RestonWeb

[stix]

This is an interesting fact check Associated Press article on the President Obama's speech last night on Libya. AP's observations from the article,

[RestonResident]

1. syria doesnt have a visible uprising.
2. with libya, france in particular wanted to do this. this way they can be forced to do more and pay more.
3. There is way too much free riding from our allies. Libya lets them have to bear more of the cost. This stuff is really expensive.
4. libya has oil. Oil > syria and hezbollah.
5. alot more world sympathy for hating on Qadafi than the leader of Syria. Which means we get a UN mandate, which means we can go "ok write a check and you pay for it".

The non-US members of NATO and Arab countries should take most of this over AND pay for it. They are more than capable of handling this.

A few things that are annoying me about this.
1. Why isnt Qadafi a target? Kill him and be done with it. Why is it ok to kill some janitors at a base who need a job or soldiers (many may be pressed into action) than it is to kill this guy? Kill him. Kill his kids. Kill his friends. Just be done with him.
2. If we are going to do this, why isn't the goal regime change? I am ok with Obama giving lip service to the UN mandate of only protecting civilians. However, Qadafi needs to be killed. Or we will be stuck paying for a stupid no fly zone for 10 years. Get rid of him and lets go home.
3. It is a hell of alot cheaper to arm the rebels than launch missiles and planes. Why aren't we doing that? Again make the allies pay for it, but why isn't that part of the plan?
4. We need real reporting on this. Not the garbage we got so far. What is the REAL political situation in Libya. What is the tribal situation? Is there any religious strife?

CAn these people get along and not kill each other without a dictator? Libya, like Iraq is a country formed after colonialism. It was another one of those English and French inventions. Basically "uh oh, we can't afford to colonize the world, so lets slap people together and draw a border".

Where is the real reporting on what the political and social structure is like in Libya? Every country is different. What about real reporting on the "rebels". Who are they? Of course they are not organized. You don't organize an army in 2 months. That is a "duh". How many different rebel factions are there? Is it tribal or ethnic based? Will they just kil other groups when qadafi is gone.

seriously. the press just wants to throw up pictures and do not do any real work. It took years for the press to even look into ethnic issues in iraq, because they are so lazy. This isn't liberal or conservative. Foxnews doesnt do it either.

[Bob Bruhns]

Evidently the PNAC is still running the executive branch of our government.

The USA seems to have involved itself in a civil war. Why? Well, we don't care about abuses except where oil is concerned. We are making ourselves one of the colonial powers now.

We should either stop playing this game, or stop pretending, because we are only fooling ourselves. We are a meddling power, looking out for our own interests and the interests of our big corporations. Obama was talking just recently about how Gaddafi had to go. And well before the 2008 elections, Hillary Clinton was talking about 'another regime change' in Iraq when she didn't like what their elected government was doing. What we are really saying is "You serve at our pleasure, and we will take you out if you displease us."

RR is right about colonial powers just slamming people together and drawing a border. He is also right about the source of the conflicts: tribal, religious, etc. It matters, and we ignore it at our peril.
_________________
Government debt and deficits are robbing your children, your grandchildren, and your great-grandchildren. http://www.usdebtclock.org/

[Chester]

Neither side in this civil war is friendly to the US. If the rebels should win, they will probably want the US out as quickly as possible. Their history is to resist Western military presence in the Muslim world.

[stix]

I do not agree with the emerging Obama doctrine that says if the international community asks, we should send our military into a country whose leadership is committing human rights abuses. To support the notion of democracy and freedom is one thing, but to actively shoot missiles and drop bombs, and to put US lives on the line is quite another.

As SecDef Gates said, Libya is not a “vital interest’ to the US.. especially not the 2% of our oil we get from them...
.

[RestonResident]

That's not really what Obama is saying. What he is saying is that he wants other countries to bear a lot of the cost. When we "lead" by ourselves, it means we do it alone and bear the costs. Other countries free-ride. This method makes them spend money and resources.

I agree with it.

[stix]

With regard to Lybia, that is exactly what he is saying. What part of "not a vital interest" is not understood?

We are up to nearly $600 million cost so far and we will not really get out, but remain in the background, doing Frances' dirty work and spending money we don't have.

The first service person that gets killed (since we have 'boots on the ground' now despite Obama claims) will bring some sanity to Obama's action's taken without Congressional approval...
.

[Chester]

Reuters reports Obama had signed a secret order authorizing covert military aid to the Libyan rebels several weeks ago.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/30/us-libya-usa-order-idUSTRE72T6H220110330

There were news reports around that time that the US and UK had special forces in the "desert" to help their civilian countrymen escape the civil war. They were probably there to identify targets for the air strikes to take out Qaddafi and his military assets. There were also reports that the US flew special planes for broadcasting propaganda targeted at Qaddafi's forces.

[stix]

When will we ever learn?

Viet Nam.. we sent in a few ‘advisors’ to start and then the military.

Iraq.. Brutal dictator fakes to the world he has WMD.. we went in for a 'short' war which turned out to be a protracted civil war.

Libya.. Brutal dictator threatens to kill some of his people... we send in a few ‘advisors’ and start by launching air strikes in his civil war.

Answer to my question.. apparently never...
.

[RestonResident]

[stix]

[Chester]

The US was probably already involved in Libya as soon as the Egypt revolt was squashed and control of the government was handed over to the the head of their equivalent of the CIA which works closely with the US CIA. Egypt's special forces were reportedly in Libya training the rebels as far back as February before there was armed conflict with the Kaddafi government. This whole thing is starting to look like Kosovo, where US and European intelligence were arming and training the KLA to provoke the Serbian government into military action that would serve as a pretext for NATO intervention.

The EU has authorized ground forces in Libya. It looks like the US will do so soon.

http://www.darkgovernment.com/news/admiral-admits-ground-forces-may-hit-libya/

[CaptHacker]

I, too, can post a link from any web site on the web and submit it as "evidence." Using the source of Chester's link above from the entirely credible "DarkGovernment" web site, perhaps, I argue, you should consider the possibility of extra-terrestrial intervention in all these revolutions:

http://www.darkgovernment.com/ufo.html

What, on this site, will be submitted as "fact" next time? A link from Glenn Beck espousing conspiracy theories or one of Fox News "factual" reports?
_________________
George W. Bush....he didn't raise your taxes, he lowered your income!!

[Chester]

See the bottom of the linked article. The story comes from the European newswire service Agence France-Presse via Rawstory.

[Bob Bruhns]

Link to Raw Story article

The difficulty now, is deciding who is a reliable source. Every news source is suspect.
_________________
Government debt and deficits are robbing your children, your grandchildren, and your great-grandchildren. http://www.usdebtclock.org/