So Much For That Cairo Speech… Obama Administration Votes To Bomb Libya
Posted by Jim Hoft on Thursday, March 17, 2011, 6:21 PM
Barack Obama promised the Muslim World A New Beginning in June 2009.
“I know — I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: No system of government can or should be imposed by one nation by any other.”
The US President Obama delivered a milestone at Cairo University. (Photo by EPA/BGNES)
Today the Obama Administration voted to bomb Libya.
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Featured Story:
Obama Campaign National Co-Chair Admits Giving Students Credit For Volunteering to Elect Democrats
Published February 22, 2012 at 4:19 pm - 32 Comments
redc1c4 commented:
the Obama Regime has been bombing since January 20, 2009, mostly with the American People.
cutlers bad knee commented:
Bomb Libya ? Really….You gotta be kidding..Really…….Had to check my calender ,thought i over slept till April 1st…Really no fooling here right…..?????
Winston commented:
Obama is a douchebag
purplewings commented:
Why can’t we just stay away from the stone age middle east area? We have nothing to gain from our military fighting and dying over there. They still come here to murder the USA citizens or murder them right there as they walk peacefully down the street. If we should need our military right here to protect us from this sneaky administration, we’ll have no one for ourselves. Obama can’t rest until he gets our guns away from us…..gee, I wonder why. Could that be that people without weapons don’t cause waves?
ADVERTISEMENT
bg commented:
++
like i say about everything else that’s “going to
be” since Obama was crowned Caliph in Chief..
wake me when it’s soup..
oh yeah, another one of those evil Muslims you never hear from.. /s/
==
Militant Conservative commented:
VOTED, this is a decision the Commander and Chief alone makes.
Obama is trying to squirm out of doing his constitutional duties. Now that he has been FORCED to do them he needs lying room with his fragile kook fringe base.
powder is dry
PhilipJames commented:
What is the point after two weeks of slaughter for the people opposing Gaddafi? Bombing Libya now is an act of direct war.
This Administration and Obama are really really stupid and dangerous.
pamlinson commented:
What? Mr. Peace Prize….?
Richard Aubrey commented:
I expect the human rights folks are going to be a whole lot more interested if the US is involved than they would be while daffy slaughters Libyans by the tens of thousands.
Yurps get us to do the heavy lifting and then try to get our troops in front of the ICC.
pamlinson commented:
Obama voting to bomb Lybia? At this point it’s like voting to return the baby after it’s already been delivered and he knows it. It was done for cover, nothing more. Just another case of Barry “faced with no other choice” so the blame can’t touch him.
mikeSilver commented:
If he bombs Libya without Congressional Approval, he will have violated and likely killed the War Powers Act.
Redwine commented:
Farrakhan and Wright will be weeping.
save us commented:
What is the US national interst in Libya today?
Josh commented:
A no fly zone means that somebody will have to bomb their radars first. Enforcing a no fly zone requires an entire aircraft carrier full of jets. If the radars and SAM sites are no taken out first, it is impossible to enforce a ‘no fly zone.’
Secretary Gates was clear about the cost of voting ‘yes’ on a no fly zone.
RedBeard commented:
This might be President Milquetoast trying desperately to look more manly than Hillary.
Jack commented:
How about a “Declaration of War” first…for a real change. Here we go again.
Ginger commented:
http://biggovernment.com/bmccarty/2011/03/17/board-of-aldermen-candidate-alleges-wrongdoing-calls-for-investigation-of-missouri-state-trooper-part-1/#idc-container
Any one live in St. Peters, MO? An 85 year old lady is running for Board of Aldermen… Any way watch it.
TXPatriot commented:
Wow. Before long everybody is going to realize Odrama is a liar who will literally lie to anyone about anything, and here I thought it was only going to be those of us who actually… you know… pay attention who knew that.
To those who are beginning to figure this out… welcome!
