Monday, March 21, 2011

More on Libya and fun with pre-Presidential quotes (UPDATED)

(please scroll down for update)

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income — to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.
- Barack Obama, 2002
(italics, ours)

And speaking of distractions, it would appear that the effort to insure the uninsured that have pre-existing conditions, which was one of the main selling points of ObamaCare is failing in spectacular fashion. More on this later, perhaps.

We'll get it out of our system soon enough as we're all for growing in office and as well as for our military succeeding in spectacular fashion so consider these swipes more intended for his zombified supporters circa 2008 who bought into HopenChange hook, line and sinker and now a little after 2 weeks from Obama formally instituting indefinite detentions for our guests down at Club Gitmo, they get this little cherry on top.

With the bombing of Libya, HopenChange has made like Zed getting brutalized in that basement and morphing into something hideously resembling W 2.0. It's over - stick a fork in it.

Da horrah!

And remember these smug, glassy-eyed dolts?

Wonder if they still like apples?

UPDATE #1: See if you detect a running theme here.

From WaPo:

But administration officials and military leaders came under a barrage of questions — raised by members of Congress, outside experts and reporters — about the parameters of U.S. participation and the operation’s goals, especially if Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi does not capitulate.

“There have been lots of options which have been discussed, but I think it’s very uncertain how this ends,” Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, acknowledged on CBS’s “Face the Nation.’’

Mullen, who appeared on five television talk shows, was pressed repeatedly to define the mission and its objectives. “I think circumstances will drive where this goes in the future,” he said on CNN’s “State of the Union.’’

Could it end with Gaddafi remaining in power? “That’s certainly, potentially, one outcome,” Mullen said on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” using language he repeated in other interviews. “I wouldn’t go so far as to say we’re not going to have airplanes over Libya in three or four days.”
(italics, ours)


And this from The Hill:

American and European forces expanded their assault in Libya on Sunday, with airstrikes damaging the compound of Col. Moammar Gadhafi, as questions mounted about the scope and duration of U.S. involvement there.

The assault on Gadhafi's headquarters raised more questions about the coalition’s mission in Libya and left the administration trying to strike a difficult balance: Officials insisted the goal of the military campaign, called Operation Odyssey Dawn, was not to remove Gadhafi, despite repeated demands by the U.S. and its allies for him to go.

U.S. Vice Adm. Bill Gortney, director of the military's Joint Staff, stressed Sunday that the coalition is acting only to enforce the no-fly zone, under a mandate of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, and that Gadhafi is “not on any targeting list.”

“We are not going after Gadhafi,” Gortney said.

And later in the same article:

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) on Sunday pressured President Obama to better explain the United States' objectives in Libya before proceeding with further military action.

He said the U.S. has a “moral obligation” to back those seeking “freedom from oppression and self-government for their people." And he called it "unacceptable and outrageous" for Gadhafi to use violence against his own people.

“The president is the commander in chief, but the administration has a responsibility to define for the American people, the Congress and our troops what the mission in Libya is, better explain what America's role is in achieving that mission, and make clear how it will be accomplished," Boehner said in a statement.

He's in Rio, dude.

So, as far as we can tell, the strategy here is to stand outside the 3-point arc and lob cruise missiles and hope good stuff happens on the ground inside of Libya.

Strictly on the basis of committing U.S. resources to this "adventure", we're not horribly opposed to this plan of action but it doesn't sound like there is any clear way ahead or clearly-defined objectives.

One almost gets the feeling of a hen-pecked Commander-in-Chief who will do the absolute minimum to get those two nags, Hillary Clinton and Samantha Power, off his back and to quit bitching at him to do something.

Not necessarily what we would call a recipe for success.


K T Cat said...

Don't you get the feeling we're watching someone (Barack) go through Geopolitics 101 in real time? This Libya thing defies description. I heard today that we're not taking sides. That means we're the referees. That's insane.

Harrison said...

It's like Obama turned into a Body Snatcher and you only need Donald Sutherland to do his scream.

K T Cat said...

Thanks for the link. Glad you liked that little excerpt.