Right war at the right time.
-
Right war at the right time.
???
mccain/palin would be invading too. and libs would be screaming about it.
it's big business, always has been, always will be. Rich people get richer, politicians sell it, and poor people fight it. nations with resources, positions, or vulnerabilities get stomped.
Way of the world. since the beginning of the world, til the end of time. nothing to do with "lefists leading the charge!" has everything to do with war, inc.
-
That idiotc twink lindsey graham was out there giving cover today. I'm wth kucinich - impeach!
-
That idiotc twink lindsey graham was out there giving cover today. I'm wth kucinich - impeach!
lots of dems and lots of repubs love this war.
lots of them hate it too. doesn't seem to be any party line divide on this one.
I don't see how balding*, heavily armed people ever considered to be a leftist war.
*also a member of Team MPB.
-
comments.
Libya to give weapons to one million people: report
Reuters ^ | March 20, 2011 | Staff
(Reuters) - Libya's government has begun distributing arms to more than one million people and will complete the operation within hours, the state news agency reported on Sunday.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
-
LMAO.... he won't be giving out that many. He does that and he's arming the rebels lol...
nice scare tactic, but it'll be everyone waiting for him to leave.
-
LMAO.... he won't be giving out that many. He does that and he's arming the rebels lol...
nice scare tactic, but it'll be everyone waiting for him to leave.
You really are embarrassingyoursel with your 24/7 kneepadding Obama. bro - what the hell happened to you? Honestly - I dont even think you realize it anymore.
-
i don't think kadaffi will give 1 million guns to his people. i really dont'. maybe i'll be wrong. but IMO he'll be flying outta there on some side deal in the next week.
-
i don't think kadaffi will give 1 million guns to his people. i really dont'. maybe i'll be wrong. but IMO he'll be flying outta there on some side deal in the next week.
One can only imaginehow you would react if this were prez palin doing this.
Oh thats right - its boy wonder, your lord , savior, messiah, and glorious leader, so its ok now.
-
do you honestly think - in a country where kadaffi had to spend million paying foreigh mercs to keep his ass alive because his military was leaving him - that he's gonna hand out a million guns?
LMAO.
-
do you honestly think - in a country where kadaffi had to spend million paying foreigh mercs to keep his ass alive because his military was leaving him - that he's gonna hand out a million guns?
LMAO.
I think you will go to any length imaginable to try to downplay this situation to protect boy wonder.
-
I think you will go to any length imaginable to try to downplay this situation to protect boy wonder.
i could care less about kadaffi or his ppl or the situation or obama, to be honest. i just like to argue.