SandyfromChesterfield commented:
Are they doing this so that we will not have the troops to protect Saudi Arabia if needed?
donh commented:
Purely a face saving vote for the New World Order….Obama must believe Khadaffi’s PR that the rebels are finished. Lets hope the rebel collapse was just a head fake . If they do come storming back, there won’t be any US bombing. Obama did not go through all that trouble of releasing the Pan Am Lockerbie terrorist from prison just to drop bombs on him. That would demean Eric Holder’s people. Authorizing a no fly zone does not mean it will be enforced. They just need to look real tough here so they can start bullying Saudi Arabian agression in Bahrain, and not be called hypocrits for contradicting their passive consent of Khadaffi’s slaughter.
Pres_WaitandSee commented:
Obama only votes until everyone else has commited to a common cause. He did that in the Illinois Senate. He did it as a Congressional Senator. He does it now as President.
Today, he can hide behind everyone on the UN Security Council.
Nothing new here; move along.
What a disgrace.
StrangernFiction commented:
“The first time around it’s like lightning in a bottle. There’s something special about it, because you’re defying the odds. And as time passes, you start taking it for granted that a guy named Barack Hussein Obama is president of the United States,” Obama said. “But we should never take it for granted.”
Ozark Lee commented:
What makes me want to puke is that we waited for the UN to green light any potential missions that we might want to pursue and that we waited until today to even ask.
As far as our interests go there are certainly humanitarian interests but as far as the American interests it is clearly the free flow of oil to Europe. While Libya only exports around 2% of the world demand it is all shipped to Europe and everything oil is priced on the margins. The spread between Brent crude and the NYMEX has gotten out of hand and it is clearly putting upward pressure on the NYMEX prices.
Compare and contrast this with 1986 when Ronald Reagan just flat took out his house. Until now he (Ghaddfi, or how the heck else he signs his checks) has been remarkably quiet.
If this was going to be our policy it would have been a heck of a lot better if it was implemented three weeks ago? At this point we are just burning jet fuel and wasting really expensive bombs with no real reward at the end of the day. As of right now I think the resistance is likely toast in Benghazi.
At least the clueless James Clapper can look really smart now.
…Lee
Dave-O commented:
#11 MikeSilver – you have it exactly correct. Where are the calls for him to seek and obtain Congressional approval under the War Powers Act?? How is he going to do that whilst on Spring Break in Rio?? Congressional approval, if obtained, could (and should) set the parameters on the extent of military action contemplated. no doubt Chuck Shumer is leading the charge to uphold congressional authority under the War Powers Act.
CV1 commented:
Don’t ever believe anything Obama says. Just WATCH what he does!
JoeyO commented:
“What is the point after two weeks of slaughter for the people opposing Gaddafi? Bombing Libya now is an act of direct war”
Normally correct, but with this admin (and really, the entire UN) you have to leave open the possibility of an act of stupidity.
At this point with no rebels left, what good will a no-fly do? Or I guess more importantly, how long are we planning on keeping it in place? Until the dictator (Libya’s, not ours) is gone? Without any more rebels on the ground to seize control, that doesn’t work – it will never end. So does that mean the UN is going to step up to kill the dictator? That’s a huge act of war, against someone they were set to honor just a month ago for his improving “human rights” record. And if we are now going to kill him (since the rebels can’t) instead of just keep the rebels from being bombed (as would have been the case 30 days ago), won’t that mean the UN basically took over the country? Isn’t that exactly what we didn’t want anyone to think we were out to do?
I can’t imagine we plan on killing him (esp since the vote calls for no boots on the ground) and instead think they honestly believe this is just a move to protect the people – people who are already dead!!! This is really just an act of stupidity, a good move coming down the pike 30 days too late.
gus commented:
PRESENT!!!!
Mike123 commented:
Heck, I never thought I’d remember fondly $4/gallon gas. When gas hit $6, will we get a free Netflix movie?
gus commented:
“under my plan, energy prices would necessarily skyrocket”
Ginger commented:
If they may be wanting to kill Gaddafi they will have to kill his son also.
Bustr commented:
Just wondering:
Where are all the peace protesters rising up against Obama’s “Rush to War”?
tommy mc donnell commented:
now that muammar has the rebels defeated i’ll jump in there with the bill clinton strategy. drop a few bombs so no one can say i didn’t do anything.
a conservative voter commented:
Obama’s foreign policy has failed. It is too late. He haven’t doing his job because he has been doing party and party every nights at the White House, have a guests like the Union workers and radical groups at the White House all the time, played golf, and taken a vacation. For the last 8 years the Democrats complained about former Pres. George W. Bush wasn’t doing his job, now the voters are complained about Obama not doing his job. They have lied about Bush; I know that George W. was doing his job and he has about 81% job approval rating high. That show Obama have a lack of inexperience and leadership. Obama shouldn’t have gone to Cairo, Egypt in 2008 to make speech while he was running for President and now he wanted to bomb Libya. Qaddafi was Obama’s best friend. It is wrong.
Blue commented:
GP earlier today: Obama’s not doing anything to help Libyan rebels…”How sad.”
http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/03/as-gaddafi-completes-annihilation-of-rebels-obama-administration-springs-into-action-calls-for-new-un-resolution/
GP now: Ha! He’s going going to help the Libyans?!? He’s a disgraceful hypocrite on a power trip, etc. etc….
Doubletalk? Newspeak? Or a little from column A and a little from column B?
You may or may not recall that the Bush administration’s approach to the war in Iraq (which was absolutely essential, had to be done ASAP because Saddam had WMD that he was going to give to terrorists, etc.) “dithered” while trying to sell snake oil to the Security Council. But when Obama does it – that is, rope-a-dope the powers that be and ultimately open hostilities against a go-nowhere country notable only for its insignificance – he’s not trying to defend America or promote freedom. No, instead he’s a total failure.
Conservatives should stop pretending like they need ideological justifications to hate Obama. Clearly you just hate. Isn’t that enough?
JT commented:
Obama will deliver a millstone for Al-Quadaffy.
JoeyO commented:
Blue,
You seem to have comprehension issues… The earlier article was pointing out that now that it is way too late Obama has actually decided to do something about the issue. That is, of course, sad. This one is merely pointing out how his actually (surprisingly) making a decision also means he once again is doing the opposite of his early statements. (Although, to be fair, its pretty obvious he is only making a decision now because he was being destroyed from both the left and right over his lack of leadership) Anyway, its similar to the whole Gitmo thing – conservatives knew it makes absolutely zero sense to close it, and in turn found it quite amusing when Obama eventually awoke to the reality he so vehemently attacked prior.
Also, your history is a bit off and apparently jaded by the leftist media’s derailment of reality on Iraq. First, Saddam did have WMDs, and had recently used them (mass graves of his mustard-gassed victims proves that) and there is still the issue of WMDs being confiscated leaving Syria which track back to Iraq as well – but that is even besides the issue. We knew he (like Gaddafi) funded terrorism. We knew he (also like Gaddafi) was slaughtering his own people. And we knew he (again, like Gaddafi) had a track record of confrontations with his neighbors. Oh, and we knew he (once more, like Gaddafi) was hated by his people who wanted so badly to get out from under his dictatorship. (Side-note – action also meant Gaddafi freaked fearing he was next, turning over all his WMD in an attempt to save his own rear. No Iraq and the slaughter in Libya today would be 1 thousand times worse)
So, knowing all that, Democrats and Republicans voted to take Saddam out in an effort to solve all the above problems plus help promote democracy. You know, all the same things the Obama admin has been saying about Gaddafi before he too decided to do the exact same thing Bush did – well, except Obama (unlike Bush) failed to actually ask congress to allow advanced military actions hinted at in his speech (you know, that ever so minor issue of the legality of it – but Obama has shown numerous times that you only have to follow the rules if you like them and that his people are free to ignore any that are an inconvenience to his agenda…)
So, if a conservatives wants to put down Obama because he is a hypocrite, because he lies, because he’s pretty clueless when it comes to reality, because he seems bought and paid for, because he seems unable to make decisions in a timely matter, because he freely breaks the law/stretches its limits or because he refuses to actually lead on anything… Well, all that is warranted. In fact, I am a tad surprised anyone can even find anything to like him on at this point; even many democrats are waking up to how much of a failed presidency this is. Its anything but blind hate though as, sadly, many conservatives voted for him in the first place. Now, after watching 2+ years of this train-wreck of a president, well…
money gets votes commented:
this looks like the white house..same decor..
Gini commented:
A UN resolution is nothing but a piece of paper. USA cannot go to war without Congress.
I await the first liberal to speak up.
RedBeard commented:
Joey, well said. Although, I think Blue has more issues than merely those about comprehension.
cutlers bad knee commented:
Was watching Fox news this morning , Chris Wallace actually said there is a chance we will be bombing Libya by Sunday….
Chris got a tip for you ,Its time for you to go back to the green room and remove your head from your @$$.
NC Cop commented:
Well done, JoeyO. As usual, liberals seem to have amnesia when it comes to the Bush years.
Westie commented:
Crossing the Rubicon…..Obama just does not want to be presidente anymore and may be moving on up. I think he will be primaried in 2012. LBJ has written the speech.
Blue commented:
JoeyO,
I am aware that U.S. troops found some canisters of poison gas in Iraq. However, the WMDs the Bush administration was telling everyone to fear (and were guaranteeing that Saddam had) were nukes and biological weapons – remember Powell holding the tiny vial at the Security Council meeting? The reason that it didn’t make newspapers that Saddam had mustard gas is because nobody would have wanted to go to war to separate him from WWI-era technology. We were worried about “mushroom clouds over cities” purchases of yellow cake from Nigeria, and terrorists releasing Iraqi-cultivated anthrax into NYC water.
But my point is this: if, as people claim, there was a legitimate rationale to think Saddam had nuclear/biological weapons AND he had ties to terrorists, it doesn’t make sense to wait to take action. If there is a clear danger, you act. If you’re accusing the White House of sitting on the sidelines on this one, it’s because (like Iraq) this situation is not a big deal, and we have the luxury of fighting this fight whenever we want.
The fact is, American policy leadership in the Middle East has principally been focused around guarding economic interests, but never a pro-democracy agenda. We took an interest in Iraq because we could loosen up some more oil; for the same reason we prop up the House of Saud; we were ready to pounce on Egypt to keep the Suez safe. The fact is, nobody cares about whether people in another country have democratic rights or are out there killing each other (see: Rwanda, South Africa, Iran policy from 1950-1980, etc.), only whether there was money to be made/lost.
So it’s really no surprise that we wanted nothing to do with Libya; they don’t have oil or precious minerals. To be honest, I think the only reason the NFZ is gaining traction is because the French don’t want a lot of Libyan political refugees coming to France, so they’re trying to keep them in Libya. I suspect that America is along for the ride to make good press at home and to score points with European allies (maybe there was tit-for-tat on a trade deal).
So is Obama a hypocrite? Sure. You don’t change military policy in one presidential term without exceptional circumstances, and policy has leaned towards interventionism and torture. But the thing that motivated my original post and the thing that shows the right’s petty animus towards Obama is that when he embraces their position – any position, tax cuts, deficits, torture, intervention – that they continue to complain. I get it, you don’t like him. But it’s not like you ever gave him a chance, or have an open mind about it. Let’s not pretend that the right’s distaste for Obama is founded in anything other than he’s a Democrat and the president.
JoeyO commented:
“As usual, liberals seem to have amnesia when it comes to the Bush years”
Very true.
I’m not sure about Blue though. I would think he is too young to remember that well, but some of his wording does indicate an advanced age, so that doesn’t work too well and instead leads me to believe he is extremely uneducated and/or sheltered in his liberalism.
Take for instance this sentence:
“open hostilities against a go-nowhere country notable only for its insignificance”
An educated person can’t make such a statement unless they have been locked in a closet the last 30 years. Gaddafi orchestrated the Discotheque Bombing, the Flight 103/Lockerbie Bombing and the Flight 772 Bombing, plotted the assassination of Reagan and many high ranking US personal, funded terrorism everytime he had the chance (ranging from Hamas to even the IRA), invaded Chad, had multiple confrontations with Egypt and throughout the 70-early90s was constantly on TV as basically the face of evil in the world (much as bin-Laden is more recently). That is all “notable only for its insignificance”?
(And that doesn’t even touch the issue of Libya being mentioned in the Marines Hymn – that’s pretty notable and hardly for an insignificant reason)
so, yeah, uneducated or had his head buried so far in the sand that he knows nothing about the world surrounding his little Liberal closet. Oh, or I guess he could also just be a troll… That said, all three are extremely common when it comes to Democrats so he makes an absolutely perfect Liberal
joeyO commented:
“However, the WMDs the Bush administration was telling everyone to fear (and were guaranteeing that Saddam had) were nukes and biological weapons”
Weapons his own generals were calling for the use of while they were trying to fight off the US movements. Saddam pulled off such a great poker-bluff that his own military was fooled… But ultimately its not unlike the situation with Iran right now – everyone knows they either have or are working towards WMD. Are you secure writing off Iran’s biological weapons as ‘possibly mustard gas so no concern’ in the face of a ranting lunatic doing everything he can not to cooperate with the world around him? The war with Iraq was inevitable, but ultimately began when it did because he was attacking us (through funding terrorism acts) while we were trying to fight a another war in the area.
“But my point is this: if, as people claim, there was a legitimate rationale to think Saddam had nuclear/biological weapons AND he had ties to terrorists, it doesn’t make sense to wait to take action. If there is a clear danger, you act.”
Which is what was done. He was funding the terrorists we were fighting and it was well know he was spouting off about having capabilities he ultimately didn’t have (or shipped off to Syria prior to the fighting)
“If you’re accusing the White House of sitting on the sidelines on this one, it’s because (like Iraq) this situation is not a big deal, and we have the luxury of fighting this fight whenever we want.”
This one is the exact opposite though – we know Gaddafi doesn’t have such weapons because he already gave them to us after we went into Iraq! That said, there is no “fight whenever we want” luxury here because we have now waited until our allies are all dead! We are putting in a “no-fly zone” to protect the rebels who have, over the last 30 days, been killed off – loosing all strongholds except one after having Gaddafi cornered at one point. Had we acted 30 days ago, we could have been out of there in 5 hours of Bombing. Now? Who knows how long it will take and how many solders will die. That’s stupidity – that’s Obama getting people killed when there was no need for it if he had just made up his mind in a semi-timely manor.
“We took an interest in Iraq because we could loosen up some more oil”
That’s bulls&^@ propaganda nonsense. Iraq was about everything but Oil.
“The fact is, nobody cares about whether people in another country have democratic rights or are out there killing each other”
This also isn’t true – people care and we have inserted ourselves into plenty of such instances. The difference is not “what can we get out of it” – its what is the threat level, what is the chain of events which will be set off, what is the ultimate outcome desired, what is chance of success, are there other issues which are tying our hands at the time, etc. Some of them we failed to act on, but we have acted on so many as well.
“So it’s really no surprise that we wanted nothing to do with Libya; they don’t have oil or precious minerals.”
We didn’t earlier because our President doesn’t have the ability to make quick decisions. Libya exports 45 billion worth of goods though – compare that with the 33 billion from Egypt. Yet Obama talked daily on Egypt, often contradicting himself but nonetheless ultimately taking a stance against our ally – and didn’t on Libya, a country run by a known terrorist responsible for more then a thousand US deaths who was slaughtering his people in the streets?
“I suspect that America is along for the ride to make good press at home and to score points with European allies”
So you’re saying Obama wants to start wars to score political points in other countries? And what “good press” will come from a 4th war (yeah, 4th – his war in Yemen should be included. And the Pakistan actions are borderline…) when people do nothing but complain about the two we are already in? This will do nothing but loose democratic votes for him, while Conservatives and Independents have already decided he is a complete joke…
“But the thing that motivated my original post and the thing that shows the right’s petty animus towards Obama is that when he embraces their position – any position, tax cuts, deficits, torture, intervention – that they continue to complain. I get it, you don’t like him.”
No, you don’t seem to get it at all. He never “embraces (conservative) positions”, he complains about them constantly then tries to nonchalantly go about enacting them when he realizes its what needs to be done – while still complaining about them! If I am hitting you over the head with a hammer because you asked for a cookie, and in the middle of it I hand you a cookie but continue to hit you over the head; would you consider me “embracing your position”? Its basically what this president has done in the very, very, very few instances where he did something conservatives can agree with. BUT, he also has yet to do anything conservatives can agree with without somehow simultaneously screwing it up completely; like he has done in Libya by waiting a month too long to do anything…
“But it’s not like you ever gave him a chance, or have an open mind about it. Let’s not pretend that the right’s distaste for Obama is founded in anything other than he’s a Democrat and the president.”
Again, you fail to grasp the part where many conservatives VOTED FOR HIM! The right doesn’t really like McCain, and many of them voted for Obama hoping he would do some of the things he promised (like transparency in government, non-partisanship, getting away from politics as usual, etc). The problem is, he has been one of the most anti-transparent presidents we have ever had, he has divided the country worse then it has ever been divided, politics as usual has been put on steroids with his Chicago-style, complete lack or respect for law, ways and he has done nothing but blame everyone under the sun 24 hours a day, 7 days a week since taking office. Oh, and he did this:
http://blog.heritage.org/wp-content/uploads/obama_budget_deficit.jpg
(although that 2011 number is now much higher, about the 1.5 range. Remember also, Pelosi took over as speaker in 2007 – wouldn’t it be nice to be back in those pre-Pelosi/Obama years now though???). And lets not forget that unemployment was 4.4% the month Pelosi took over as speaker as well – yeah, 4.4% under Bush pre-Pelosi! What did Obama have it at for a while; 10.1? Oh, and we also have gas prices at gigantic levels (while the president is driving energy production out of the US) and food inflation at its highest levels since the 70s while cotton and other products are skyrocketing. Oh, and we have that unconstitutional health law he refuses to allow to go to the supreme court and have decided. Oh, and we have him basically ignoring the border issue on our side while sending unarmed men up against the drug lords in Mexico. Oh, and the DOJ is selectively enforcing laws left and right. Oh, and the TSA is now implementing Communist-like “security checks” on 8 year old boys and nuns in an attempt to protect us against 20-30 year old Muslim men wanting to blow planes up… and, well, this could just go on for days so we will leave it there and instead just state again that there are countless reasons for Conservatives to hate this president whether he was a democrat, republican, independent, green-party, tea-party or martian. He’s a hypocritical idiot with stupid ideas and disrespect for laws – that’s enough reason to hate him! Its pretty clear you just defend him because he is a democrat though, which is pitiful…
bg commented:
++
Blue
==
bg commented:
++
via AJ-E
Obama gives Gaddafi tough warning
Obama just gave Qaddafi the go ahead (translation: hurry up & get the
genocide over with before the UN actually means what it’s saying.. you
know me, Taqqiyah all the way baby..)
wow, one thing for certain, the points AJ rpeortes are making, and the hard
ball questions they’re asking would NEVER vebe heard heard here in the US,
no, and allbeit i stopped watching cable news years ago, i believe it’s quite
safe for me to say, no, not even on FoxNews..
==